“Sunny ways” and broken promises : Tsleil-Waututh Nation v. Canada (2018) and the Liberal government’s relationship with Indigenous Nations in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis challenges the current Liberal government's depiction of its relationship with Indigenous communities as building what Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party of Canada have referred to as a "renewed, nation-to-nation relationship" (2015).It does so by analyzing, through the lens of key pieces of Indigenous scholarship, the arguments and positions expressed by the Government of Canada and Indigenous plaintiffs in the Tsleil-Waututh Nation v. Canada (2018) Federal Court of Appeal ruling.Secondarily, government policy releases and statements by government officials, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, regarding the Trans Mountain Pipeline Project 1 , as well as Indigenous media coverage, will be used to support the analysis of Tsleil-Waututh Nation v. Canada (2018) in order to understand the relationship between the Liberal Government and Indigenous Nations in Canada.Through socio-legal and narrative criminological approaches, informed by Indigenous scholarship, this thesis will demonstrate that the Liberal government's relationship with Indigenous Nations as seen in Tsleil-Waututh Nation 1 The Trans Mountain Pipeline is intended to transport oil from Alberta to the British Columbian coast.When the arguments of Tsleil-Waututh 2018 were heard by the Federal Court of Appeal in October 2017, the Trans Mountain Pipeline was owned by a Canadian division of Texas-based corporation, Kinder-Morgan.In May of 2018, the Canadian Government announced that it would buy the Pipeline, and that it would become a Crown Corporation.The sale was completed on August 31 st , 2019, one day after the Tsleil-Waututh 2018 ruling was made public (APTN National News, 2018).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.053 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".