- Reaction score
- 9,032
- Points
- 1,260
There’s always one that feels left out….

There’s always one that feels left out….
There is literally no limit on what FNs feel they need to be consulted on (and no limit of taxpayer money which will make them happy) and no limit on which FN gets to ring in.There’s always one that feels left out….
There is literally no limit on what FNs feel they need to be consulted on (and no limit of taxpayer money which will make them happy) and no limit on which FN gets to ring in.
Actually, there is no limit because it is a fairly new legal concept and the courts haven't written the rules around it yet.
These folks seem to be located north of Victoria. I don't believe that their land abuts against the proposed shipping lanes from what I can see. Guess they feel possibly left out.Well, 'Treaties' are the usual legal construct that define a wide range of relationships between the Crown and a First Nation..
Unlike the rest of Canada, largely for historical and geographical reasons, BC has over 200 First Nations but only a handful of treaties in place.
Alot of the 'noisy' First Nations we see in the media are not supported by others, who continue to engage in quietly managed treaty making processes, which remains the duty of the Crown to conduct.
No problem. All revenues obtained by big-project - particularly resource-oriented - agreements between companies and local aboriginal government should go into one federal pot, which can then be used to distribute the wealth more fairly among those with the ill luck not to be sitting on a mother lode or pipeline route, and particularly those with pressure infrastructure (eg. water, sewer, housing) needs.Guess they feel possibly left out.
There should be something in place along those lines, maybe a portion into the 'big pot' and the remainder to those directly affected by the project?No problem. All revenues obtained by big-project - particularly resource-oriented - agreements between companies and local aboriginal government should go into one federal pot, which can then be used to distribute the wealth more fairly among those with the ill luck not to be sitting on a mother lode or pipeline route, and particularly those with pressure infrastructure (eg. water, sewer, housing) needs.
But treaties (where they exist) don't cover the length and breadth of the duty to consult. I'm not even sure they address the concept of 'traditional territory'.Well, 'Treaties' are the usual legal construct that define a wide range of relationships between the Crown and a First Nation..
Unlike the rest of Canada, largely for historical and geographical reasons, BC has over 200 First Nations but only a handful of treaties in place.
Alot of the 'noisy' First Nations we see in the media are not supported by others, who continue to engage in quietly managed treaty making processes, which remains the duty of the Crown to conduct.
I suspect many FNs would say 'give us the money - we'll decide how to spend it'. Anything else is paternalism.No problem. All revenues obtained by big-project - particularly resource-oriented - agreements between companies and local aboriginal government should go into one federal pot, which can then be used to distribute the wealth more fairly among those with the ill luck not to be sitting on a mother lode or pipeline route, and particularly those with pressure infrastructure (eg. water, sewer, housing) needs.
All government is paternalism. Aboriginal local governments are in turn are paternalistic towards at least some of the people who live under their jurisdictions. So remind them of that, and carry on.I suspect many FNs would say 'give us the money - we'll decide how to spend it'. Anything else is paternalism.
No problem. All revenues obtained by big-project - particularly resource-oriented - agreements between companies and local aboriginal government should go into one federal pot, which can then be used to distribute the wealth more fairly among those with the ill luck not to be sitting on a mother lode or pipeline route, and particularly those with pressure infrastructure (eg. water, sewer, housing) needs.
Since most aboriginal local government is already socialist (who owns the real estate and the major enterprises?), it's at least an improvement by distributing the gains of socialism more widely.You socialist!![]()
Wouldn't take long for old grievances between groups to rear their ugly heads if that were the case. Quick way to end unity.No problem. All revenues obtained by big-project - particularly resource-oriented - agreements between companies and local aboriginal government should go into one federal pot, which can then be used to distribute the wealth more fairly among those with the ill luck not to be sitting on a mother lode or pipeline route, and particularly those with pressure infrastructure (eg. water, sewer, housing) needs.
Wouldn't take long for old grievances between groups to rear their ugly heads if that were the case. Quick way to end unity.
