British Columbia NDP Majority Government 2024-(no later than) 2029

[Kirkhill]

BC has a total area of 944,735 km2

Apparently 95% of that area is not covered by any treaty.
I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest that the previous inhabitants have an arguable case for the land.
Even if those 290,210 people only represent 5.9% of the population.
In Scotland 57% of the land and half of that land is held by 421 people. Less than .01% of the population.

Meanwhile

61.8% of the population lives in large urban areas like Richmond
12.9% of the poulation lives in medium urban areas like Kamloops
11.7% of the population lives in small urban areas
13.6% of the population lives in rural areas
I am going to suggest that there is a higher percentage of indigenous people in the rural areas than the urban areas.

85% of the population lives in the urban areas
And that is where most of the non-indigenous population lives.

The urban area of BC is 83,447 km2 or about 9% of the total area.

Victoria, Sooke, Nanaimo and Port Hardy are secured by the Douglas treaties.
Fort St. John and Fort Nelson are secured by treaty 8

Notably Vancouver and the Lower Mainland, along with the Okanagan and Shuswap valleys are not.

.....

If the First Nations were negotiating as a collective and I was them I am not sure that I would have picked either the Richmond or the Kamloops fight.

A good chunk of the urban population has been sympathetic to indigenous land claims and was quite willing to let the government bargain with the first nations for the 90% of BC they didn't use and only visted occasionally.

By bringing attention to the 5% of the territory that is in dispute, that territory being the most populous part, and by making the issue personal to home-owners, they have likely lost a good deal of that useful sympathy.

Unless they wanted to stir up dissent....

 

[Brad Sallows]

Add, a civil claim case by the Secwepemc Nation for Kamloops. The case seeks Aboriginal title over the entire city and other areas.

100,000 + people in Kamloops.

That case has (as do all of them, I suppose) a particular context: opposition to the proposed Ajax mine. Opposition wasn't limited to them. Kamloops has gotten big enough that the "life-of-the-mind" community is starting to act like it can pick and choose what sits at the bottom of its economic pyramid, while at the same time using perfidious political means to spend on frivolities like the new entertainment centre.

But it underscores the insanity of allowing small communities whose membership is decided mostly on hereditary grounds to hinder economic development.

 

[dapaterson]

But it underscores the insanity of allowing small communities whose membership is decided mostly on hereditary grounds to hinder economic development.

So you favour a Canadian Republic and not a monarchy, then?

 

[daftandbarmy]

But it underscores the insanity of allowing small communities whose membership is decided mostly on hereditary grounds to hinder economic development.

Have we shifted topics to the British Upper Classes now?

 

[Brad Sallows]

I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest that the previous inhabitants have an arguable case for the land.

All extant inhabitants have an identical case for the land. The dead and who they were and where they came from are irrelevant. Anything less is a warped fusion of apartheid and feudalism. No-one has a choice about where or to whom he is born; as a principle, naturalized immigrants ought only be admitted as equal citizens and never as some approximation of indentured servants.

If the politicians and lawyers and judges don't fix this shit now and utterly break and gut the political rent-seekers among us, worse is coming.

 

[Brad Sallows]

So you favour a Canadian Republic and not a monarchy, then?

Yes. My views on the political structure have changed dramatically in the past 20 years.

 

[Kirkhill]

Plus side is that if 95% of BC were the personal fiefdoms of 202 mutually antagonistic chiefs then getting that pipeline to tidewater might become easier.

....

One other thing about these ownership debates. Under common law once you have accepted money in accordance with an agreement you have accepted the agreement.

How much money have the BC nations accepted from the Crown and for how long?

Doesn't that tend to dilute their claims?

 

[Quirky]

How much money have the BC nations accepted from the Crown and for how long?

The tap needs to be shut off, like yesterday.

 

[Kirkhill]

All extant inhabitants have an identical case for the land. The dead and who they were and where they came from are irrelevant. Anything less is a warped fusion of apartheid and feudalism. No-one has a choice about where or to whom he is born; as a principle, naturalized immigrants ought only be admitted as equal citizens and never as some approximation of indentured servants.

If the politicians and lawyers and judges don't fix this shit now and utterly break and gut the political rent-seekers among us, worse is coming.

My problem with that, as you state it, is that I wish to assist my children and their children by passing on my accumulated property to them as their inherited right.

If property means anything it has to mean the same to everyone.

....

I do agree with you that this is a mess that needs fixing urgently and the poloticians are the chosen fixers, Only problem is that your current fixer is not a supporter of individual property rights.

....

PS does BC's push for densification enter into this? The more people they can squeeze onto Granville Island the less need they have of Aldergrove.
And Aldergrve never votes NDP anyway.

 

[Halifax Tar]

So you favour a Canadian Republic and not a monarchy, then?

Yes. Whoops you weren't asking me

 

[Brad Sallows]

My problem with that, as you state it, is that I wish to assist my children and their children by passing on my accumulated property to them as their inherited right.

I mean there should never be a collective right of a political entity defined by hereditary identity politics, and probably not any kind of identity politics.

The more people squeezed into urban concentrations, the more dependent they are on the producers of everything needed to prevent them from collapsing into warring tribes of howling savages. Cities are strong in fiscal and social senses but immensely fragile under extreme physical circumstances.

 

[Kirkhill]

I mean there should never be a collective right of a political entity defined by hereditary identity politics, and probably not any kind of identity politics.

The more people squeezed into urban concentrations, the more dependent they are on the producers of everything needed to prevent them from collapsing into warring tribes of howling savages. Cities are strong in fiscal and social senses but immensely fragile under extreme physical circumstances.

Agreement.

Though reading up on this issue I have a sense that Alberta's problems originate in BC.

Douglas, like HBC traded fairly with the locals to establish settlements of limited area for commercial purposes.

Concurrently, back east, the Crown was in the process of enfranchising Indians and converting them into landholding Bitish Subjects with all the same rights as any other British Subject. This was being accomplished by means of the Gradual Civilization Act of 1857 and the Gradual Enfranchisement Act of1869. Those were largely the work of Sir John A Macdonald and enjoyed support among natives in Upper Canada. They, along with the Royal Proclamation of 1763 seem to have informed Ottawa's position on the early numbered treaties, 1 to 5.

BC saw things differently. Rather than providing the locals with an allowance of 160 to 640 acres per family, as was happening on the prairies, allotments equivalent to what new sttlers were being granted, BC was restricting the Indians to one acre a head.

The Ottawa Liberals imposed the Indian Act in 1876, five years after BC joined Confederation, nominally accepting the supremacy of Ottawa in return for a railroad to the east. They got their railway in 1885 but continued to argue with Ottawa over Indian lands to at least 1938 when BC transferred administration, control and benefit of Indian lands to the Federal Crown from the Provincial Crown by Order in Council 1036.

People born in 1938 are now 87 years old. They are the tribal elders. They remember their parents and grandparents. And their grievances.
Those memories are at least as fresh to them as Ukrainian and Polish memories of Russians and Germans.

In 1877 the prairie tribes trusted Ottawa. They didn't trust Washington. It doesn't sound like BC did much to earn local trust.

And now BC, Aberta and the rest of Canada suffer.

As said, this is a mess that needs fixing.

 

[Cloud Cover]

“In 1877 the prairie tribes trusted Ottawa. They didn't trust Washington. It doesn't sound like BC did much to earn local trust.”

Your g*ddamned right they didn’t- With anybody, and not just First Nations.

That being said, this land right here beneath my feet is mine. I consider it permanently ceded and that’s the end of it.

 

[YZT580]

I mean there should never be a collective right of a political entity defined by hereditary identity politics, and probably not any kind of identity politics.

The more people squeezed into urban concentrations, the more dependent they are on the producers of everything needed to prevent them from collapsing into warring tribes of howling savages. Cities are strong in fiscal and social senses but immensely fragile under extreme physical circumstances.

just file an indigenous claim. Then you can pass your neighbour's house off to them as well

 

[Cloud Cover]

Oh, it’s gets worse. Much worse…

 

[Cloud Cover]

And this …

 

[The Bread Guy]

The Cowichan leadership know this and are working hard to clarify a few things - they agree that the Judge screwed up too ...

Cowichan Tribes issues statement to clear up ‘misinformation’ surrounding its Aboriginal title case​

Cowichan Tribes leadership is firing back at Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie, Premier David Eby, and other politicians who have recently made public statements about the Cowichan Nation’s Aboriginal title case.

They call the statements about the effect of the B.C. Supreme Court’s judgement on individual private property owners misleading and “deliberately inflammatory.”

“To be clear,” the statement says, “the Cowichan Nation’s court case regarding their settlement lands at Tl’uqtinus in Richmond has not and does not challenge the effectiveness or validity of any title held by individual private landowners. The ruling does not erase private property.”

Cowichan Tribes issues statement to clear up ‘misinformation’

They call the statements about the B.C. Supreme Court’s judgement on individual private property owners “deliberately inflammatory.”

www.aptnnews.ca

Here's another way to "clarify" things ....

Biggest landowner in Cowichan area wants Aboriginal title case reopened, in rare move

A company that says it is the biggest private landowner in the Cowichan Tribes' Aboriginal title area in Richmond, B.C., said it will ask the British Columbia Supreme Court to

www.thecanadianpressnews.ca

 

[daftandbarmy]

Meanwhile, on the down low....

Rob Shaw: BC NDP catching Richmond residents off guard with quiet door-knocking campaign​

Province sends staffer door to door after Cowichan title ruling, surprising homeowners with flyers

For a government already under fire for its secretive handling of Indigenous reconciliation, you’d think the BC NDP might approach its outreach to Richmond residents on the Cowichan title ruling with extreme caution. Maybe a consultation plan, a website and some open meetings.

But instead, the province has done the opposite.

On the weekend, it quietly dispatched someone from Premier David Eby’s office to start knocking on Richmond doors with a stack of hastily printed flyers. No notice. No launch. No warning. Just a stranger at your doorstep claiming to be from the premier’s office, and an outreach effort nobody had ever heard of.

It was a mystifying way to address genuine community anxiety after a B.C. Supreme Court decision granted the Cowichan Nation Aboriginal title over nearly 800 acres in Richmond, including more than 140 private homes and properties.

Residents are on edge after a heated city session on the issue last month. Fears centre around the impact to private property rights, mortgages and financing, after the court also ruled Aboriginal title sits above private property rights in the legal hierarchy.

https://www.biv.com/news/commentary/rob-shaw-bc-ndp-catching-richmond-residents-off-guard-with-quiet-door-knocking-campaign-11477739

 

[Brad Sallows]

Meanwhile, on the down low....

Try to imagine what a "Town Hall" would look like, and who would show up to protest "for" and "against".