Jump to content

Duty to consult Aboriginal communities


Recommended Posts

You still didn't respond to what you mean by free? Dig deep enough and you may see what I mean in the legal sense. How did they pay for it? Well when you showed up in the boats you squatted on the land--like you were in a diaper :lol: raped the women; molested the children; committed acts of arson, kidnapping and murder; and to this day you still attack the indians in the mass media, on forums like this, through ass-backwards attitudes in our society etc etc ;) The indians have paid dearly at the hands of you land-squattin terrorists. Your response to "you guys" is very unreasonable ;) Why would I froth at the mouth towards the truth? Your the one frothing, relax, you, messed up mutt, etc etc, are the one frothing and you're going to have to tell yourself that it is not worth becoming a cranky old bat over others. You need to look at yourself in the mirror :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well ... another topic derailed, and we can't even blame benny.

Too bad.

It's important, but apparently understanding the current legal situation in regard to aboriginal rights is too threatening to some.

Well when you have hateful zealots championing a cause it's hard to have intellectual discussion. That being said, I think even in the best of circumstances you may be expecting too much if you want to discuss the intricacies of the law on this forum. I'm no lawyer and to me the situation seems quite simple, at least from what I know of dealings with aboriginal groups in BC. I'm assuming things are similar in Ontario but could be wrong on that point. Consultations are already required, and the steps you seem to be referring to look like they will have the effect of adding more red tape and discouraging investment. This may hurt not only the corporations that want to utilize the resources but the natives communities you are so concerned about as well.

You also didn't do anything to raise the level of discussion with the insults and slurs you hurled earlier.

Edited by Bonam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You still didn't respond to what you mean by free? Dig deep enough and you may see what I mean in the legal sense. How did they pay for it? Well when you showed up in the boats you squatted on the land--like you were in a diaper :lol: raped the women; molested the children; committed acts of arson, kidnapping and murder;

Yep I sure did all that, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a real shame that you are so bankrupt of intellectual capacity you are only capable of ignorant racial slurs.

I think you have a better life coming ... as a dancing pig ... and we get to throw slop at YOU!

First you should look in the mirror to see what a disgusting fucking racist pig looks like!!
Is it the same as all the free-land you land squatting terrorist got?

Gee, I have no idea why Aboriginal complaints don't get taken seriously around here. Their arguments are always so rational, and they always supply such workable solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consultations are already required, and the steps you seem to be referring to look like they will have the effect of adding more red tape and discouraging investment. This may hurt not only the corporations that want to utilize the resources but the natives communities you are so concerned about as well.
The "duty to consult" is a two way street since it requires that natives spend time providing the consulting services. This makes it difficult for small bands in areas where there is a lot of activity. Natives have started charging the governments thousands for their services as consultants which I can understand from their perspective but such fees go completely against the spirit of the SCC rulings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The twisted insights are pathetic sometimes--equivalent to a bunch of stranded bimbos with nothing better to do than yelp about natives

Gee, I have no idea why Aboriginal complaints don't get taken seriously around here. Their arguments are always so rational, and they always supply such workable solutions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "duty to consult" is a two way street since it requires that natives spend time providing the consulting services. This makes it difficult for small bands in areas where there is a lot of activity. Natives have started charging the governments thousands for their services as consultants which I can understand from their perspective but such fees go completely against the spirit of the SCC rulings.

Please provide a reference for that, because I don't know what you're talking about.

Actually, it is the provincial governments that are responsible for the costs, assuming they are the ones that want to approve a development/mining/logging etc operation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think even in the best of circumstances you may be expecting too much if you want to discuss the intricacies of the law on this forum. I'm no lawyer and to me the situation seems quite simple, at least from what I know of dealings with aboriginal groups in BC. I'm assuming things are similar in Ontario but could be wrong on that point. Consultations are already required, and the steps you seem to be referring to look like they will have the effect of adding more red tape and discouraging investment. This may hurt not only the corporations that want to utilize the resources but the natives communities you are so concerned about as well.

BC was in the thick of it as soon as Sec 35 was in place, because there are no treaties there so there is less need for debate about whether rights exist. The Supreme Court rulings re 'duty to consult' all came from BC.

It's more complicated here in Ontario, and I believe perhaps the developers of this generation are more accustomed to having their own way here, so it's more contentious, perhaps. Certainly no engineers here would have learned about Aboriginal rights in college/university, and likely still don't. It's just beginning to be forced into their consciousness.

I would guess - maybe stereotypically and if so then someone can correct me - that the Alberta contingent wouldn't be too receptive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please provide a reference for that, because I don't know what you're talking about.
An interview on CBC radio. Municipalities trying to ensure they have fulfilled their duty to consult are now getting large bills from the native groups.
Actually, it is the provincial governments that are responsible for the costs, assuming they are the ones that want to approve a development/mining/logging etc operation.
The spirit of the SCC judgements require both parties to act in good faith to resolve potential conflicts. Demanding payment in return for this consultation means the natives are not acting in good faith. There is a difference between getting re-imbursed for out of pocket expenses and getting paid for time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interview on CBC radio. Municipalities trying to ensure they have fulfilled their duty to consult are now getting large bills from the native groups.

What "municipalities"? When?

The spirit of the SCC judgements require both parties to act in good faith to resolve potential conflicts. Demanding payment in return for this consultation means the natives are not acting in good faith. There is a difference between getting re-imbursed for out of pocket expenses and getting paid for time.

I don't believe it.

The province (Crown) is responsible for facilitating the consultations, including arranging the funding. People do have to be paid for their time: The industry reps are being paid, the provincial reps are being paid. Why would the Indigenous governance reps not be paid? That's ridiculous.

And it's likely they would have to hire someone extra, as does the province, since they are not staffed for that - It didn't exist in the past.

Granted, the province of Ontario has dragged its feet until the courts ordered them to do it, so there may have been some anomalies along the way. However, that isn't how it really works.

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe it.

Can only find it in Google cache:

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:PD13H...=clnk&gl=ca

The village of Belcarra paid the initial $250 application fee sought by the Tsleil Waututh Nation (TWN) under its newly unveiled stewardship policy that aims to recover the costs of assessing projects that could impact its aboriginal interests.

The village was then presented an estimate of $34,000 for the total costs the band said its assessment would entail.

Belcarra has asked for clarification but it's now unclear when the project can proceed, even though the federal and provincial governments announced funding for two thirds of the costs over a year ago.

http://harveyoberfeld.ca/blog/belcarra-is-...ry-in-the-mine/

Edited by Riverwind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting ... and did you notice who was not saying anything?

The province ... just laying low ... though facilitating the 'consultation and accommodation process is their responsibility.

Those are legitimate costs. It has to be funded, and it isn't clear at present.

Obviously, there's going to be a struggle between the municipalities/prov/feds over who's going to fund.

It's just political posturing.

It isn't resolved entirely here in Ontario either, but it is the province that has to step up to the plate, though they may try to recoup some of the costs from the feds.

Of course, municipalities charge exactly the same kinds of fees when they take development applications. Same thing, really.

Excuse me for doubting. I momentarily forgot about provincial evasion of responsibility. It's their strong suit. ;)

eta - Upon reflection, I actually think this is a wise strategy by the First Nations: Money up front, and you governments fight it out!

Otherwise, they're stuck holding the bag as usual, with no funding.

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would the Indigenous governance reps not be paid?
Why should they be paid? The government is constitutionally required to select citizens for jury duty and once selected citizens have an obligation to accept but all they get for their time is bus fare and lunch.

Why should consulations under the 'duty to consult' be any different than jury duty?

There is also practical matter. There is no free market for aboriginal consultants so there are no way to determine the fare market wage. If one accepts that they should be paid $34K for consulting - why not $34 million?

That is why I say aboriginals are not acting in good faith if they expect to get paid for their time providing consultations.

Edited by Riverwind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should they be paid? The government is constitutionally required to select citizens for jury duty and once selected citizens have an obligation to accept but all they get for their time is bus fare and lunch.

Why should consulations under the 'duty to consult' be any different than jury duty?

There is also practical matter. There is no free market for aboriginal consultants so there are no way to determine the fare market wage. If one accepts that they should be paid $34K for consulting - why not $34 million?

That is why I say aboriginals are not acting in good faith if they expect to get paid for their time providing consultations.

Why shouldn't they be paid? Everyone else at the table is paid. They need professional expertise to review the applications. They are First Nations governance and they are paid for their work, like everybody else.

Who the hell can afford to work without pay?

Give your head a shake!

How much do municipalities charge for reviewing development applications?

How much does it cost the the provinces to review/approve development applications?

Of course they have to be paid.

I say the provinces are not acting in good faith if they are not ensuring that funding is available to facilitate consultation.

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are First Nations governance and they are paid for their work, like everybody else.
If the first nations can't rely on volunteers to protect their interests they should tax their own people and hire full time staff.

For example, my municipality is required to consult with residents before changing any zonings. If I decided I needed to protect my interests by participating in the zoning committees then I have do it for free. If I decided that I did not have time then I would have to pay someone myself. I would be met with howls of laughter if I asked the city to pay for my lawyer to act on my behalf in consultations which they are required to have.

Who the hell can afford to work without pay? Give your head a shake!
If the aboriginal communities need to hire someone to look after their interests then they should pay for it themselves. They have no business asking others to pay for it. Edited by Riverwind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the first nations can't rely on volunteers to protect their interests they should tax their own people and hire full time staff.

For example, my municipality is required to consult with residents before changing any zonings. If I decided I needed to protect my interests by participating in the zoning committees then I have do it for free. If I decided that I did not have time then I would have to pay someone myself. I would be met with howls of laughter if I asked the city to pay for my lawyer to act on my behalf in consultations which they are required to have.

If the aboriginal communities need to hire someone to look after their interests then they should pay for it themselves. They have no business asking others to pay for it.

Too bad. You are wrong.

This isn't First Nations seeking input.

This is our governments seeking to fulfill their legal duties.

I'll take a small wager on it though! :lol:

And I do wish you'd actually read my posts before responding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't First Nations seeking input.

This is our governments seeking to fulfill their legal duties.

Governments have a legal duty to find jurors.

People often don't want to be jurors.

But the government does not pay them for their time.

It does not make a difference that everyone else is the court room is paid to be there.

There is no difference with the duty to consult. Especially since the duty to consult requires that both parties act in good faith. Demanding that governments pay their people means aborignals are acting in bad faith and that should be enough to allow governments to proceed without further input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Governments have a legal duty to find jurors.

People often don't want to be jurors.

But the government does not pay them for their time.

It does not make a difference that everyone else is the court room is paid to be there.

There is no difference with the duty to consult. Especially since the duty to consult requires that both parties act in good faith. Demanding that governments pay their people means aborignals are acting in bad faith and that should be enough to allow governments to proceed without further input.

The more valid comparison is as I stated above:

Please tell me why First Nations governance should not be paid to review development applications when municipalities and provinces are?

Please tell me why everyone else in consultation should be paid and not them?

Sounds like the First Nations are inundated with applications they can't afford to review or consult on. Too bad about those applications. I guess they'll just have to sit there.

And of course, the reason First Nations can't afford it is ... because their stolen land is tied up in federal land claims, and their stolen resources are ... well ... stolen ... and their trust funds are ... well ... embezzled by our governments.

You see, it isn't our money: It's their own money they are asking for.

And they have been asking for hundreds of years for their money, land and resource revenues back.

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please tell me why First Nations governance should not be paid to review development applications when municipalities and provinces are?
The jury duty is the most accurate comparsion. The municipal workers are paid by the taxpayers in the municipality because they represent the interest of those taxpayers. Same goes for the provincial workers. Similarily the aboriginal workers should be paid by the aboriginal group that they represent. The province does not pay for the municipal workers which is what you are asking.
Sounds like the First Nations are inundated with applications they can't afford to review or consult on. Too bad about those applications. I guess they'll just have to sit there.
Not the government's problem. It is acting in good faith. If the aboriginals with an interest in the land do not pay for enough people to represent their interests they are NOT acting in good faith which means the government does NOT need to consult further.
And they have been asking for hundreds of years for their money, land and resource revenues back.
So? The duty to consult requires good faith on BOTH sides. Charging consulting fees means the aboriginal groups are not acting in good faith. If aboriginal groups really need the money they the can borrow it from the federal government pending the resolution of their land claims. But no matter what they are responsible for paying their own representatives. Edited by Riverwind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The jury duty is the most accurate comparsion. The municipal workers are paid by the taxpayers in the municipality because they represent the interest of those taxpayers. Same goes for the provincial workers. Similarily the aboriginal workers should be paid by the aboriginal group that they represent. The province does not pay for the municipal workers which is what you are asking.

Not the government's problem. It is acting in good faith. If the aboriginals with an interest in the land do not pay for enough people to represent their interests they are NOT acting in good faith which means the government does NOT need to consult further.

So? The duty to consult requires good faith on BOTH sides. Charging consulting fees means the aboriginal groups are not acting in good faith. If aboriginal groups really need the money they the can borrow it from the federal government pending the resolution of their land claims. But no matter what they are responsible for paying their own representatives.

Only in your mind, riv. Not in court.

As I said, the funding they are asking for is not our money: It's money our governments have stolen from them.

IMO, the developments cannot proceed. The courts will not allow it, as the government is not acting in good faith. The court won't accept failure of consultation due to lack of funding to do the work, because that is the province's responsibility.

But why speculate and make ridiculous comparisons?

You'll just have to wait to see what happens in your neck of the woods.

And now that I see where you are going with this, I feel even more that the First Nations are using an effective strategy in requiring the funding up front.

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said, the funding they are asking for is not our money: It's money our governments have stolen from them.
One does not have anything to do with the other,
IMO, the developments cannot proceed. The courts will not allow it, as the government is not acting in good faith. The court won't accept failure of consultation due to lack of funding to do the work, because that is the province's responsibility.
You have no concept of the meaning of "good faith" do you? Good faith imposes an obligations on BOTH parties. For example, would you still insists that aboriginal groups were acting in good faith if they demanded $34 million? If not then you have more or less agreed with me that there is an obligation on the aboriginal groups to act in good faith and demanding money is a sign of bad faith. If you think that demanding $34 million is perfectly acceptable then you are truly out of touch with the laws.
But why speculate and make ridiculous comparisons?
The comparisons are appropriate and relevant to anyone who does not have a completely unjustified sense of entitlement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (tango @ Aug 20 2009, 02:36 AM) *

As I said, the funding they are asking for is not our money: It's money our governments have stolen from them.

One does not have anything to do with the other,

:lol:

Now you are truly being ridiculous.

You have no concept of the meaning of "good faith" do you? Good faith imposes an obligations on BOTH parties.

Absolutely.

It would not be 'good faith' for the First Nations to begin the process if they know they cannot sustain it due to lack of funding.

Likewise, it would not be 'good faith' for the province to tell the judge that they consulted, and accommodated Aboriginal rights, when they did not, due to lack of funding of First Nations' participation.

Sooo ... what do you think the Judge would say, given that by law, it is the province's responsibility to facilitate meaningful consultation, and ensure adequate accommodation of Aboriginal rights?

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...