Infrastructure, a key Liberal promise, is a mess

[Dougie93]

Still failing to grasp the nature of the issue.   This is not a charter rights issue.   The issue is that in 1997 the SCC ruled that the natives were the legal title holders of their hereditary territories and associated monarchies.

It's not a rights issue, it's a title issue, which neither Canada nor British Columbia have dealt with in the years since 1997, none the less it is a SCC ruling and thus the constitutional law of the land, and again, no, section 33 could not be invoked in any way in the face of it, because this judgement is not charter related, in that, land title  is a collective  law not an individual right.

That is to say, Canada is not being blocked here by individual natives but rather native constitutional monarchies unto themselves which the SCC has ruled have jurisdiction over their land, with the legal authority of de facto countries.  Thus, the Notwithstanding Clause does not apply.

As the matter was settled by the SCC in 1997, even if some dingbats try to bring a charter challenge, the courts ultimately would decline to re-litigate the already litigated.

Or to dumb it down;

SCC; "we already ruled on this issue, see; judgement rendered

Dingbats "wanh, wanh"

SCC "piss off"

Edited January 9, 2019 by Dougie93

[Zeitgeist]

24 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Still failing to grasp the nature of the issue.   This is not a charter rights issue.   The issue is that in 1997 the SCC ruled that the natives were the legal title holders of their hereditary territories and associated monarchies.

It's not a rights issue, it's a title issue, which neither Canada nor British Columbia have dealt with in the years since 1997, none the less it is a SCC ruling and thus the constitutional law of the land, and again, no, section 33 could not be invoked in any way in the face of it, because this judgement is not charter related, in that, land title  is a collective  law not an individual right.

That is to say, Canada is not being blocked here by individual natives but rather native constitutional monarchies unto themselves which the SCC has ruled have jurisdiction over their land, with the legal authority of de facto provinces.  Thus, the Notwithstanding Clause does not apply.

Okay.  Read about the hearings.  The province of BC government opposes the pipeline, but as it’s an interprovincial pipeline it comes under federal jurisdiction.  The NEB is continuing hearings about the pipeline because of environmental concerns such as the impact on marine life and local populations.  The elected band councils in the Indigenous territory you mentioned have actually approved the project, so these hearings are mostly a final kind of environmental assessment.  Whale watchers are pissed. 

Raising the Charter to oppose the pipeline would be a last ditch attempt to take it down. 

Edited January 9, 2019 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

12 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Okay.  Read about the hearings.  The province of BC government opposes the pipeline, but as it’s an interprovincial pipeline it comes under federal jurisdiction.  The NEB is continuing hearings about the pipeline because of environmental concerns such as the impact on marine life and local populations.  The elected band councils in the Indigenous territory you mentioned have actually approved the project, so these hearings are mostly a final kind of environmental assessment.  Whale watchers are pissed. 

Non sequitur

The Province of British Columbia is neither here nor there because they are not the ones blocking the pipeline, because as you say; they can't.  

But that is again, non sequitur to my assertion which is; the SCC says the natives can. Not as individuals, but as in effect kingdoms, and kingdoms don't need charter rights, kingdoms have  the rights of a sovereign, so no section 33 issue here,  as sovereigns are not subject to the section 33 of a foreign country, and they have the SCC hammer backing them up, so there's nothing the government can legally do here, except negotiate with them as equals. Our Queen negotiating with their kings, de facto and de jure.

Edited January 9, 2019 by Dougie93

[Zeitgeist]

6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Non sequitur

The Province of British Columbia is neither here nor there because they are not the ones blocking the pipeline, because as you say; they can't.  

But that is again, non sequitur to my assertion which is; the SCC says the natives can. Not as individuals, but as in effect kingdoms, and kingdoms don't need charter rights, kingdoms have  the rights of a sovereign, so no section 33 issue here,  as sovereigns are not subject to the section 33 of a foreign country, and they have the SCC hammer backing them up, so there's nothing the government can legally do here, except negotiate with them as equals. Our Queen negotiating with their kings, de facto and de jure.

I should clarify that band councils have approved the LNG pipeline and that project is full steam ahead, even though there’s an active opposition.  Trans Mountain is still pending approval as it’s in NEB hearings.  The BC government has no jurisdiction.  The purpose of these hearings is to provide assurances to the residents of all locally impacted populations, Indigenous and non-indigenous. Band councils need to be on board. My understanding is that they are if impacts are mitigated.  We’d have to dig into the individual representations. 

[Dougie93]

11 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I should clarify that band councils have approved the LNG pipeline and that project is full steam ahead, even though there’s an active opposition.  Trans Mountain is still pending approval as it’s in NEB hearings.  The BC government has no jurisdiction.  The purpose of these hearings is to provide assurances to the residents of all locally impacted populations, Indigenous and non-indigenous. Band councils need to be on board. My understanding is that they are if impacts are mitigated.  We’d have to dig into the individual representations. 

So long as the band councils are on board, I'm fine with it,  I do not oppose pipelines, although I don't think it's going to save the oil sands mid to long term, because a lack of pipelines is not what is killing the oil sands, what is killing the oil sands and what is going to kill the oil sands, is the international Bolshevist Climate Doom scam and associated  shift of public opinion which is going to render the oil sands politically unsustainable.

Edited January 10, 2019 by Dougie93