BC NDP's Haida deal should be a huge concern for BC residents

[blackbird]

Premier Eby and the BC NDP signed a deal giving the FNs on Haida Qwaii title over all private land on Haida Qwaii (formerly called the Queen Charlotte Islands).   I thought it did not include private land.  I don't see how the BC government can give private land to any FN group.  What about the people that own land on Haida Qwaii?   If this is true, it is shocking.  What is next in B.C.?

 

Edited April 25, 2024 by blackbird

[eyeball]

49 minutes ago, blackbird said:

What about the people that own land on Haida Qwaii? 

They're like anyone else who owns private land, subject to the whims of sovereignty.

The Haida want a country of their own. It's easy enough to make it happen because their title was never surrendered, the place is surrounded by ocean and there's no overlapping claims.

If there comes a time the Haida forcefully try to dispossess and displace non Haida people from their property for simply being non-Haida those people will probably have to fight for their fundamental universal human rights from the ground up. If Haida Gwaii thinks their title makes them exempt from recognizing these rights they'll learn soon enough they aren't.

This process will take generations to work through.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

They're like anyone else who owns private land, subject to the whims of sovereignty.

The Haida want a country of their own. It's easy enough to make it happen because their title was never surrendered, the place is surrounded by ocean and there's no overlapping claims.

If there comes a time the Haida forcefully try to dispossess and displace non Haida people from their property for simply being non-Haida those people will probably have to fight for their fundamental universal human rights from the ground up. If Haida Gwaii thinks their title makes them exempt from recognizing these rights they'll learn soon enough they aren't.

This process will take generations to work through.

So just to be clear you're saying a future gov't could legislate to take it all back and remove them from any title.

[eyeball]

32 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So just to be clear you're saying a future gov't could legislate to take it all back and remove them from any title.

Msybe by force. Good luck with that.

[CdnFox]

Just now, eyeball said:

Msybe by force. Good luck with that.

Oh i don't know that a game of cowboys and indians would end well for the first nations   

But i was referring to legislation. As you say "They're like anyone else who owns private land, subject to the whims of sovereignty."

So a future gov't could legislate that it isn't first nations land any more now that it's been established that it is

[Moonlight Graham]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Oh i don't know that a game of cowboys and indians would end well for the first nations   

But i was referring to legislation. As you say "They're like anyone else who owns private land, subject to the whims of sovereignty."

So a future gov't could legislate that it isn't first nations land any more now that it's been established that it is

Problematic given they and many large parts of BC never ceded their land or made treaties with the Crown.

Like any other private lands the gov can say the land is privately owned by them but it still remains under jurisdiction of the Crown and the Province in terms of laws and borders.  Though I really don't know what the new agreement means.

This could get interesting depending on how far the indigenous want to take things.

Edited April 26, 2024 by Moonlight Graham

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, CdnFox said:

So a future gov't could legislate that it isn't first nations land any more now that it's been established that it is

Anything you propose will take force. Like I said, good luck.

[CdnFox]

8 hours ago, eyeball said:

Anything you propose will take force. Like I said, good luck.

And like i said if they want to play cowboys and indians that may not go well for them   It hasn't in bc before.

But we're talking legally here.  So i take it you just don't like what the answer is and you're avoiding it rather than dealing with it and that's why you refuse to answer a simple question.  Fair enough.

[herbie]

Took you long enough to notice. And it's absolutely typical to interpret things that way.

17 hours ago, eyeball said:

The Haida want a country of their own.

No they don't. They want say over their lands not ceded. The concept of First Nations is not the same as Countries.
No one will lose titled land, but they will determine the terms of future land use and ownership on Haida Gwaii. You will deal with them, not just Victoria and Ottawa.

[CdnFox]

31 minutes ago, herbie said:

Took you long enough to notice. And it's absolutely typical to interpret things that way.

No they don't. They want say over their lands not ceded. The concept of First Nations is not the same as Countries.
No one will lose titled land, but they will determine the terms of future land use and ownership on Haida Gwaii. You will deal with them, not just Victoria and Ottawa.

So they want to basically live in their mommy's basement   Not be responsible for actually having a nation but be slightly seperate from the country

Sounds about right.

[ExFlyer]

21 hours ago, herbie said:

Took you long enough to notice. And it's absolutely typical to interpret things that way.

No they don't. They want say over their lands not ceded. The concept of First Nations is not the same as Countries.
No one will lose titled land, but they will determine the terms of future land use and ownership on Haida Gwaii. You will deal with them, not just Victoria and Ottawa.

Give it to em but, also let them know they are now on their own...no more handouts or grants or support.

They can be like your kid leaving home...on their own now.  To all, not just in BC.

[herbie]

3 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Give it to em but, also let them know they are now on their own...no more handouts or grants or support.

They can be like your kid leaving home...on their own now.  To all, not just in BC

What's that attitude got to do with land issues? You think Surrey or London Ont. should have no say in municipal land issues either?