Liberals, NDP, and Bloc vote against a Conservative non-binding motion in Parliament to work toward protecting private property rights.

[blackbird]

This is shocking and should be of major concern to Canadians.  Why would our elected MPs refuse to take steps to protect private property rights in the face of the Cowichan ruling in B.C.?   This is incomprehensible.  Is this country on some kind of self destruct path or what is going on?

"Motion voted down: A majority of MPs rejected the Conservative push to prioritize private property rights over Aboriginal title in negotiations.

Court ruling backdrop: The motion followed a B.C. Supreme Court decision affirming Cowichan Tribes' title to 300 hectares, sparking debate on property rights.

Partisan clash: Liberals, NDP and Bloc opposed the motion, accusing Conservatives of fearmongering; Conservatives say the ruling fuels uncertainty."

Majority of MPs vote down Conservative motion calling for private property protection

I hope the Conservatives will keep this as a central issue.  I believe the MPs and parties who voted against this motion are out of touch with Canadians.  Canadians are concerned about what is going on in B.C. under the BC NDP government with their secret meetings and co governance with FNs which are only a few percent of the population.  The BC NDP has been handing over large areas of land to FNs in BC.  The BC NDP brought in the DRIPA law which really created a serious problem leading to the court ruling giving a huge part of Richmond, BC to the Cowichan band.  This is a threat and a warning sign.

Edited May 26 by blackbird

[Radiorum]

So Poilievre follows in Trump's conman footsteps. Do you really believe for one minute that property rights are not already protected in Canada? If you don't, you're the fool, falling for Poilievre as he tries to keep himself relevant.

Did you even read the article?  Quoted from it - 

Listen to Poilievre fearmonger - 

"The ruling has shaken the foundations of British Columbia's economy and sparked fear among landowners provincewide," Poilievre said in a statement on April 23.

Food for fools! But here is the truth - 

"The Cowichan decision is not and never was about taking away people's homes or private fee-simple property. The court simply reaffirmed principles that have existed in Canadian law for decades — namely that First Nations title was never automatically extinguished by the Crown,"

...

"It is already Government of Canada policy to only make rights and title agreements that protect the private property of Canadians. I can assure this House, and all Canadians, that we will not, nor would we ever, entertain or even consider an agreement where Canadians lose their private property," 

 

 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Radiorum said:

Food for fools! But here is the truth - 

"The Cowichan decision is not and never was about taking away people's homes or private fee-simple property. The court simply reaffirmed principles that have existed in Canadian law for decades — namely that First Nations title was never automatically extinguished by the Crown,"

...

"It is already Government of Canada policy to only make rights and title agreements that protect the private property of Canadians. I can assure this House, and all Canadians, that we will not, nor would we ever, entertain or even consider an agreement where Canadians lose their private property," 

 

BC Land Claims 2026: What's Happening Now and What It Means for Canadian Homeowners

Back to all articles

For most Canadians, the idea that someone could show up and challenge ownership of your home or business sounds far-fetched. But that's essentially what happened in Richmond, BC and it started with a question that Canadian courts had never fully answered: what happens when Indigenous people never gave up their land?

In 2019, the Quw'utsun (Cowichan) Tribes launched a legal claim over approximately 1,800 acres along the north bank of the Fraser River. Land that now includes homes, industrial parks, a golf course, Amazon and Canadian Tire distribution centres, and fuel storage tanks serving Vancouver International Airport. The Cowichan argued that this land was their ancestral village, Tl'uqtinus, and that it was never formally surrendered to the Crown through a treaty.

What followed was the longest trial in Canadian history — 513 days over six years, involving more than 80 lawyers and the federal government, the Province of BC, the City of Richmond, and two other First Nations who opposed the claim.

On August 7, 2025, BC Supreme Court Justice Barbara Young ruled in the Cowichan's favour.

She found that the Crown had unjustifiably infringed on Cowichan title by granting fee simple titles — standard private property ownership — over land the Nation never gave up. Some of those Crown-issued titles, she ruled, were "defective and invalid."

The decision sent shockwaves through BC's real estate market. Property deals collapsed. Banks stopped lending. Homeowners learned about the ruling at a City of Richmond town hall, not from their government, not from their real estate agent, and not from the courts. Many had lived in the affected area for years without knowing the claim existed.

Here's Where Things Stand Today

That ruling is now under appeal. But far from settling down, the situation has escalated sharply over the past 60 days. New lawsuits have been filed, the government has announced a financial rescue package, lenders are cutting off mortgages, and a class action against the Crown is moving forward.

This is the most current picture of what's happening — and what it means if you own or want to buy property in BC.

The 6 Biggest Developments Since December 2025

1. BC Officially Files Its Appeal — and Draws a Hard Line

On February 5, 2026, BC Attorney General Niki Sharma confirmed the province is formally appealing the Cowichan ruling and seeking a stay to pause implementation while the appeal works through the courts.

"We disagree strongly with the decision," Sharma said, adding that the ruling "could have significant unintended consequences for fee simple private property rights in BC." The federal government and City of Richmond are also appealing. The case will go to the BC Court of Appeal — a process expected to take at least one to two years — and will almost certainly land at the Supreme Court of Canada after that.

Premier David Eby has been blunt in public:

"For our government, private property is non-negotiable. People's homes and businesses are not bargaining chips. Full stop."

That's a significant rhetorical shift for a government that spent years advancing reconciliation through legislation. Critics have pointed out the province didn't mount a robust defense of private property rights at trial, making the appeal feel reactive. But politically, the line has been drawn.

2. A New First Nation Has Already Filed a Copycat Claim

On January 26, 2026, the Dzawada'enuxw First Nation on BC's central coast filed a new lawsuit directly citing the Cowichan ruling, targeting roughly 650 hectares of fee simple land at Kingcome Inlet, currently owned by forestry company Interfor, the Nature Trust of BC, and the province.

The Nation argues the land was taken from them illegally over a century ago by an Indian Agent and his family. Their lawyer was direct: "In the wake of the Cowichan decision, the legal landscape has changed."

This is not an isolated case.

Legal experts say there are at least half a dozen active Aboriginal title cases in BC alone. A partner at law firm Borden Ladner Gervais told the Globe and Mail:

"I've been fielding calls from banks, credit unions, title insurers, mortgage brokers, real estate agents and regulators asking, 'What direction should we be giving on this?' And I think everybody's holding their breath."

The Cowichan ruling has effectively created a legal template that other First Nations are now using.

3. Banks Are Refusing to Renew Mortgages on Affected Properties

This is the most immediate, ground-level impact: lenders are saying no.

Multiple banks, credit unions, and mortgage brokers have stopped issuing new mortgages and refusing renewals on properties within the Cowichan title area.

‍At a Town Hall hosted by Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie, one property owner reported that his lender had declined to renew his mortgage outright. Property tax expert Paul Sullivan, who represents more than half the property owners in the claim area, said his clients have been told these properties are "not saleable. There's no value."

Real estate deals that were mid-process when the ruling came down were abandoned. A $100 million development project in the area has been shelved. Some owners have filed property tax appeals, arguing their assessed values no longer reflect what the market or any lender is willing to recognize.

4. The Province (of BC) Announced a $150 Million Loan Guarantee Program

In a December 13, 2025 interview with CBC, Premier Eby announced the province is working on a plan to offer over $150 million in government-backed loan guarantees to property owners and businesses in the claim area.

The breakdown: roughly $100 million would backstop financing for Montrose Properties (the largest single landowner, whose lender denied it $35 million in financing post-ruling), and $54 million for smaller owners. The final figure could grow once additional commercial activity is factored in.

Richmond Mayor Brodie called it "a good step forward." The BC Conservatives noted they'd been asking for this for months before being ignored. The loan guarantees don't resolve the legal question, they're a bridge to keep people financially afloat while the appeals process plays out over the next several years.

5. A Class Action Has Been Filed Against the Federal and BC Governments

In November 2025, a proposed class action was filed in BC Supreme Court alleging that both levels of government misled property owners for years — assuring the public that land titles were "safe, marketable and free from material qualification" while internally aware of the risks from unresolved Indigenous land claims.

The suit claims the governments caused "economic and psychological harm" and collected property taxes based on "inflated or misinformed property values." The relief sought includes damages for loss of property value and mental distress, plus restitution of taxes collected under false pretences.

The reach of the claim is significant: it argues the problem isn't just Richmond — it potentially extends to all private property owners in BC whose land may be subject to unresolved Aboriginal title claims.

6. BC and New Brunswick Courts Have Reached Opposite Conclusions

A January 2026 legal analysis by Torys LLP identified what may be the most consequential tension in Canadian property law right now: BC and New Brunswick courts ruled opposite ways on the same core question.

The BC Supreme Court said Aboriginal title can be declared over privately held land, with negotiations to follow. The New Brunswick Court of Appeal (in the Wolastoqey Nation case, decided December 2025) said no. Aboriginal title declarations should not extend to private property; monetary compensation from the Crown is the right answer instead.

Two provincial courts. Two opposite answers. One Supreme Court of Canada showdown almost certainly coming — but not for years.

What This Means for Canadian Homeowners

The immediate crisis is centred in Richmond, BC. But the legal principles at stake reach every Canadian who owns property on unceded Indigenous land — which, outside of the numbered treaty areas of the Prairies and parts of Ontario, includes most of BC and significant parts of the country.

Here's what you need to know right now, in plain terms.

If you own property in the Cowichan claim area in Richmond: Your title has not been automatically taken away. The Cowichan Nation has been consistent that they are not trying to displace homeowners. But your property may be unsellable and unmortgageable until the appeal resolves. Apply to the province's loan guarantee program if you need financing, and consult a lawyer before attempting to sell.

If you own property anywhere else in BC: The Cowichan ruling has not invalidated your title. But it has established that Aboriginal title can coexist with — and take precedence over — fee simple title on unceded land. The legal uncertainty is real, and it's something your lawyer and lender should be factoring in, especially in areas with active claims.

If you're buying property in BC right now: Don't rely on a standard title search alone. Ask your real estate lawyer to specifically check whether the property falls within a known or asserted Aboriginal title claim area. This should now be routine practice for any BC transaction. At Deeded, our lawyers conduct full title reviews as part of every closing — learn what's included here.

If you're selling in an affected area: Disclose. If you know your property falls within a claim area, your lawyer needs to know before you list. Non-disclosure of a material fact affecting title is a serious legal issue.

If you're a lender or investor: The financial sector is already treating claim-area properties as unbankable. Expect more caution province-wide as the Dzawada'enuxw and other new claims are filed. Title insurance policies vary significantly in how they handle Aboriginal title risk — read the exclusions carefully.

If you're anywhere else in Canada: Watch this closely. An Algonquin First Nation has already filed a similar claim in Quebec. The New Brunswick Wolastoqey case is on appeal. Ontario has seen rulings prioritizing treaty rights over fee simple ownership. The Cowichan ruling is a BC case, but the legal principles it set in motion are national.

The Bottom Line

Canada has been quietly carrying a legal contradiction for decades: governments sold land and issued property titles on territory that Indigenous peoples never formally surrendered. Courts are now saying that out loud.

That doesn't mean homeowners are about to lose their houses. The Cowichan Nation, the Haida Nation, and the Wolastoqey Nation in New Brunswick have all been clear they're not trying to displace private residents. The Haida agreement where Aboriginal title was recognized by negotiation rather than litigation, with private property fully protected shows a better path forward exists.

But the path from here to there runs through years of appeals, negotiations, and legal uncertainty. For anyone buying, selling, or financing property in BC, that uncertainty is real and needs to be managed — not ignored.

‍BC Land Claims 2026: What's Happening Now and What It Means for Canadian Homeowners | Deeded

6 Sources

 

[West]

You have to consult with people who have brown skin now to determine if you can keep your assets. Live in a very sick society 

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, West said:

You have to consult with people who have brown skin now to determine if you can keep your assets. Live in a very sick society 

Our society is not sick it's just lazy. It's evolving, in the case of our relationship with First Nations, according more to our centuries old system of jurisprudence than negotiated treaties.

England's Governor of British Columbia didn't extinguish the indigenous title that English law plainly said existed at the time of colonization.

That title didn't go away with Confederation and responsibility for acknowledging it was formally and legally passed onto British Columbians, Canadians and our governments.

We also adopted the same legal system of jurisprudence and it's as accessible to indigenous people as anyone.

What did people think would happen, especially in the absence of properly negotiated treaties?

Edited May 27 by eyeball

[West]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Our society is not sick it's just lazy. It's evolving, in the case of our relationship with First Nations, according more to our centuries old system of jurisprudence than negotiated treaties.

England's Governor of British Columbia didn't extinguish the indigenous title that English law plainly said existed at the time of colonization.

That title didn't go away with Confederation and responsibility for acknowledging it was formally and legally passed onto British Columbians, Canadians and our governments.

We also adopted the same legal system of jurisprudence and it's as accessible to indigenous people as anyone.

What did people think would happen, especially in the absence of properly negotiated treaties?

In what way do they "own" thousands of square miles of land and why should anyone have to consult with brown skinned people because they settled 100s of KMs away? Pretty stupid logic

Edited May 27 by West

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, West said:

In what way do they "own" thousands of square miles of land? Pretty stupid logic

They were here before England. The logic of the day was according to agreements England had with competing colonizers from Europe. They all had to justify their claims to colonies by, amongst other things, showing they had treaties with indigenous people that extinguished Aboriginal title.

Even back then there was a process guided by law and jurisprudence.

That process lives on and will live on long long after all of us are gone.

[West]

23 minutes ago, eyeball said:

They were here before England. The logic of the day was according to agreements England had with competing colonizers from Europe. They all had to justify their claims to colonies by, amongst other things, showing they had treaties with indigenous people that extinguished Aboriginal title.

Even back then there was a process guided by law and jurisprudence.

That process lives on and will live on long long after all of us are gone.

You are justifying keeping the colonial state. Let Canada as we know it collapse and Britain can do whatever they gotta do to pay back law abiding Canadians having their land stolen from them by welfare cases aka the natives 

[eyeball]

29 minutes ago, West said:

You are justifying keeping the colonial state.

Huh? I'm not justifying it, I'm simply acknowledging how things unfolded. I think we could all stand a good renegotiation of our Confederation.

Except next time we should also incorporate the indigenous perspective into it as well.

In a lot of ways there's a real opportunities here for everyone. I live where formal modern treaties have been negotiated and it's plain as day they're amongst the biggest economic drivers in the region.

 

[West]

6 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Huh? I'm not justifying it, I'm simply acknowledging how things unfolded. I think we could all stand a good renegotiation of our Confederation.

Except next time we should also incorporate the indigenous perspective into it as well.

In a lot of ways there's a real opportunities here for everyone. I live where formal modern treaties have been negotiated and it's plain as day they're amongst the biggest economic drivers in the region.

 

What indigenous perspective? Let it collapse and let the natives take care of themselves. Either they sign on to good paying jobs or they can starve. End the welfare state and move toward economic progress.

 

The time for handouts needs to come to an end. The worst thing that happened to Canada was when the Liberals expanded the welfare state. Taxpayers have already paid out enough in welfare. 

Edited May 27 by West

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, West said:

What indigenous perspective? Let it collapse and let the natives take care of themselves. Either they sign on to good paying jobs or they can starve. End the welfare state and move toward economic progress.

You're just not paying attention are you. Negotiated treaties are the surest path towards this. Like I said they've been the biggest economic driver where I live and where the resident population is about 50% 1st Nations.

They're not wasting anytime creating businesses and finding partners to come and invest in larger ventures, which is a lot easier now that they have certainty over title to their territories.

[blackbird]

42 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You're just not paying attention are you. Negotiated treaties are the surest path towards this. Like I said they've been the biggest economic driver where I live and where the resident population is about 50% 1st Nations

You are imagining things.  FNs claim 125% of the province as their land.  This is nothing but a scam to continue to rip off whitey.  

Your idea that BC can sit down and resolve everything by negotiating a deal with 5% of the population who claim it all belong to them is total nonsense.  The reason there are no treaties in much of the province is because their demands are ridiculous nonsense.  They don't own the province.  When Europeans settled here it became part of a new country.  That's just how the world was settled.  People in other countries simply migrated into new areas or areas that were already settled and took over.   That's how the world was settled.  Look at Europe, the UK and you see nobody pays compensation or negotiates with descendants of previous occupants.  The idea is all part of the radical Socialist NDP ideology.  They are screwing the non-natives of BC big time.  

They negotiate in secret with some FN and give them big tracs of land.  Now some FNs are taking over the LNG industry.  Where do you they think they got the money to be owners of LNG?  The answer is the federal and provincial governments who are giving them everything.   You might live in a highly populated FN area but overall they are only about 5% of the population and should have no rights more than the other 95%.  Everyone has the same rights.  They are not special with rights above everyone else.  They don't own the province.  God created this earth for everyone.

[eyeball]

8 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You are imagining things.  FNs claim 125% of the province as their land. 

Yeah well, I guess they got over that where I live and we got a treaty!

We get along.

August would get it.

[Radiorum]

9 hours ago, West said:

You have to consult with people who have brown skin now to determine if you can keep your assets. Live in a very sick society 

It would be okay if they were white?