Supreme Court to Decide Metis Claim

[Riverwind]

The two examples I cited ... one child was kicked down the stairs to her death. The other was beaten by nuns with hockey sticks. READ THEM ... or are you too chicken !!!!!!

Anecdotes don't prove gov't complicity or intent.

If Canada had no legal obligation to honour the treaties, Canada would let the Indigenous nations go to court and lose. Canada prefers to settle out of court, because Canada knows it is legally liable to honour the treaties.

The court has instructed to gov't to find a negotiated settlement - the gov't is trying to do that. The court has never ruled that aboriginals are entitled to everything they claim.

If Canada had no complicity in the residential school abuses and deaths ... Canada would let Indigenous people take them to court ... instead, Canada prefers a blanket payout with an acknowledgement that is not an apology because an apology would leave it legally liable for complicity.

The blanket settlement was agreed to by natives because they knew that the majority of claims might not stand up in court. There is no settlement in the minority of cases where real abuse occurred - that is still being negotiated on a case by case basis.

I object to paying my taxpayer dollars toward your salary for you to spew racism and twist facts and manipulate people emotions and fears in a public discussion forum. Obviously the Canadian government is desperate to avoid detection ... but it is inevitable.

Excuse me - what on earth are you talking about? A bit rich coming from someone who complains about other people attacking them.

[saga]

The two examples I cited ... one child was kicked down the stairs to her death. The other was beaten by nuns with hockey sticks. READ THEM ... or are you too chicken !!!!!!

Anecdotes don't prove gov't complicity or intent.

Your callous response is a clear enough answer. The government of Canada is complicit because it was responsible for genocidal policy, mandatory attendance, and oversight of residential schools, but it intends to hang the crimes on the churches.

If Canada had no legal obligation to honour the treaties, Canada would let the Indigenous nations go to court and lose. Canada prefers to settle out of court, because Canada knows it is legally liable to honour the treaties.

The court has instructed to gov't to find a negotiated settlement - the gov't is trying to do that. The court has never ruled that aboriginals are entitled to everything they claim.

Again, your response is a clear answer ... the Government of Canada has been instructed to find a negotiated solution ... or face the court s and lose.

If Canada had no complicity in the residential school abuses and deaths ... Canada would let Indigenous people take them to court ... instead, Canada prefers a blanket payout with an acknowledgement that is not an apology because an apology would leave it legally liable for complicity.

The blanket settlement was agreed to by natives because they knew that the majority of claims might not stand up in court. There is no settlement in the minority of cases where real abuse occurred - that is still being negotiated on a case by case basis.

And there will be many cases.... and the missing children ... what investigation is underway to address this ... or does Canada think their families will just forget them...

I object to paying my taxpayer dollars toward your salary for you to spew racism and twist facts and manipulate people emotions and fears in a public discussion forum. Obviously the Canadian government is desperate to avoid detection ... but it is inevitable.

Excuse me - what on earth are you talking about? A bit rich coming from someone who complains about other people attacking them.

I am talking about the fact that you are part of the propoganda machine to convince Canadians that indigenous people are not entitled to legal treaty land, and you pretend to think that the residential schools were not systematically abusive ... but you are wrong and most Canadians already know that anyway.

What galls me is ... this is the official line of the government that is my government. It disgusts me. This is the machine of a facist state, not a democracy.

CBC did a movie called Butterbox Babies about a home for unwed mothers down east where the owner was found to be murdering the babies and burying them in butterboxes. CBC did not have the guts to tell the whole story ... my mother told me ... those were indigenous girls from the residential schools whose babies were killed. On the west coast ... a similar story ... the girls impregnated through sexual assault by staff went away ... and came back without their babies ... and some did not come back at all. The boy beaten with hockey sticks in Northern Ontario survived ... by escaping and outwitting the police and their dogs and finding his way ... at 11 years old ... 1,400 km through the bush to winnipeg where he lived on the streets until finally able to return home as an adult. He is at the Grassy Narrows blockade now, still having to fight for his rights.

We expect people who commit crimes to show remorse and their sentencing reflects this. I expect Canada to show remorse, and to deal with Indigenous people honestly from then on. Our negotiations with them will go alot easier if Canada does the right thing. If Canada denies and hides ... negotiations will not go well.

I believe our government is making the wrong choice.

I believe there are many decent Canadians who agree.....

Can we afford to settle their treaties ...

Can we afford not to when our national honour is at stake ...

[Riverwind]

I am talking about the fact that you are part of the propoganda machine to convince Canadians that indigenous people are not entitled to legal treaty land, and you pretend to think that the residential schools were not systematically abusive ... but you are wrong and most Canadians already know that anyway.

You have a real problem accepting information that you do not want to believe. You want to believe that all of these issues related to aboriginal land claims are black and white where the gov't is pure evil and the aboriginals are pure good. Life is never like that and the facts of both residential schools and native land claims do not support the grossly exaggerated claims you are making.

What galls me is ... this is the official line of the government that is my government. It disgusts me. This is the approach of a facist state, not a democracy.

I have never said I speak for anyone other than myself - it is mystery to me why you keep making these accusations. I suggest you re-read your own posts and ask yourself if you are living up to the standards that you demand of others.

[saga]

I am talking about the fact that you are part of the propoganda machine to convince Canadians that indigenous people are not entitled to legal treaty land, and you pretend to think that the residential schools were not systematically abusive ... but you are wrong and most Canadians already know that anyway.

You have a real problem accepting information that you do not want to believe. You want to believe that all of these issues related to aboriginal land claims are black and white where the gov't is pure evil and the aboriginals are pure good. Life is never like that and the facts of both residential schools and native land claims do not support the grossly exaggerated claims you are making.

What galls me is ... this is the official line of the government that is my government. It disgusts me. This is the approach of a facist state, not a democracy.

I have never said I speak for anyone other than myself - it is mystery to me why you keep making these accusations. I suggest you re-read your own posts and ask yourself if you are living up to the standards that you demand of others.

I have made no exaggerated claims. The obligations of Canada are quite clear: Return the land the government stole from them, and acknowledge their sovereignty, as per the treaties and agreements for which Canada is responsible.

I keep making claims that you are part of the governments propoganda machine ... because it is true and you have not denied it.

The country I choose to honour has better morals than that.

[Riverwind]

I keep making claims that you are part of the governments propoganda machine ... because it is true and you have not denied it.

It is such a ridiculous accusation that I feel no need to dignify it with a denial.

The country I choose to honour has better morals than that.

You have admitted that you would not donate any of your own money to pay for these settlements unless your are assured that other people are forced to pay much more. Morals that demand the spending of other people's money are not particularly noble.

[saga]

I keep making claims that you are part of the governments propoganda machine ... because it is true and you have not denied it.

It is such a ridiculous accusation that I feel no need to dignify it with a denial.

The answer is obvious. You are here to promote an agenda. You have government information available to you. You have no interest in new information, except in how you will distort and reject it. You use the same sorry propoganda lines over and over again like a good party hack... if it looks like a duck... ... Oh come on ... deny it ... you are here to promote party or government propoganda ... convince Canadians not to honour Indigenous treaties...

The country I choose to honour has better morals than that.

You have admitted that you would not donate any of your own money to pay for these settlements unless your are assured that other people are forced to pay much more. Morals that demand the spending of other people's money are not particularly noble.

Ahhh I was hoping you would bring that up again... No I have not admitted that ... our discussion stalled because ... your question was how much am I willing to pay in taxes to settle Indigenous land claims ... and my question was ... How much does the Canadian government receive each year in corporate taxes ... so I can know what my fair share is .... do you have the answer yet ... I have asked several times ... I believe the corporations who benefit from selling resources from Indigenous lands south of the border, and who leave the land desecrated have an obligation too.

I look forward to finishing this conversation.

[Riverwind]

I believe the corporations who benefit from selling resources from Indigenous lands south of the border, and who leave the land desecrated have an obligation too.

Assume that legally it is impossible to get corporations to pay so they pay nothing and the entire burden must be born by indiviudals. How much would you pay to resolve land claims in that circumstance? How high would the bill have to get before you would flush your morals down the drain and simply say that it costs too much and you can't afford it?

[saga]

I believe the corporations who benefit from selling resources from Indigenous lands south of the border, and who leave the land desecrated have an obligation too.

Assume that legally it is impossible to get corporations to pay so they pay nothing and the entire burden must be born by indiviudals. How much would you pay to resolve land claims in that circumstance? How high would the bill have to get before you would flush your morals down the drain and simply say that it costs too much and you can't afford it?

Sooooo .... what you are telling me is that the Canadian government receives no corporate taxes... and will try to foist the entire cost of Indigenous land claim settlements on the citizens through individual income tax.

[Riverwind]

Sooooo .... what you are telling me is that the Canadian government receives no corporate taxes... and will try to foist the entire cost of Indigenous land claim settlements on the citizens through individualo income tax.

You are evading the question - I believe that you are being intellectually dishonest. You spend all this time ranting about how the gov't has a moral obligation to honour these treaties but I believe you would say screw the treaties if it turned out that the only way to resolve them required you (and other non-aborginal taxpayers) to make big economic sacrifices. For you honouring treaties is a great idea as long as other people have to pay for it.

So answer the question: how much of an economic sacrifice would you be willing to make in order to live up to these agreements?

[saga]

Sooooo .... what you are telling me is that the Canadian government receives no corporate taxes... and will try to foist the entire cost of Indigenous land claim settlements on the citizens through individualo income tax.

You are evading the question - I believe that you are being intellectually dishonest. You spend all this time ranting about how the gov't has a moral obligation to honour these treaties but I believe you would say screw the treaties if it turned out that the only way to resolve them required you (and other non-aborginal taxpayers) to make big economic sacrifices. For you honouring treaties is a great idea as long as other people have to pay for it.

So answer the question: how much of an economic sacrifice would you be willing to make in order to live up to these agreements?

Riverwind, you are evading my question... how much does the canadian government receive in corporate taxes ...

You said the government takes in 200b in income taxes so we use that to figure out everyones share ... and once we know what government takes in in corpôrate taxes, we can finish the calculations ...

[Riverwind]

Riverwind, you are evading my question... how much does the canadian government receive in corporate taxes ...

Federal Government Revenue Sources for 2005-2006 (in millions)

Personal income tax 103,000

Corporate income tax 34,530

Other income tax 4,645

Goods and services tax 31,940

Customs import duties 3,410

Other excise taxes/duties 9,970

The $200 billion figure I gave you earlier includes the provincial taxes.

[saga]

Riverwind, you are evading my question... how much does the canadian government receive in corporate taxes ...

Federal Government Revenue Sources for 2005-2006 (in millions)

Personal income tax 103,000

Corporate income tax 34,530

Other income tax 4,645

Goods and services tax 31,940

Customs import duties 3,410

Other excise taxes/duties 9,970

The $200 billion figure I gave you earlier includes the provincial taxes.

Ok ... and your estimate of the cost for land claims settlements is ...

Just trying to recall ...

... and of course the provinces have had use of much of the land so their share has to be included, and ALL of the federal surpluses...

[Riverwind]

Ok ... and your estimate of the cost for land claims settlements is ... Just trying to recall ...

If 3-4 trillion you simply give the aboriginals whatever they ask for.

... and of course the provinces have had use of much of the land so their share has to be included, and ALL of the federal surpluses...

personal $167 billion

corporate $50

sales $69

No matter how you wriggle you cannot escape the fact that the majority of gov't revenue comes from individual taxpayers so the majority of the burden of paying any claims will fall on them too.

[saga]

Ok ... and your estimate of the cost for land claims settlements is ... Just trying to recall ...

If 3-4 trillion you simply give the aboriginals whatever they ask for.

... and of course the provinces have had use of much of the land so their share has to be included, and ALL of the federal surpluses...

personal $167 billion

corporate $50

sales $69

No matter how you wriggle you cannot escape the fact that the majority of gov't revenue comes from individual taxpayers so the majority of the burden of paying any claims will fall on them too.

The majority is better than all of it!

Well, I am no financial wizard ... but at 3t, it looks like an extra 30b per year is needed, about a 14% increase in personal and corporate taxes ... and of course, with increasing population that would go down each year.

It is not a pleasant prospect ... but not out of the realm of possibility either.

Much preferable ... in my mind ... as a means of restoring Canadian honour ... to the lies and distortion and spin and fraud of cheating Indigenous people out of fair settlements again, because that will come back to haunt our children and their children again.

[Riverwind]

Well, I am no financial wizard ... but at 3t, it looks like an extra 30b per year is needed, about a 14% increase in personal and corporate taxes ... and of course, with increasing population that would go down each year.

14% adds up to 1% GST and 2-7% increase in income tax. I am pretty sure the overwhelming majority of Canadians would say that is too much.

[saga]

Well, I am no financial wizard ... but at 3t, it looks like an extra 30b per year is needed, about a 14% increase in personal and corporate taxes ... and of course, with increasing population that would go down each year.

14% adds up to 1% GST and 2-7% increase in income tax. I am pretty sure the overwhelming majority of Canadians would say that is too much.

I think that is perfectly reasonable and I believe the majority of Canadians would be happy to settle this longstanding shame in an honourable way.

What is the alternative ...

[Riverwind]

I think that is perfectly reasonable and I believe the majority of Canadians would be happy to settle this longstanding shame in an honourable way.

A 7% increase in income tax reasonable? You must be kidding.

What is the alternative ...

Make a reasonable offer that is based on what is affordable and let it go to the supreme court if necessary. I do not believe the SCC would reject a balanced settlement offer by a gov't that was acting in good faith.

Bottom line is - legalities mean nothing. This is a political problem.

[geoffrey]

Few things you two.

Firstly, River, while I agree with you on this topic, your tax calculations assume we pay for it all in one year. We should spread it over 10 and it would be like 1% per year with interest. Not suggesting we do, but your theory isn't exactly fair.

All together though, if we could make one lump sum payment to the Indians and have them all bugger off forever, I'd probably be ok with it. There are too many bleeding hearts in Canada to cut off the racial funding in my lifetime, so we might as well be pragmatic and end the burden now.

I'm sure 10 years from now they'll be back saying they were conned into a perfectly legal and fair contract though and demand more land and money. It is the Indian way.

Idealistically, we'd throw out our racist policies and stop giving anyone anythign based on their ancestory. Racism died a hundred years ago in the British colonies, it's time we joined in.

[Riverwind]

Firstly, River, while I agree with you on this topic, your tax calculations assume we pay for it all in one year. We should spread it over 10 and it would be like 1% per year with interest. Not suggesting we do, but your theory isn't exactly fair.

You misunderstood the calculations. A 14% tax increase would bring in $30 billion/year (assuming the economy did not slow down as a result). The total land claim bill could be $3-4 trillion dollars which would take 133 years to pay off at $30 billion per year.

Paying it all off in one year or even 10 is not even an option.

[geoffrey]

Firstly, River, while I agree with you on this topic, your tax calculations assume we pay for it all in one year. We should spread it over 10 and it would be like 1% per year with interest. Not suggesting we do, but your theory isn't exactly fair.

You misunderstood the calculations. A 14% tax increase would bring in $30 billion/year (assuming the economy did not slow down as a result). The total land claim bill could be $3-4 trillion dollars which would take 133 years to pay off at $30 billion per year.

Paying it all off in one year or even 10 is not even an option.

My apologies. Your right. Let's not give them a dime, I already pay enough taxes for people that should be working. I can no longer get my damned Tim Hortons in my neighbourhood past 9:00 because there are no workers. Let's get all the unemployed from reserves and make them give me my damned coffee, I get grouchy without it.

No more mooola. I was hoping we could just pay them out, but you just made it clear it's not possible.

[saga]

Firstly, River, while I agree with you on this topic, your tax calculations assume we pay for it all in one year. We should spread it over 10 and it would be like 1% per year with interest. Not suggesting we do, but your theory isn't exactly fair.

You misunderstood the calculations. A 14% tax increase would bring in $30 billion/year (assuming the economy did not slow down as a result). The total land claim bill could be $3-4 trillion dollars which would take 133 years to pay off at $30 billion per year.

Paying it all off in one year or even 10 is not even an option.

My apologies. Your right. Let's not give them a dime, I already pay enough taxes for people that should be working. I can no longer get my damned Tim Hortons in my neighbourhood past 9:00 because there are no workers. Let's get all the unemployed from reserves and make them give me my damned coffee, I get grouchy without it.

No more mooola. I was hoping we could just pay them out, but you just made it clear it's not possible.

Well, fortunately there is some middle ground between all and nothing, so I am glad we did that Riverwind.

Umm Gregory ... where did you get your expertise on ... the Indian way ...

[saga]

Firstly, River, while I agree with you on this topic, your tax calculations assume we pay for it all in one year. We should spread it over 10 and it would be like 1% per year with interest. Not suggesting we do, but your theory isn't exactly fair.

You misunderstood the calculations. A 14% tax increase would bring in $30 billion/year (assuming the economy did not slow down as a result). The total land claim bill could be $3-4 trillion dollars which would take 133 years to pay off at $30 billion per year.

Paying it all off in one year or even 10 is not even an option.

My apologies. Your right. Let's not give them a dime, I already pay enough taxes for people that should be working. I can no longer get my damned Tim Hortons in my neighbourhood past 9:00 because there are no workers. Let's get all the unemployed from reserves and make them give me my damned coffee, I get grouchy without it.

No more mooola. I was hoping we could just pay them out, but you just made it clear it's not possible.

Well, fortunately there is some middle ground between all and nothing, so I am glad we did that Riverwind.

Umm Gregory ... where did you get your expertise on ... the Indian way ...

Of course ... Riverwind we have forgotten the savings that offset! Indian Affairs can bite the dust finally, Band Councils mostly, health, welfare, all government services ... policing, education ... We have a ways to go yet before we have the bottom line ...

[Riverwind]

Well, fortunately there is some middle ground between all and nothing, so I am glad we did that Riverwind.

I have always advocated finding the middle ground. However, I believe the middle ground is going require that aboriginal groups give up on the idea that their treaties will be honoured as written if doing so would cost non-aboriginals too much.

I have always felt that changing the constitution to remove aboriginal rights is the 'nuclear' option which should never be used. However, I felt it is important to remind some aboriginal rights advocates that the 'nuclear' option is available and it will be used if aboriginals groups do not respect the limits that non-aboriginal society wants to put on their entitlements.

[saga]

Well, fortunately there is some middle ground between all and nothing, so I am glad we did that Riverwind.

I have always advocated finding the middle ground. However, I believe the middle ground is going require that aboriginal groups give up on the idea that their treaties will be honoured as written if doing so would cost non-aboriginals too much.

I have always felt that changing the constitution to remove aboriginal rights is the 'nuclear' option which should never be used. However, I felt it is important to remind some aboriginal rights advocates that the 'nuclear' option is available and it will be used if aboriginals groups do not respect the limits that non-aboriginal society wants to put on their entitlements.

So long as they are aware that there will be serious consequences for our relations with Indigenous people, and possibly ongoing strife that could wipe out any savings. You do not go nuclear without causing damage, and that itself can be expensive.

Is it not just a question of how the value of the properties will be established for compensation purposes ... how much ... what percentage of current value...

It will be used ... you say that with some certainty of your decisions in that regard

So ... it looks doable!

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

The Supreme Court of Canada has no jurisdiction over international agreement disputes.

All treaties will be honoured or the consequences will have to be faced. In Canada that means removing future development or interference with infrastructure that passes over our territories. It also means inconvenince and unpheaval for Canaadian citizens.

You should also study the Constitutional documents, since legally, Canada doesn't exist as a sovereign nation. You can't change the constitution because it is not yours to tinker with. And given that the Crown does recognize our sovereign right and the promises made between us, it is more likely that any amendments would futher entrench our physical and property rights. The recent UN Declaration on Aboriginal Rights spells out the future direction that people will take. It is about recognition of aboriginal rights, not reducing them.

O:nen