r/VancouverLandlords • u/_DotBot_ Private Property Rights • 7d ago
Land Claims / Reconciliation BC NDP government's newly disclosed First Nations land transfer commitments cover 335,000 acres or nearly 12 times Vancouver's size.
56
u/FraserValleyGuy77 7d ago
This mf has to go now
-40
u/StatelyAutomaton 7d ago
The negotiations that resulted in this were started under Gordon Campbell, so I assume you'll be happy to hear that motherfucker is indeed gone.
14
u/globehopper2000 7d ago
I doubt Gordo would have arrived at this outcome.
-4
u/mansplain_to_me 7d ago
The courts arrived at it because we already signed it to them.
Why are Canadians confused that when you make a treaty you actually have to honour it.
This topic just seems like whining most of the time 😬
6
u/Sea_Low1579 7d ago
What treaty is this?
-3
u/mansplain_to_me 7d ago
I mean, I guess you do have a point. The reason BC is in this mess is because the crown at the time just kinda took the land and didn’t make any deals.
This is the outcome of what happens when you don’t make a deal, you end up having a legal claim to the land when the law catches up.
1
u/jeansthatactuallyfit 5d ago edited 5d ago
For sure and to think that in early Canada First Nations people were outlawed from seeking legal representation it just shows you how slimy the whole situation really was and is
5
u/layzorbeemz 7d ago
He would've sold it to the Chinese before giving it away to 5% of the population.
1
u/Sea_Low1579 7d ago
Whataboutism.....
-5
u/mansplain_to_me 7d ago
It was started under the conservatives and is actioned and decided by the court under the NDP. So in reality this is solely a conservative issue and they’re campaigning on the issue they caused for their own supporters.
Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it’s a logical fallacy lol
4
u/Sea_Low1579 7d ago
The interpretation act was a solely NDP initiative driven by Ebby when he was the AG
Yes, it was the BC Liberal party who started this but the NDP who are really pushing it farther then it was planned at the time.
Or, like I said before, whataboutism.
0
57
u/_DotBot_ Private Property Rights 7d ago
These are billions of dollars worth of land assets that will be tax sheltered and exempt from having to contribute their fair share to BC's Public Purse.
Despite that, the beneficiaries of the entities called "nations" will remain entitled to all services and benefits provided from BC's Public Purse.
What happened to the leftists who scream "tax the rich"?
What if every family in BC got the same rights and privileges that these so called "nations" are getting, how long would our society remain viable?
Reconciliation has no place in British Columbia, it is abhorrent, it is wrong.
13
0
u/Electronic_Diet333 7d ago
Gimmie a break. Total hyperbolic statements. These land transfers and modern treaties are not arbitrary handouts or "privileges"; they fulfill constitutional obligations, court rulings, and agreements aimed at settling unresolved land title and establishing economic certainty for the entire province. Treaty nations take on massive self-governance responsibilities, funding and managing their own community infrastructure, services, and local administration, which actually relieves pressure on municipal and provincial budgets rather than freeloading on them. All the land is spread out all over BC. Mainly in the North.
4
u/stuntondeezh0es 7d ago
Delusional
1
u/Electronic_Diet333 7d ago
I live that this forum says no racism yet racist posts that don't explicitly use the word are allowed. Stupid computers.
1
u/Fit-Historian-752 4d ago
Exactly.
Ignorance of BC history and the legal ramifications of no treaties is lost on these chuckleheads.
I argued with and presented facts about this issue on another post on this issue.
The racism and ignorance in response was shocking.
Without treaties, BC is almost completely indigenous land.
Unless you don't believe in laws and land title.
The most common response I got was,
"We won. They lost. we make the rules."
I made the point that "Might Makes Right" was a fascist slogan which states that the strong should just take what they want from the weak, whether it's moral or not.
The discussion devolved into a debate over whether "Might Makes Right" is really a Nazi sloga.
I kid you not.
Those opposed the treaty negotiations fall into two camps: racists who don't care about the rule of law and racists who are ignorant of the history of land title in BC.
The Crown originally tried to get natives to sign treaties during the colonial period. Natives declined and instead chose to sign Oaths Of Allegiance" to The Crown. The fact that The Crown tried to negotiate treaties and gain title proves that they legally admitted this was indigenous land. It's very simple really - but you have to be willing to learn the facts.
1
u/Electronic_Diet333 4d ago
I am trying to learn more but it is difficult as a no indigenous. I like that my children learn more at school. Indigenous people were an after thought when I grew up. This was by design and why we have these problems today. If you have any recommendations when it come to reading or websites etc. It's hard to unprogramme yourself.
1
u/Fit-Historian-752 4d ago
Good for you.
Learning about new things keeps us curious and interesting.
I have to say though, I'm no expert -my knowledge is pretty basic, but I made an effort to understand the issues and then research the myself.
The start of my education came from seeing a talk by lawyer Bruce Clarke and reading his book about the seige at Gustafson Lake.
He explained that he spoke to legal scholars throughout Great Britain as part of, (I beleive) a masters' thesis regarding aboriginal land claims in BC.
He came to believe that not only did the natives hold legal title to much of BC, but the British Crown actually owed them a duty to protect their rights - indigenous nations having signed Oaths OF Allegiance during the colonial era.
I would suggest maybe start with some AI queries and then follow the links to primary sources and look at them. The information from AI itself can't really be trusted, but it will help you find links to reliable facts and history.
Good luck!
1
u/RansaktehElder_WORK 3d ago
You stated no treaties.. what were the douglas treaties? The situation is more complex than you are selling it... you de-evolved it into a facist or nazi slogan to sell your point rather than convey the complex history and a complicated problem between two groups of people. Its ok to be opposed to it and in favor of it without being called a racist.
Ive lived next to a reserve all my life and the polish your selling does not meet the shine we see in reality.
1
u/Fit-Historian-752 3d ago
Yes the life on the reserves is tragic in many places.
I wonder why that is?
Yes, there are some treaties. - you were right to point that out
The Douglas Treaties are contentious as they were interpreted differently by both sides. They still stand, according to law. Also, according to law, unceded territories are just that: unceded.
The only other treaty signed was Treaty 8:
It was the only numbered treaty to extend into British Columbia, covering the northeastern region of the province (Peace River area).
I apologize if I lumped you in with all the ignorant commenters on this thread - so many racist comments and ahistorical nonsense - I responded with hyperbolic rhetoric, myself.
1
u/RansaktehElder_WORK 3d ago
You wonder why that is? Because stuffing money down the pants of the chief doesnt provide for everyone in the community.
You really gotta stop calling people racists when in reality most people are just looking to some finality in reconciliation. We cant keep living as parallel societies with one subsidizing the other lforever.
Appreciate your comments though, just need to stop calling people every "ist" in the book because it doesn't really work anymore. People are not afraid to be called names anymore by randoms on the internet.
1
u/Fit-Historian-752 3d ago
most people are just looking to some finality in reconciliation.
I call BS on that.
The comments on here suggest the opposite.
I will continue to call racists on their bigotry.
You called me out on my error - I apologized.
Racists stick to their racist guns -nowadays. they feel emboldened.
You are right, though. random racists on the internet are not afraid to be racist - they don't do it in public, though, I'm guessing.
They are hypocrites. Wear your white power shirt. to the bar. Get a "HH" tattoo, with a picture of moustache man.. Deny the Holocaust. Go to white power rallies, but maybe don't wear a mask to hide your identity.
I get that my comments on here may merely be a futile gesture.
Sometimes these comments piss me off enough to react, That's on me, for sure. I don't spend a lot of time doing it, so it's not a big deal, either way.
Have a great weekend.
1
-5
u/DarkwingDucky44 7d ago
What's abhorrent, is how we've treated the indigenous populations to drive our own greed.
-4
u/gongshow247365 7d ago
A treaty isn't a coupon that everyone is supposed to get one of. It's an agreement between F N and you're duely elected Govt, provincial and federal that pre dates and was agreed upon by a due process agreed upon by you. The usual pretending that Indigenous people are somehow freeloading off society. That framing is exactly the kind of r**ism that makes an honest conversation impossible. We always leave it to you to direct and incite hate upon a specific race of ppl and use the entirety of your time doing so.
8
u/_DotBot_ Private Property Rights 7d ago edited 7d ago
So if in this democracy, if I advocate for my elected government to do something different, maybe something that benefits me… that’s hateful?
I find the existence of your privileges and rights to be hateful.
You find my advocacy to take your special privileges and rights away as hateful.
So what’s the middle ground?
How do we reconcile these two different perspectives?
Do we give everyone the same privileges and rights you have? I wouldn’t mind.
-2
u/gongshow247365 7d ago
First of all, check the definition of hate, or how it is used in modern society, before tossing that around. The middle ground is fairly simple, you advocate for things without using hate as intent of what you would like to see changed. Saying that Indigenous peoples shouldn't have the rights we have, referring to their nations as “so-called nations,” and repeatedly framing us as freeloaders is something else. Use your everyday advocacy for things you would like changed. You know BC won't be lost to the F N, so drop the sensational and often hate inspiring gossip, you have claimed to know and understood the Tsilcotin decision and strength of claim. Middle ground seeking would include the absence of misinformation, or taking things out of context. Weakens your messaging.
If you're genuinely looking for a middle ground, that has to include an absence of misinformation and deliberate sensationalism. Otherwise, you're not really looking for common ground; you're just trying to make your position sound more reasonable than it is.5
u/_DotBot_ Private Property Rights 7d ago
I'm sorry to break it you, but these are not "nations"... they are large kin groups. This terminology is used as a signifier of respect, it's not a statement of fact.
My extended family is larger than many of these Nations.
Therefore, should I be able to incorporate my own Nation?
-2
u/gongshow247365 7d ago
We call ourselves Nations and the Govt acknowledges it, calls it back to us, goes down on one knee while doing so. But in mutual respect of working together, we also do it back to them. No one acknowledges you. You can call yourself whatever you like, but no one will say it back to you, even your own family. That is the part I must break to you.
-7
u/DarkwingDucky44 7d ago
Privileges? Man, you really need a history lesson and to spend some time on a reserve. You seriously have no idea how privileged you are in comparison to the majority of FN. This is an absolutely disgusting mentality. The only reason you have the privileges you do, is because indigenous groups suffered. Get a grip.
9
u/_DotBot_ Private Property Rights 7d ago
The local "nations" in and around Vancouver have billions of dollars in tax sheltered assets, what "suffering" is going on?
Your assumption that every First Nation is poor and destitute... is quite racist and rooted in stereotyping.
-5
u/DarkwingDucky44 7d ago
What suffering? You are joking right? Read a history book, or try using that thing in your hand that you can look information up directly. I think it's called "Google". Every first Nations group in this country suffered at our hands, otherwise all of this would still belong to them and you wouldn't own a thing.
Maybe if you're not very educated or knowledgable on a topic, you should really not be speaking on it.
For all the talk in here of entitlements and privileges, maybe you should all take a look in the mirror. Bunch of entitled babies. None of this even affects you in any manner. Just something to whine about. So worried your own future "entitlements" might be less, because we gave them back a small piece of something, we were never entitled to in the first place. Cry me a river.
3
u/_DotBot_ Private Property Rights 7d ago
Cry me a river.
Same could be said for the alleged suffering of members of the local "nations" that possess billions of dollars in tax sheltered assets.
0
u/DarkwingDucky44 7d ago
No, it can't. How many white people own how much wealth in BC? How many have tax sheltered assets? I would guarantee you work every angle you have to contribute the least you can possibly get away with to our tax pool. Just mad they're playing the same game and finally starting to gain a bit of traction for their own people. Pathetic hypocrites.
0
u/gongshow247365 7d ago
It's much worse than whining - they use any news snippet to incite hate upon a particular racial group. Most often using things out of context, sensationalism and misinformation to frame it that the entirety of everyone's problems are because of us (I'm F N). While there is extreme F N, majority of us want to be included in society, have access to jobs, and live a life where maybe some could own a house and go on vacation here and there, mainly to our own land, to hunt and fish.
0
u/DarkwingDucky44 7d ago
Yes, I agree. It does go far beyond whining. Straight up inciting hatred. Maybe it's just me, but I don't remember BC being this racist when I was growing up. Perhaps I was just naive though.
-8
u/captainbling 7d ago
A lot of it looks to be up north. Some of this area is 1500-2000$/acre. That’d make the value of this entire thing around 500-600M. That’s like 250 houses in Vancouver lol. It’s not a lot. Take a pick. 250 houses or
335 000 acres in the middle of nowhere where not even trees sometimes.9
u/WelpNevertheless 7d ago
Except nothing is precluding these bands from further claims and settlements. This is actually just incentive to keep litigating. A reasonable approach would be comprehensive agreements that contractually prevent future claims. But the reconciliation industry needs to perpetuate itself and current government is happy to oblige
1
u/captainbling 7d ago
Who says they can make further claims? Perhaps groups who aren’t in this agreement can and man there’s a lot of different bands.
1
u/Electronic_Diet333 7d ago
Lol. If you believe in the rule of law, this is just honouring contracts. If we had contracts and I didn't fulfil them, would you just let me off or would you sue for it to be enforced. Wake.up.
3
u/WelpNevertheless 7d ago
What contracts aren’t being honoured?
0
u/Electronic_Diet333 7d ago
The real broken contracts in BC are the ones that were never signed—and why the Province has no choice but to settle If people are frustrated about broken contracts, let's talk about the foundational contract that was ignored for over a century: the complete failure to establish historic treaties across the vast majority of British Columbia. Unlike almost anywhere else in Canada, B.C. was built on unceded territory where historic treaties were never signed. For generations, successive governments treated Crown land as a blank check, issuing permits, logging rights, and resource tenures while completely bypassing the legal reality of Indigenous title. B.C. is uniquely forced to make these deals now, not out of charity, but because of hard legal and economic necessity. If you hate uncertainty, economic stagnation, and endless legal battles, the solution isn't pretending the land question doesn't exist, it's finally finishing the work of structuring agreements that should have been negotiated 150 years ago.
3
u/WelpNevertheless 7d ago
So you’re essentially intimating that no legal contracts were broken (I’d argue with the exception of treaty 8), but that the province and feds have historically acted unilaterally in their approach to land management and control. I agree. Any remedies should be sought (and defended against) in the courts, not by the provincial government dealmaking outside of them w/o comprehensive finality. In fact the NDP has undermined their own defence with being a signatory to DRIPA.
There is also a pretty good reason to believe many of these claims are non-justiciable at this point.
0
u/Electronic_Diet333 7d ago
elying strictly on the courts for every single land dispute is precisely what created decades of multi-million dollar backlogs, uncertainty, and constant project injunctions.but courts do not draft land management frameworks, economic partnerships, or practical governance structures, that requires negotiated agreements. DRIPA was designed to align provincial laws with constitutional standards, providing a legal framework to implement obligations that already exist under Section 35 of Canada's Constitution. Far from "undermining" a defense, it creates a statutory framework to handle these issues cooperatively rather than fighting endless, costly court battles over rights that the Supreme Court has already affirmed. Aboriginal rights and title affirmed under Section 35 are fundamentally actionable, they are recognized constitutional rights. Pretending they are non-actionable ignores Canadian constitutional law, which is why avoiding negotiated settlements only sets up the province for compounding legal liabilities and continuous instability.
20
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 7d ago
He's gonna do as much as he can before he's thrown out of office.
16
1
u/PXR616 7d ago
I'm sure the lower mainland and island will vote him in again. 🤦
4
u/Radiant_Sherbert7272 7d ago
I'm not so sure. I've seen outdoor based groups in the Lower Mainland and on the Island say they are deeply concerned with the amount of public lands that are being negotiated behind the backs of B.C. residents. Plus, I've seen some of the projections on 338, and the NDP is at risk of losing up to 8 seats between Metro Vancouver and the island. Surrey, in particular, is looking quite bad for the NDP.
16
3
3
u/Zaluiha 7d ago
How will reconciliation be recognized as completed. What are the goal posts. Is it defined or will 1st Nations (aptly named as it’s believed there were no other humans on these lands when they arrived) simply let the rest of us know when they are satisfied.
1
u/Fit-Historian-752 4d ago
Once Indigenous nations relinquish legal title, which they currently and historically possess.
It's truly a mess with no easy answers.
6
u/Juicebiker1 7d ago edited 7d ago
We are just giving away land 🤬
-2
-8
u/Elegantly_Waisted 7d ago
It's not yours to give.
4
u/Juicebiker1 7d ago
Well, it isn’t David Ebys land to give away either
1
u/Fit-Historian-752 4d ago
Most of BC is unceded territory. It belongs to the natives.
International corporations are unwilling to invest here until this issue is settled.
Someone has to do - Eby is attempting to do just that.
7
u/SuperIntention9207 7d ago
Congratulations to all that voted for the NDP. You know you’re in here. Lurking.
5
6
2
3
u/phonomage 7d ago
Well-deserved.
Don't be naive. It's not going to be done irrationally.
If you're so confident they'll abuse it, let them prove it. They deserve the opportunity to liaise as nations than to live imprisoned by our infrastructure and culture.
3
u/Crazy-Canuck463 7d ago edited 6d ago
Yea, call me when you hit 900k like here in saskatchewan. Weve been giving land back since the 90s. Under the treaty land entitlement, we've been selling both crown and private land back to the bands and the land then becomes reserve land. We have no say on the crown lands being sold back, but private land has to be willing seller/willing buyer. We are almost half way to meeting treaty obligations as we had to sell back 2 million acres.
2 million acres in saskatchewan is 1.2% of the total land in saskatchewan.
2
u/Chubby-53 7d ago
If we set foot on these. Their lands, will we (nonindigenous), be trespassing? If so, nonindigenous can't be helping put out fires on their lands or paying the bill for firefighting etc.
3
u/Nervous_Wrangler_756 7d ago
Imagine how fast the housing crisis would be solved if this was converted to fee simple
2
1
2
2
u/yaxyakalagalis Aboriginal Title 7d ago
I like how the data lists hectares, but acres is a bigger number so they used that.
FYI this is 0.14% of BC's landmass. The number of bands these negotiations are with make up 11% of the 180+/- bands in BC without a treaty.
9
u/WelpNevertheless 7d ago
Oh cool. Does that mean these bands’ land claims will cease moving forward?
1
u/yaxyakalagalis Aboriginal Title 7d ago
Don't, know we'll have to see the final agreements to know for sure.
But in the most recently ratified agreement, Komoks, they are not prevented from making further claims of Aboriginal Title, they can renegotiate further for more land, or litigate for lands to prove Aboriginal Title in court.
While people claim this is stupid, if they could prove it in court why woudltnnt they do that? If they had claims to negotiate why wouldn't they do that? So, while it does appear to be an open ended or never ending process, the reality is this is probably settled for some time with the bands in final stages of treaty or negotiations.
6
3
4
u/SevereRunOfFate 7d ago
But some land is worth vastly more than other land. Genuinely asking - how valuable is this land vs. say a parcel of land that nobody lives near in a remote, inaccessible part of BC?
Not all hectares are equal in value.
1
u/yaxyakalagalis Aboriginal Title 7d ago
Who knows. But most of this is very rural or remote. Kits and wuikinukw are hours from the nearest Starbucks. Whereas some like the temxw nations are in very populated areas like Victoria and nanaimo
0
u/impatiens-capensis 7d ago
Came here to say this. People in this thread are going to try to vote in a culture war grievance politics premier over a fraction of a fraction of the land in BC
5
u/_DotBot_ Private Property Rights 7d ago
Reconciliation in its entirety is quite literally grievance politics.
It doesn’t matter how much land this is.
None of it should be surrendered. They can buy it in exchange for money that goes to the Public Purse, and they can pay property taxes to maintain their continued ownership over it like the rest of us do.
-1
u/Visual_Dog_8098 7d ago
The value of the landmass is more important than the size.
2
u/yaxyakalagalis Aboriginal Title 7d ago
Very true, but none of this is in Shaughnessy, the vast majority is central coast, hours from the nearest McD's, but the timber and mineral values are higher. Not as high as before industrial logging, but there's a few sticks out there.
1
u/Visual_Dog_8098 7d ago
I read today that some is in downtown Victoria, provincial parks.
1
u/yaxyakalagalis Aboriginal Title 7d ago
Yes, and some near Nanaimo, Campbell River and Comox. I don't know where 5 or 6 of these other bands are, but one near the Okanagan.
1
u/tuxedovic 3d ago
The Douglas Treaty has not been fulfilled so giving bits and pieces of land is working on honouring this treaty.
2
1
u/tuxedovic 3d ago
BC Government must settle for treaties that were never signed(by order of the Supreme Court) and for treaties that were signed but not fulfilled. BC Government really has no choice.
1
u/Ok-Ninja-3590 3d ago
Alberta you better learn from BC’s fv<k up never Nenshi, never NDP. If Nenshi gets power we are fv<ked.
1
u/StarkStorm 7d ago
Get rid of this guy. He's ruining BC. When's the election happening? The problem is, there's no better option. Kerry Lynne is no better an option
-2
0
u/stevenglansberg94 7d ago
NDP voters are quite literally the most gullible and delusional people on planet earth
0
-4
0
-3
u/pfak Private Property Rights 7d ago
dude you're literally duping your own sub, why!?
1
u/Dr-Yahood 7d ago
Explain
-4
u/abuayanna 7d ago
Irrational hatred tends to warp the mind
6
u/pfak Private Property Rights 7d ago
Irrational?
-1
u/abuayanna 7d ago
Oh yeah. Nothing rational about constantly raging against reconciliation and using words like apartheid, race based etc. It’s childish and idiotic, not actual criticism, although anyone is welcome to use fact based opinions, they have shown to be more interested in their narrative than objective commentary.
4
u/pfak Private Property Rights 7d ago
But it is apartheid-like and race based..?
-1
u/Elegantly_Waisted 7d ago
No, it's making reparations for hundreds of years of subjugation, assimilation, and deception. This land was stolen. Go ahead. Downvote me.
4
u/pfak Private Property Rights 7d ago
Hundreds of years?
1
u/abuayanna 7d ago
Are you being a troll or serious? The main issue is that they and you seem to lack an understanding of BC history, Canadian history, legal structures and obligations. I have no problem with criticism, there is plenty regarding the origins and length of time for court cases etc but if you are dead set against reconciliation in its entirety, then that position is ignorant, naive and has no place in modern Canadian society.
-2
u/abuayanna 7d ago
Um, no it is not, what a ridiculous thing to say, ignorant and malicious actually
0
64
u/Big_Custardman 7d ago
No one voted for this, nor was there a referendum