It's a matter of law

Page 5

British Columbia is the other hotspot for Indian politics here in Canada with the Burnt Church situation cooling off and tempers on all sides worn down to the frayed edges. Even though the Mi'kmaq have a treaty they are reduced to being beggars in their own lands. What does that say about efforts to get treaties here in B.C.?

The land question continues to be the hottest issue here in the province that has one of the biggest First Nations populations anywhere in Canada (some estimates put it at about one-quarter of Canada's Indian population) and one of Canada's most volatile situations. No blanket solutions here.

The issue dominating the talk shows in Vancouver lately has been the issue of the Skeetchestn Indian Band and their attempts to register Aboriginal title with the land title registry office. The band is arguing they must be consulted on all new developments being planned for their traditional territory and they must give their informed consent to the project in order for it to proceed.

The issue boils down to a local developer who wanted to build a residential subdivision along with other services on a piece of agricultural land just outside of Kamloops. The developer had to get the provincial government to first release the land from the agricultural land reserve and that was extremely tricky given that farmers and ranchers want to do the same thing with their lands. The developer got his exemption to develop the land. Then he ran into the Skeetchestn Indian Band and Chief Ron Ignace.

Meetings took place between the developer and band officials but were unsatisfactory to the band and they then took matters into their own hands.

The issue was brought forward to the court system and the band lost their initial court challenge but appealed and lost again. In making her decision public, the judge in the trial said there is a cloud hanging over the entire land tenure system including fee simple lands. This has caused a nervous ripple among pundits who make such things public through the media.

When the general public finds out about this latest court challenge they will be alarmed because the sanctity of their fee simple properties is under siege. This is bound to bring out the numerous rednecks and Indian fighters across this incredibly rich and beautiful province. I ask how fee simple ownership is held out as a sacred right while our rights to Aboriginal title are soundly ignored? What is the fundamental difference between the two competing titles?

I can hear it now. "One law for all," they will cry. "It is time to legislate them out of existence," and the Reform Party of B.C. will whine, "Offer each of them $1 million and get them to give up their Indian status." Simplistic solutions for a multi-dimensional problem.

I personally agree with the strategy of Skeetchestn Chief Ignace and the band in their efforts to get their title registered with the provincial land registry. It is brinkmanship of a people tired of waiting for a fair negotiation process.

The Minister of Aboriginal Affairs Dale Lovick waded into the fray after a Vancouver daily newspaper columnist published his take on the issue.

"There is nothing new in the B.C. Court of Appeal's remarks about the question of land ownership and Aboriginal title in regard to the Skeetchestn Indian Band land claim near Kamloops. The 1997 Delgamuukw decision by the Supreme Court of Canada means that the onus of proof lies with Aboriginal groups to prove Aboriginal title.

"If title is proven, the Crown still maintains the ability to infringe that title. Before it does, however, the Crown has a responsibility to consult with the Aboriginal groups in question. The decision clearly stated that economic activity, land settlement and environmental protection are legitimate reasons for infringement by the Crown. B.C. has the authority to manage Crown resources and neither the Delgamuukw ruling nor this most recent ruling involving the Skeetchestn band does anythingto change that. The Supreme Court of Canada clearly says that negotiation is the best vehicle for resolving issues of Aboriginal title. It sees judgements of the court as a means of reinforcing those negotiated settlements. The provincial government does not believe that it is up to the courts to say who owns B.C. The Court of Appeal's decision on the Skeetchestn band's claim is consistent with the provincial government's position in land claims negotiations; private property is not on the table, and will only be considered if there is a willing seller and willing buyer," wrote Lovick.

If Skeetchestn were to win at the Supreme Court of Canada level, both levels of government would have nowhere left to hide on this issue and would be forced into real negotiations.

Premier Ujjal Dosanjh recently met with the First Nations Summit and it was one of the biggest non-events of the year. He said nothing and announced nothing, but his Minister of Aboriginal Affairs several days before the event was managing expectations by announcing to any media that cared to listen not to expect any miracles. Does he really think that we have to be warned about expecting anything from this morally bankrupt provincial government?

Call me cynical but I have never expected much from either government in relation to the land claims issues. That is the way I see it anyway.

Putucw.