Sign in to follow this  
Marshall

Is it Reconciliation or ??????

Recommended Posts

Valentine’s Day missteps

AS RAIL CRISIS RAGES, PM HEADING TO CARIBBEAN CHASING SECURITY COUNCIL SEAT

  • Calgary Herald
  • 15 Feb 2020
  • JOHN IVISON
img?regionKey=8xS2RvByWNjqJiqHgW%2fdNg%3d%3dLARS HAGBERG/ THE CANADIAN PRESS A protester stands on closed train tracks during blockade in Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory in Ontario on Thursday in solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs opposed to the Coastal Gaslink pipeline in northern B.C.

Things had been going so well for Justin Trudeau. His new modus vivendi obliged him to stay out of the public eye and do nothing in particular. It was proving wildly popular — the Liberals have had a healthy lead in recent polls.

But his Captain Ahab act, in pursuit of his own Moby Dick — a seat on the UN Security Council — threatens to undo all his good un-work. As the country grinds to a halt because of rail blockades, our peripatetic prime minister risks comparison with his Australian counterpart, Scott Morrison, who took a family vacation in Hawaii while wildfires raged across his country.

Trudeau, who is set to head to Barbados on Monday to try to persuade Caribbean leaders to vote for Canada’s bid, has hemmed and hawed about the blockades across the country that have led to gridlock of the nation’s rail service.

“We are, obviously, a country of laws. And making sure that those laws are enforced, even as there is, of course, freedom to demonstrate free and to protest,” he said from Germany. “Getting that balance right and wrapping it up in the path forward ... is really important.”

What most citizens want to hear, one suspects, is less equivocation and more fortitude.

They want their prime minister to come home and show some leadership.

In the short term, that means meeting with premiers and co-ordinating a response that keeps food, propane, airplane de-icing fluid and other essentials flowing across the country.

A CABINET COMMITTEE WAS STRUCK AND THEN … NOTHING.

Canada is particularly vulnerable to these kinds of extortion efforts, given the choke points on its rail networks. While no one wants another Oka, there are limits on the right to protest.

But it is the long-term response that is just as important. Two years ago to the day, Trudeau outlined a “recognition and implementation of Indigenous Rights framework” in the House of Commons.

It was billed as the central plank in the Liberal government’s Indigenous reconciliation efforts and its fruits were scheduled to be implemented before last October’s election.

Canadians were consulted, a cabinet committee was struck and then … nothing.

Jody Wilson-raybould, the former justice minister, wrote much of Trudeau’s Valentine’s Day speech in 2018, which was intended to get Canada to a place where Indigenous people control their own destiny and make decisions about their own future.

Part of the problem was that Wilson-raybould had difficulty convincing her cabinet colleagues how the framework would look in practice. “She made a lot of other ministers nervous,” said one person who was there. Then there was the small matter of the Snclavalin scandal that ultimately saw her demoted and booted from the Liberal caucus.

But the current crisis over the Coastal Gaslink pipeline — which crosses the traditional lands of B.C.’S Wet’suwet’en First Nation, where it is supported by elected band chiefs but opposed by hereditary chiefs — suggests the broad goals of taking Indigenous groups out from under the paternalistic governance of the Indian Act is an absolute imperative.

With the Trans Mountain expansion pipeline heading toward Indigenous territory in B.C., where a minority of bands are hostile to the development, the current impasse is likely to be a harbinger of civil conflict to come.

In theory, at least, a legislative framework could allow First Nations like the Wet’suwet’en to remake their governance structure, so that there is no confusion about who speaks for them.

Former NDP MP Nathan Cullen was appointed as liaison between the British Columbia government and the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs but was unable to find a compromise. He is under no illusions how hard it will be to reach a new governance structure. “These are not calm waters in which to orient where to sit in the boat,” he said.

But he is clear on one thing: “The Indian Act days are over.”

The poster child for this type of governance reform is the Nisga’a First Nation, which signed a comprehensive self-government agreement with the Crown 20 years ago. Its written constitution combines elected representatives with a hereditary component that, for lack of a better comparison, acts like the House of Lords in the U.K.

The treaty process in Canada has moved at the pace of coastal erosion since the early 1990s. But people who have watched the self-government process unfurl say that there is a clear correlation between the quality of governance and outcomes. Simply put, First Nations that have left the Indian Act behind have performed better in terms of health and wealth. That may be because the Indigenous communities that made the move had a higher capacity and would have excelled in any case. But it is likely the case that power has been wielded more effectively because it is closer to home.

Rather than forcing First Nations to engage in lengthy and costly legal battles to establish land ownership and rights, the changes envisaged would see the government agree to title and then work out how it is applied. That would not give First Nations a veto on economic development — provinces could still infringe on title, provided compensation was paid. But it would require more genuine consultation with titleholders than in the past.

It sounds messy and it would be. There are around 200 bands in British Columbia, with an average population of around 300. Efforts to encourage a re-aggregation into larger, traditional First Nations have not been a success — chiefs are, unsurprisingly, not keen to give up power.

This fragmentation means there are competing claims over land and fishing rights and there is no mechanism to resolve those conflicts. (A dispute between the Yale band and the Sto:lo First Nation over salmon grounds in B.C.’S Fraser Canyon resulted in fist-fights and weapons being brandished). Any new deal would have to include an Indigenous-administered dispute resolution body.

Self-government is unlikely to be the silver bullet that its proponents suggest. It is certainly not guaranteed to improve the lot of individual Indigenous Canadians in communities where property is communal.

It will never satisfy those who argue that sovereignty was never extinguished on Indigenous land. That is not the view of Canadian law, which holds that treaties are between the state and an internal collective.

But a new relationship with the Crown could make that collective better off and boost its sense of dignity.

As the author and former politician Gordon Gibson noted in his overlooked book, A New Look at Canadian Indian Policy, the benefits would work in two directions — the trade of some land, some cash and some government power in exchange for a delimitation of claims or protests or threats of court action by the Indian side.

The cost would not be negligible to Canada. The Nisga’a settlement was around $300 million (over 14 years) and Gibson’s estimate in 2008 was $55-70 billion to settle other outstanding claims.

But, as he noted, this is the most important moral question in federal politics.

The real comparison in cost terms is the potential expense to the Canadian economy over a 20-year period of chronic uncertainty, blockades, unfinished resource projects and civil unrest?

There is a lot of bombast about First Nations being sovereign and self-sufficient. The reality is too many are dependent on Canadian taxpayers.

The lure of self-government for mainstream society is that First Nations that aspire to it want to pay their way — the Nisga’a and others pay income tax. Many First Nations are keen to find their way back into Confederation and acknowledge that if they don’t raise revenues they are just service agencies dispensing Ottawa’s largesse.

Trudeau, without ever defining what he meant by the word, promised “reconciliation”.

He has asked Carolyn Bennett, the Crown-indigenous relations minister, to continue to redesign inherent rights policies but there is no mention in her mandate letter of the framework he promised would be in place by now.

Clever Conservatives should view the prime minister’s discomfort as an opportunity and adopt as their own the idea of deconstructing the Indian Act and replacing it with a structure that is chosen, not imposed.

Perhaps they could even ask Wilson-raybould to spearhead the effort. If she helped unseat her former boss, it would bring new meaning to the concept of returning the favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SELLEY: TERMINAL GRIDLOCK NEAR.

 

  • Calgary Herald
  • 15 Feb 2020
  •  
img?regionKey=j86qbKDpbqfph0jtFHWOKw%3d%3dKEVIN LIGHT/ REUTER Protesters stand outside the British Columbia Investment Management Corporation in Victoria, B.C., on Friday, as part of an ongoing series of Canada-wide protests against the Coastal Gaslink pipeline.

The majority of Wet’suwet’en First Nation members support the Coastal Gaslink natural gas pipeline project, and they are in an objectively peculiar situation. On the one hand, the RCMP is doing its best to clear away the protesters and let construction proceed. On the other hand, anti-pipeline protesters claiming solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en have created chaos in their name — most notably the total shutdown of CN Rail’s eastern Canadian network, the cancellation of nearly every Canadian passenger train, and the layoffs and untold economic costs that go with that.

If protesters acknowledge the diversity of opinion among the Wet’suwet’en at all, they will defer to the authority of five hereditary chiefs who oppose the project, or observe that the five elected Wet’suwet’en band councils — all of which have signed community benefits agreements — represent a form of settler democracy imposed by the Indian Act.

They’re not wrong. But had Cabot and Cartier stayed home and farmed potatoes, surely Canada’s First Nations would not govern themselves today as they did 450 years ago. Settler Canadians know something of hereditary rule, after all: It tends to evolve, and often in the direction of democracy. You don’t have to like Western democracy to deplore the tyranny of a minority.

Theresa Tait-day is in an especially peculiar situation. She holds a hereditary title under the Laksilyu clan of the Wet’suwet’en — or at least, she did.

Nowadays it depends who you talk to. Tait-day, along with hereditary house chiefs Gloria George and Darlene Glaim, formed the Wet’suwet’en Matrilineal Coalition (WMC) in 2015 — an effort, they say, to build a more democratic partnership between the hereditary chiefs and the elected band councils, and to get the former on board with the pipeline project.

In response, they claim, the five male hereditary chiefs simply stripped them of their titles. The practical effect, Tait-day says — and the male chiefs’ goal — was to shut women out of the decision-making process.

The Wet’suwet’en are largely poor, Tait-day observes, with many concrete problems that money, jobs and skills training associated with the natural resources industry can help solve. “We want to share our (land) wealth,” she says. “We want to live in prosperity.”

Asked what she would tell anti-pipeline protesters claiming to support her people, Tait-day suggests they simply “disengage.”

“They’re not truly informed,” she says. “It’s none of their business.”

Clearly the Wet’suwet’en are a divided community, including on the most basic questions of how they should be governed. It’s a mess. Mind you, look at the state of Canada as a whole.

Just as the RCMP have court authorization to clear protesters and encampments along the pipeline route, the Ontario Provincial Police have court authorization to clear the Mohawk rail blockade near Belleville, Ont. Unlike the RCMP, the OPP refuses to exercise its authority. And we just have to live with that. Conservative politicians are barking at Justin Trudeau to “enforce the law,” but he doesn’t give orders to the OPP, and neither does Ontario Premier Doug Ford, and nor should we want them to.

Still, you might expect senior ministers to have moderately stern words for folks illegally causing economic harm. You might expect the prime minister, at minimum, to be in the country. Instead, Trudeau spent the week swanning around Africa drumming up support for the UN Security Council seat with which he remains unaccountably obsessed, then decamped for the Munich Security Conference, where he was photographed warmly embracing Iranian foreign affairs minister Mohammad

Javad Zarif, five weeks after Iran blew an airliner full of Canadians out of the sky over Tehran.

“We will ensure everything is done to resolve this through dialogue and constructive outcomes,” Trudeau cooed in Munich. Back on the home front, Transport Minister Marc Garneau sounded like he had joined the blockaders: “Freedom of expression and peaceful protest are among the most fundamental and cherished rights in a democracy such as a Canada,” he said. He very unhelpfully recalled the OPP’S disastrous intervention during the occupation of Ipperwash Provincial Park in 1995, during which an officer shot unarmed Ojibway protester Dudley George to death.

And then, bewilderingly, he averred that “the injunctions have to be respected because we are a country of the rule of law.”

The OPP, meanwhile, went Full Orwell: “The proper exercise of police discretion should not be confused with a lack of enforcement,” a spokesperson told CBC on Friday. War is peace, freedom is slavery, etc.

When it comes to the rail blockade, the message boils down to this: “We hope they lose interest and leave.” And perhaps they will. Other blockades and protests came and went over the course of the week. But it seems like that would be a tactical error. The Mohawks have made specific and plausible demands: The RCMP vacating Wet’suwet’en territory, and the cancellation of the pipeline project. The cops charged with chasing them off have done nothing but ask nicely and offer them maple syrup.

The pipeline is a provincial project, not a federal one, but if the OPP won’t end the blockade and the feds aren’t willing to take truly extraordinary measures, then at some point in the foreseeable future it may well make short-term economic sense to give in to their demands. Maybe the feds can buy the pipeline from Coastal Gaslink and shut it down.

And what if the Mohawks do lose interest, or are somehow induced to stand down? That now counts as the best-case scenario, and it will have involved shutting down the CN railway for at least a week — maybe two, maybe three — with enormous consequences for people’s livelihoods and the economy as a whole, all in the name of killing a project supported by the vast majority of Indigenous people affected by it. And it will happen again, as many times as any group wants it to, on whatever issue they want it to, for as long as they want it to.

Unless someone in power does something unusually bold and concrete in the very near future — and it’s not even clear what that thing would be — we are well on the road as a country to being terminally screwed. In the meantime, we certainly have no lessons on accountable government to give the Wet’suwet’en.

THE MESSAGE BOILS DOWN TO THIS: ‘WE HOPE THEY LOSE INTEREST.’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

COMMENTARY: Amid blockades, Trudeau needs to borrow a page from his father and show resolve

 

BY ROB BREAKENRIDGE GLOBAL NEWS

Posted February 15, 2020 9:00 am

 

 WATCH: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Friday that this week has been "really difficult" for Canadians amid ongoing rail blockades by people protesting in solidarity with the Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs who oppose the Coastal GasLink pipeline's construction.+

Justin Trudeau is clearly not his father, despite how often both his detractors and supporters try to portray him as the second coming.

The past week has illustrated for us the stark contrast between the father and the son. It has also illustrated for us the urgent need for the latter to find the sort of resolve that the former became so famous for.

The protests and blockades that have spread across the country over the last 10 days are obviously not yet at the level of seriousness that the FLQ crisis was, but Pierre’s famous “just watch me” declaration would seem to represent the least-likely scenario for how Justin is going to respond to this situation.

Canadians might not be looking for Trudeau the younger to be parroting his father, but I think it’s fair to say that Canadians are looking for some leadership, some clarity, and some backbone. Say what you will about Pierre Trudeau, but he was capable of demonstrating those qualities.

No one is suggesting that there’s a quick and easy resolution to these protests, or the rail blockades more specifically. But step one for the prime minister would be demonstrating that his government takes all of this seriously and there’s at least an urgency in its approach.

Canadians accept that our prime minister has duties that require travelling abroad from time to time, but there was a real tone deafness from the prime minister and his handlers in believing that Canadians would see Trudeau’s jet-setting campaign for a UN Security Council seat as a greater priority than the shutdown of rail traffic in Canada and the ensuing economic fallout.

Even Friday, while speaking in Germany, Trudeau was non-committal about whether he still planned on attending a conference in Barbados on Monday and Tuesday. Cancelling those plans should be a no-brainer.

In his comments Friday, Trudeau was more interested in offering up excuses and platitudes rather than any sort of plans for concrete action. He described the past several days as a “difficult week” for the country, lamenting that this whole situation is “fraught with challenges and obstacles to overcome.”

 

That’s little solace to the Canadians who are and who will be directly and adversely affected by the rail blockades.t’s not just retail, agriculture, grocery, and other sectors of the economy that are feeling the pain. There are now warnings about shortages of propane, baby formula, and even the chlorine that’s used by cities to treat their drinking water.

Yes, there are sensitivities around issues pertaining to Indigenous rights and Indigenous concerns, but none of that should justify capitulating to blockades that are aimed at putting a stranglehold on the Canadian economy. That’s a rather disturbing precedent being set and a rather troubling message being broadcast about our vulnerabilities and our willingness to act.

 

It should be easy enough in this context for Trudeau to defend his decision to approve the Coastal GasLink pipeline and the broader LNG Canada project. The pipeline has the support of all 20 affected First Nations along its route, as well as the support of a majority of hereditary chiefs.

There are agreements in place between these communities and the company that will lead to employment and economic opportunities. This is a model for how such development should work.

Imagine if all of these communities and all of these hereditary chiefs were opposed and the government and the company said, “Well, that’s OK, five heredity chiefs support it so we’re proceeding, anyway.” It hardly seems to represent any sort of progress to deny these communities a voice when it comes to embracing the benefits of economic development.

We need to hear the prime minister speak with clarity on all of this. We need to hear the prime minister make it clear that activists and illegal protests cannot and will not strangle our economy.

It’s not too late for him to show some of that famous Trudeau resolve, although much damage has already been done.

 

Rob Breakenridge is host of “Afternoons with Rob Breakenridge” on Global News Radio 770 Calgary and a commentator for Global News.

 

© 2020 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A sample of the rhetoric our woke pm will have to reconcile....after all it’s his governments most important relationship .... nation to nation:

Quote

'Settlers need to stop and listen'

Sarah Rotz, a professor at York University who's been supporting and helping to organize the protests, said "it's important that settlers consider and take seriously" what's going on across Canada.

She said using terms like "the rule of law" to justify the crackdown in Wet'suwet'en territory is not helping.

"When we use terms like the rule of law, we're ignoring Indigenous legal systems and we're assuming that the colonial legal system is the only legal system, so really undermining Indigenous legal systems," Rotz told CBC News.

Rotz said she is "standing in solidarity" with Indigenous peoples and nations who are defending their land and their legal system and trying to educate settlers about their traditional governance systems and cultures and ways of being.

"Settlers need to stop and listen," Rotz said.

We are going after Canada where it hurts the most," Vanessa Gray, an environmental and Anishinaabe activist from Aamjiwnaang First Nation in southwestern Ontario told CBC News.

"There are many groups, many networks organizing. This is across the nation, across the world. We're working apart but together in solidarity for the Wet'suwet'en land defenders."

Saturday's protest coincided with a meeting between the federal Indigenous Services minister Marc Miller and representatives of the Mohawk Nation to discuss the Belleville blockade.

I hope the Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs' demands are met, that the RCMP leave the Wet'suwet'en territory immediately, and I would like to see all those cops who were involved, who are involved, see consequences for their actions," Gray said.

We are just standing up and fighting back for our sovereign Indigenous right to be on our own territory without a military police raid or response.

"Canada's relationship to the oil industry is the deepest relationship that they have and we're here today to talk about the deep relationship Wet'suwet'en people have with their water. The urgency to protect that is dire right now. This is an emergency," Gray added.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder at what point regular Canadians, who can't get to work, can't get groceries can't get heat for their homes will decide to enforce the laws that the RCMP won't?

This, after all is the bargain we (society ) have made; we do not resort to vigilantism and person solutions to solve grievances and make people answer for wrongs committed because we expect the police and courts to do it expeditiously and fairly.  If the police and courts do not hold up their end of the bargain, well, what is the expected end game?

An example of what we can expect (and personally, I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often);

 

Edited by seeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

M.I.a.

Trudeau dithers while rail blockaders hold nation hostage

  • Calgary Sun
  • 16 Feb 2020
  • LORRIE GOLDSTEIN lgoldstein@postmedia.com @sunlorrie
img?regionKey=Bpym0gyB%2fh%2fsvhkdJ1sB0w%3d%3d  

In 1968, 7-Up had a successful ad campaign billing itself as the “Uncola.”

In 2020, Canadians have, in Justin Trudeau, our very own, “Un-Prime Minister.”

Don’t look at him, he said — from Munich while on a foreign tour to increase Canada’s chances of winning a temporary seat on the UN Security Council — to end the Indigenous blockades that have shut down much of Canada’s railway system.

That’s the job of the police, Trudeau said, adding: “We are not the kind of country where politicians get to tell the police what to do in operational matters.”

The late Christie Blatchford, writing in the National Post, summed up this attitude perfectly in relation to Indigenous blockades in Ontario years ago, where the then-Liberal government took a similar hands-off approach and the Ontario Provincial Police failed to enforce court-ordered injunctions.

To wit: “The government mantra is hands off the police, the police are accountable to no one, including the courts, and no one is answerable to the people.”

What Trudeau could have done, what a prime minister should have done, was to return to Ottawa immediately and take charge.

To signal to Canadians he understood the blockades were not only inconveniencing the public but damaging the economy, endangering jobs and risking public safety by, for example, choking off vital supplies to hospitals and chlorine to water treatment plants.

Trudeau could have met with Public Safety Minister Bill Blair to be briefed, given that the Trudeau-appointed RCMP commissioner, “under the direction of the minister (meaning Blair) has the control and management of the Force and all matters connected with the Force.”

Following that, Trudeau could have told the public that getting the rail lines open was a national priority and he had instructed Blair to do everything possible to achieve this, within his lawful powers under the RCMP Act.

That doesn’t mean telling Blair to interfere with “operational matters” by ordering the RCMP to immediately storm the barricades, regardless of any threat to the public, the protesters or the RCMP officers themselves.

It does mean holding Blair, and through him, the PM himself, publicly accountable for getting the rail lines moving and informing the public of what actions they were taking, or not taking, to do so and why.

Trudeau could have publicly acknowledged police cannot address the reasons behind these protests, which are the result of decisions by federal and provincial governments, and that the solutions are further complicated because of disputes within the Indigenous community between elected and hereditary leaders.

Ever since Indigenous protester Dudley George was shot and killed by Ontario Provincial Police in the Ipperwash standoff in 1995 during the Mike Harris Progressive Conservative government, federal and provincial governments of all stripes, as well as police, have been terrified of taking action during Indigenous blockades.

The result has been disasters like the Ontario town of Caledonia being held hostage by such protests for years.

Meanwhile, we have a PM, who, as described by former ethics commissioner Mary Dawson in her report on Trudeau’s multiple violations of conflict-of-interest rules regarding his

Aga Khan family vacations, doesn’t see himself as holding business meetings as head of his own government.

Rather, Trudeau views himself as a relationship builder, “ensuring that all parties are moving forward together” while “specific issues or details are worked out before, subsequently or independently of any meeting he attends.”

That’s Trudeau, all right. Our “Un-Prime Minister.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Misunderstanding over Indigenous sovereignty

 

  • Calgary Sun
  • 16 Feb 2020
  • LORNE GUNTER lgunter@postmedia.com @sunlornegunter
img?regionKey=CeKIr%2bz3QV1p0FkSGJoCfA%3d%3d  

Let’s say for a minute that the Wet’suwet’en people of northern B.C. had sovereignty over their land, as claimed by those Indigenous and non-Indigenous protesters across the country who oppose the Coastal GasLink pipeline.

The protests along the route of the pipeline and at multiple other sites across the country are based, in part, on the assertion that the Wet’suwet’en never ceded control over their land and thus retain sovereignty to this day.

It’s not quite that simple. Canadian courts do recognize Indigenous sovereignty, but only if individual nations have signed treaties giving them sovereignty, settled a land claim or gone to court to assert their sovereignty.

The Wet’suwet’en have done none of those things.

But let’s say for the sake of argument that the Wet’suwet’en people do have recognized sovereignty over their traditional lands. That still wouldn’t give them an automatic right to veto any proposed project across that land.

Non-Indigenous property owners don’t have an unchallengeable right to prevent development on their land. Private property is expropriated or otherwise claimed by governments all the time for highways, power lines, wind farms, pipelines, subdivisions and other alleged public purposes, provided adequate compensation is paid.

Indeed, if you told the lefty, non-Indigenous protestors who are demanding the Wet’suwet’en be granted unquestioned power over their land, that non-Indigenous land owners would be given that same level of control over their own property – a power that could potentially prevent most government action – those same hypocrites would accuse you of advocating Darwinian capitalism.

As courts have said again and again, the duty to be consulted or even to be compensated is not the same as the power to veto.

But the current gross misunderstanding of just what Indigenous “sovereignty” means comes mostly from myths and fallacies First Nations have told themselves over the last three or four decades; myths and fallacies that have been encouraged and reinforced by politically correct politicians, academics, activists and judges.

This week, a group of Treaty 8 chiefs walked out of a meeting with Alberta Premier Jason Kenney over child welfare policy. They insisted they didn’t have to abide by changes in provincial programs because “contrary to what the Government of Canada and Province of Alberta says (sic), we did not cede or surrender our lands.”

Good try. But Treaty 8, like most of the Prairie treaties, explicitly says the signatories “hereby cede, release, surrender and yield up to the Government of the Dominion of Canada … all their rights, titles and privileges whatsoever to the lands …”

That couldn’t be clearer. Yet for years now, bold-faced claims such as the Treaty 8 chiefs’, have been met with nodding acceptance by timid politicians and elites afraid of being called racist.

There will be no meaningful reconciliation so long as these fanciful absolutes are accepted as truth and permitted to determine what constitutes success.

You are never going to satisfy people who have convinced themselves the only way they can be sure they have been properly consulted is when governments and companies give into their demands fully.

If you and you alone get to decide how much is enough, what is to prevent you from upping the stakes, then upping them again, endlessly?

I’m all for self-governance by First Nations. Indigenous communities should have all the same rights as non-Indigenous ones to be consulted, to fight for their views, set policy and share in the rewards of development.

But so long as the current false sense of rights is allowed to fester and grow — that it’s their way or no way — Canada will get nowhere.

Most First Nations have under 500 members. They can function on a level similar to non-Indigenous towns and villages (with some inherent special status, such as mineral rights). But to insist they have special rights to hold up all development is a recipe for economic stagnation and political division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, st27 said:

Settlers need to.....

These folks seem to believe that if you use a word over and over again (like settlers) and assert that "settlers need to" that it will somehow cause fundamental and lasting change in the opinion of their audience; sort of like "irregular border crossers" or "Bernie's a racist." They are the same people who prattle about this is an apple and this is an orange..... as if they are teaching a primary school class.

The one huge takeaway from all this is that people who want action on climate change are simply not willing to put up with the inconvenience and cost of achieving it. I'm now absolutely convinced that all efforts directed toward achieving Paris Accord targets will fail, and they will fail in spectacular fashion because neither the government nor the people (who want it) are even willing to discuss it rationally. 

79 is a whole bunch of megatons, in comparison to that, this little blockade is a whole bunch of nothing. What I'm suggesting is that Canada should shut this protest down and stop pretending we are on track to achieving accord targets. Only when that has been embraced, can we move on to something that might work.

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At what point will the talks, the reconciliation, the polishing of the silver chain reach a conclusive end?? We have a national chief of the AFN,  regional chiefs, chairs of elders and youths councils, hereditary chiefs elders, local band chiefs that have been negotiating on behalf of the First Nations....and now we have unelected band members, with no title and sympathizers with no status at all, holding TROC hostage because of their perceptions of governance and injustice....when will it end?? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that's exactly the point - no end.  

Look, we have the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary chiefs and the Wet’suwet’en elected Chief and Council.  The Wet’suwet’en people themselves have chosen who is to be their leader and who is to represent them in negotiations.  If they wanted the "Hereditary Chiefs" to be their leader and representative they would have chosen them.  Why would we (Canada) negotiate with anyone other than the duelly elected council and can you imaging the outcry if some sort of agreement was negotiated with anyone other than the Elected Chief and Council?  "How dare we shutout the "elected" Chief, as chosen by the people, when the "Hereditary Chiefs" clearly have no standing?"  Except that they do have standing but only when it suits those who disagree with the elected Council.  

Edited by seeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, seeker said:

Well, that's exactly the point - no end.  

Look, we have the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary chiefs and the Wet’suwet’en elected Chief and Council.  The Wet’suwet’en people themselves have chosen who is to be their leader and who is to represent them in negotiations.  If they wanted the "Hereditary Chiefs" to be their leader and representative they would have chosen them.  Why would we (Canada) negotiate with anyone other than the duelly elected council and can you imaging the outcry if some sort of agreement was negotiated with anyone other than the Elected Chief and Council?  "How dare we shutout the "elected" Chief, as chosen by the people, when the "Hereditary Chiefs" clearly have no standing?"  Except that they do have standing but only when it suits those who disagree with the elected Council.  

Agree, the same would be valid if Our Queen attempted to rule in place of our elected officials.  No one would pay any attention to her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, st27 said:

..when will it end?? 

Canada has freely admitted to ongoing genocide on the world stage and the world is watching (this is no small admission, it's HUGE).... we are now members of a very small, very ugly club. Surely this presents a huge problem for JT so I'm guessing this will unfold slowly. How do you march in with CS gas after making an admission like that? And why wouldn't native groups take full advantage of it?

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jonathan-kay-railroading-of-elected-bands-betrays-progressive-hypocrisy

"The TVO commentators flatly told viewers that this ongoing genocide is a “fact,” and that any argument to the contrary amounts to “denial.” Moreover, we were told that anyone engaging in such denial is effectively abetting a crime against humanity, because “denial is a tool of genocide.”

But really, why are people surprised that this is an issue now? What did y'all think was going to come from an admission like that? I'm surprised they have taken this long to capitalize on it. This situation was bought and paid for by liberal voters..... and well deserved IMO. There's an added benefit here too, if you want action on climate change.... this serves as a small taste of what you've been demanding.

There is the looming potential for shortages and I now refuel daily. 

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like someone woke Mr. Dithers up.

Trudeau skipping Caribbean trip amid rail blockades, protests

Ryan Flanagan

Ryan FlanaganCTVNews.ca Writer

@flanaganryan Contact

Published Sunday, February 16, 2020 6:48PM ESTLast Updated Sunday, February 16, 2020 6:55PM EST Demonstrators shut down U.S.-Canada border bridge
 
About 200 people stopped traffic at Rainbow International Bridge in Niagara Falls in solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en First Nation.
 

TORONTO -- Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has cancelled a planned trip abroad as protests continue to choke rail travel across the country.

The Prime Minister's Office confirmed Sunday night that Trudeau will remain in Canada on Monday, skipping a two-day trip to Barbados during which he planned to secure support from Caribbean leaders for Canada's bid to land a seat on the United Nations Security Council.

"Following the government’s ongoing efforts to address infrastructure disruptions across the country, the Prime Minister will convene the Incident Response Group tomorrow to discuss steps forward," PMO wrote in a statement Sunday.

"Our priority remains the safety and security of all Canadians and the swift resolution of this issue to restore service across the rail system in accordance with the law."

 

Trudeau returned to Canada late Friday after spending a week in Ethiopia, Kuwait, Senegal and Germany, where he attended the Munich Security Conference.

He spent the weekend in private meetings in Ottawa, according to his public schedule.

At least some of those meetings touched on the ongoing protests in support of the Wet'suwet'en Nation and opposition within that community to the current proposal for a natural gas pipeline in northern B.C.

Indigenous Services Minister Marc Miller told CTV's Question Period on Sunday that he had talked to Trudeau both before and after his nine-hour meeting with Mohawk First Nation members in Tyendinaga, Ont. on Saturday.

A protest next to a rail line in Tyendinaga, Ont., has resulted in CN Rail halting its freight service in Eastern Canada and Via Rail doing the same for all passenger service across the country.

The Prime Minister's Office confirmed that Canada will be represented in the Caribbean by Foreign Affairs Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne in Trudeau's stead. 

More to come. 

 

Tomorrow morning, I’ll convene an Incident Response Group meeting with @MarcMillerVM, @Carolyn_Bennett, @MarcGarneau, @BillBlair, @cafreeland, @pablorodriguez & @Bill_Morneau to address infrastructure disruptions across the country & discuss the path forward. Details to follow.

 
 

The PM will no longer attend the CARICOM meeting. He’s spoken with the Secretary General, as well as PMs of Barbados & Jamaica to inform them. 🇨🇦 will be well represented by @FP_Champagne to advance our shared priorities with Caribbean partners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Wolfhunter said:

I'm surprised they have taken this long to capitalize on it.

 

They?  8/13 Hereditary Chiefs support the pipeline.  85% of the Wet’suwet’en people support the pipeline.  All 20 of the bands along the pipeline route (including the Wet’suwet’en) support the pipeline.

Many/most of the protestors are not-Canadian (foreigners) brought in and financed by Tides, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, seeker said:

They?  8/13 Hereditary Chiefs support the pipeline.  85% of the Wet’suwet’en people support the pipeline.  All 20 of the bands along the pipeline route (including the Wet’suwet’en) support the pipeline.

Many/most of the protestors are not-Canadian (foreigners) brought in and financed by Tides, etc.

Indeed.... they 

When you are the victim of ongoing genocide, none of that matters. Your facts are nothing more than facts, they don't matter. By admitting to genocide the optics associated with stern intervention are terrible. They are even worse if you want that UN seat. IMO, this is political capitol being cashed out with a certified check. 

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Wolfhunter said:

Indeed.... they 

When you are the victim of ongoing genocide, none of that matters. Your facts are nothing more than facts, they don't matter. By admitting to genocide the optics associated with stern intervention are terrible. They are even worse if you want that UN seat. This is political capitol being cashed out with a certified check.

Hey, works for me.  I'm hoping they shut down the whole country - burn it to the ground and we can start over.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

  I'm hoping they shut down the whole country 

You might get your wish....the interview with “Indigenous Services Minister”  was less than reassuring...other than stating they don’t want to repeat mistakes of the past, the government is “fully engaged” and it’s a nation to nation relationship. 
The world is watching.

  https://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1901908
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, st27 said:

You might get your wish....the interview with “Indigenous Services Minister”  was less than reassuring...other than stating they don’t want to repeat mistakes of the past, the government is “fully engaged” and it’s a nation to nation relationship. 
 

 

"Minister Miller, what's happening?"   "Ahhhhh, I'm fully engaged on this matter."

"And what about the PM?"  "Ahhhh, yeah, he's fully engaged too."

"So, what's the plan?"  "Ahhh, as I said, I'm fully engaged and the PM is fully engaged and the the government is fully engaged."

Repeat X3

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Ottawa rejects calls to shut down rail blockades, will focus on negotiation......

A blockade in the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory near Belleville, Ont., has stopped most traffic on CN’s rail network east of Winnipeg. Via Rail said on Sunday that it has cancelled all trains across Canada, except for two secondary routes, until the end of Monday. More than 83,000 passengers have had their trips cancelled since the Ontario blockade started. One of Montreal’s commuter lines has been shut down by a blockade in the Kahnawake Mohawk Territory outside the city. The provincial authority that operates the line said it is planning to run buses for commuters on Monday. Smaller protests were also held on the weekend in Vancouver, Vaughan, Ont., and Niagara Falls, Ont.

Protesters at the Tyendinaga blockade declined to speak to media, including regarding Mr. Trudeau’s plans – except to say they believed it was unlikely that he would show up and speak to them in person.

Four Ontario Provincial Police officers hung back several hundred metres from the blockade Sunday, coming closer only for a brief check-in with the protesters in the late afternoon. “The dialogue is still open,” said Sergeant Cynthia Savard, the OPP’s regional community safety officer, in a phone interview. “It’s about keeping a peaceful, safe environment.”

Several dozen supporters arrived over the course of the day, delivering supplies including pizza, propane, firewood and Tim Hortons coffee. Some came from hundreds of kilometres away to share their support for the blockaders and the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs, and share their fears over the natural gas pipeline in B.C. “It’s our future that’s going to be destroyed – it’s really important for youth,” said Malika Gasbaoui, 17, who is Ojibwa-Métis and visited from the Laurentians in Quebec. Her mother, Anna, added that “a lot of people have been saying that the majority of native people, and non-native people in Canada, are for pipelines – which is not true. … The more these guys destroy, the less we’re going to have.”
 

Mike Salmon came with his family from Kitchener, Ont. to bring the protesters tarps, toilet paper and batteries. “I think it’s such a sign of the times that Canada’s been going through this wake-up call about reconciliation, and the whole planet is going through a wake-up call around climate change,” he said.

Attention all activists and anarchists.....you now have free reign to shut down one of the largest countries in the world for whatever issue you choose...the trudeau government is willing to dialogue until the cows come home and half the country is laid off...no hurry, take your time...will be interesting when propane and decking fluid runs out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, st27 said:

Attention all activists and anarchists.....

I doubt it would apply to all; for instance, you and I would be tasered and dragged away in handcuffs were we to try that.

But when you admit to ongoing genocide (directed toward a visible minority) and you do it on the world stage and you join the ranks of countries like Nazi Germany and Rwanda, optics become more than just political inclinations. Keep in mind that genocide is a crime against humanity..... it's not a small thing. They are in a tough spot now and it's completely of their own making.

IMO, it made the government's reaction to the next uprising (that's this one) pretty predictable. Cause and effect again.... there are consequences to virtue signalling and his admission (at the time) certainly did not garner the backlash and condemnation it richly deserved. I don't know what's behind our collective inability to look around corners and anticipate problems in advance, but I think it's gone for good.

As a result, I say this is both predictable and well deserved.... even so, while I disagree with virtually everything he does, I do admire the fact that he sticks (or tries to stick) to the values he has articulated even when the going gets rough. A rare commodity in politics... hats off to him.

Liberal voters have no cause to be offended here.

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wolfhunter said:

I doubt it would apply to all; for instance, you and I would be tasered and dragged away in handcuffs were we to try that.

But when you admit to ongoing genocide (directed toward a visible minority) and you do it on the world stage and you join the ranks of countries like Nazi Germany and Rwanda, optics become more than just political inclinations. Keep in mind that genocide is a crime against humanity..... it's not a small thing. They are in a tough spot now and it's completely of their own making.

IMO, it made the government's reaction to the next uprising (that's this one) pretty predictable. Cause and effect again.... there are consequences to virtue signalling and his admission (at the time) certainly did not garner the backlash and condemnation it richly deserved. I don't know what's behind our collective inability to look around corners and anticipate problems in advance, but I think it's gone for good.

As a result, I say this is both predictable and well deserved.... even so, while I disagree with virtually everything he does, I do admire the fact that he sticks (or tries to stick) to the values he has articulated even when the going gets rough. A rare commodity in politics... hats off to him.

Liberal voters have no cause to be offended here.

Sorry - I have no idea how I did this!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I do admire the fact that he sticks (or tries to stick) to the values he has articulated even when the going gets rough. A rare commodity in politics... hats off to him.

Sorry...I do not share the same admiration. After debacles like SNC Lavalin and the screwing Mark Norman took,  our pm boasts about respecting the rule of law?? And now this?? You mentioned if you or I tried this, we would be tasered and dragged away. What kind of society have we become when there are two standards of justice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Falken said:

Sorry - I have no idea how I did this!!

That's a problem then, but it's likely you will get further opportunities to contemplate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, st27 said:

What kind of society have we become when there are two standards of justice?

JT is predictable and there are no surprises here. Don't think that I agree or support him.... but he is predictable. Where you expecting another outcome? Maybe immediate enforcement of outstanding injunctions? Are you shocked that it hasn't happened yet? I can tell you that I'm not.

As to your question, it is the society that brands itself genocidal without so much as a whimper.

Whether you (or I) like it or not, action on this is likely to be slow. In fact it's already slow, no?

 

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this