Did government pull its punches in the Cowichan Tribes court case? | Vancouver Sun - "One of the most important issues in this case was whether Aboriginal title was “extinguished” when the private ownership was created over the lands by the government in the 1800s. Yet the court expressly noted B.C. did not argue this... Similarly, the federal government also backed off this issue. The court stated: “Canada initially pled extinguishment but abandoned its reliance on this defence in its amended response to civil claim filed Nov. 22, 2018.” If B.C. and Canada are in support of protecting private property rights, one may ask why they would pull their punches on this key legal issue. To answer that question, one should look at the little known “civil litigation directives” that both governments have established to guide their lawyers in court cases involving Indigenous groups... before anyone gets too critical of the decision, they should understand that the court can only work with the arguments advanced. And when governments choose to self-limit arguments they are otherwise fully entitled to make, they should be extra cautious about criticizing the decision after the fact."
Chief of Chawathil First Nation says that it is "dangerous" and "irresponsible" to label citizens who are concerned about the Cowichan decision as "racist". : r/VancouverLandlords - "Most people are afraid to speak candidly about this entire issue and in particular how Undrip and Reconciliation has been yet again been miss managed by the governments. No one wants to be seen as or called a racist however it seems ok for those who want to protect our private property to be called colonists or settlers. Perhaps the whole threat of potential loss of private property will cause the federal and provincial government to use this as a springboard to an overarching policy that will eliminate these issues in the future. We can only hope and use our votes to make change ."
Why weren't we told sooner about the implications of Aboriginal title? | Vancouver Sun - "the case dates back 10 years. And as far back as eight years ago, the court had wrestled with whether to notify private landowners about the implications of a declaration of Aboriginal title. So why were landowners and residents only learning about it now? The answer — sobering as it is — ought to concern every British Columbian... It was the province that first asked the court, back in 2017, to require notification... The court rejected the application, saying at that stage that “no remedy” from the court would impact the private landowners. The province also chose not to give notification on its own because of the legal implications in terms of liability down the road, Sharma said. Case management judge J.A. Power of the B.C. Supreme Court rejected motions for notification from the provincial and federal governments. The judge worried that if the court ordered formal notifications to private landowners it could be swamped with applications from them for standing. “It would for all practical purposes put a halt to these proceedings,” Power ruled. Plus, the Cowichan Tribes “do not seek at this stage to invalidate fee-simple interests held by private landowners.”... Yet as the case unfolded over the years, the Cowichan Tribes sought a declaration of Aboriginal title over the entire claim area in Richmond, private land included. They are now appealing the judge’s decision to grant them title to less than half of their 1,800-acre claim. As for the impact of Aboriginal title, the nation’s lawyer admitted recently that the court declaration has already affected the buying and selling of private land within the affected area. A private sale would proceed only “with the consent of the Cowichan Nation and it would be with some accommodation from the Crown to the Cowichan Nation.” So, to recap, the city, the province, the Indigenous nation, and the court all ducked responsibility for notifying the landowners … and passed the buck to each other."
The tribes claim "at this stage" that they are not interested in taking private property. Of course, this means that they made a legally binding promise that they would never do so
brittany on X - "Hey @Dave_Eby 👋🏼 You said property rights were safe. Roll the tapes!!"
Premier Eby says B.C. will ask court to stay implementation of Cowichan Tribes case - "British Columbia Premier David Eby says his government will be asking for a stay of the implementation of the Cowichan Tribes case that confirmed Aboriginal title over an area of private and government-owned land in Richmond, B.C. Eby said Wednesday that a stay would give the British Columbia Court of Appeal an opportunity to consider and decide on the landmark case that has sparked concerns about the implications for private land ownership... The ruling says the Crown's grants of private titles in the 750-acre area was an unjustified infringement of Cowichan rights... The province had argued in the B.C. Supreme Court that Aboriginal and fee-simple title cannot co-exist on the same land in their full form, seeking suspension of Aboriginal title, while the City of Richmond, which was also a defendant, sought extinguishment. Both arguments failed. Eby was speaking the day after the City of Richmond hosted a tense public meeting for hundreds of residents and land owners on Tuesday night about the precedent-setting case and its potential impacts on private property. Eby said the ruling had been "very troubling for many people" in the area, including about 150 owners of private property in the title area. He said Attorney General Niki Sharma and her team were currently collecting information from property owners, including whether they have been able to get mortgages or financing since the decision, and Eby encouraged affected residents to come forward. The Cowichan have accused Eby and other officials of spreading "misinformation" about the ruling, because their case did not seek to overturn private property titles... The City of North Vancouver on Wednesday warned residents of a "fraudulent" letter claiming to be from the city's "indigenous claims review council." It said residents should "disregard" the letter, which is circulating online and says people should hire a lawyer to make sure their properties in the city are not affected by Indigenous claims."
Weird. Left wingers keep telling us that the ruling didn't affect anything and that politicians were cynically exploiting the situation and that we could believe the tribe when they announced that this would not change anything and that banks which were not renewing mortgages either were made up anecdotes or they were just being evil
Metro Vancouver Indigenous land ruling could derail reconciliation: Poll - "the City of Richmond sent letters to 150 impacted property owners, warning the case may compromise their continued ownership of their property — not to mention resale values as homeowners face the prospect of sitting on potentially unsellable land... B.C. residents, who the poll found 60% believe the ruling harms relationships between First Nations and the rest of the province, while 10% said it neither harms nor hinders the relationship. Ten per cent said the decision will only help reconciliation. Despite ongoing reconciliation efforts, recent polling suggests Canadians remain divided. A Leger poll released last month had only 38% of respondents agree that Canada belongs “first and foremost” to Indigenous people, while 43% disagreed with the sentiment."
B.C. land claim court ruling muddies reconciliation waters - "Justice Barbara Young determined that because the Cowichan First Nations had used an 800-acre site along the Fraser River as a summer fishing village more than 150 years ago, it should now have “Aboriginal title” over public and private lands worth over half-a-billion dollars... About the only limit is that lands covered by Aboriginal title can, according to the Constitution, only be sold to the Crown. British Columbia is, in some ways, a special case. Unlike most of the rest of the country, it is not governed by treaties. The British government simply declared sovereignty over most of the province in 1846. But if the courts can find a way to extinguish Crown title and private property rights in the name of ancient occupancy by First Nations, it’s not a giant leap to think a creative judge or panel of judges could find a imaginative way to nullify the treaties. This is what reconciliation increasingly means. It’s a one-way street. After years of apologetic, guilt-ridden land acknowledgments before every sporting event, concert and public meeting, plus encouragement of “land back” theories, even the courts have bought into the notion that we “settlers” (God how I hate that term) have no claim on the land. Some B.C. provincial parks have also been subject to seasonal, racebased restrictions during the past two years. For instance, Joffre Lakes Provincial Park north of Whistlerone of the most popular parks in the province – has been closed to non-Indigenous visitors at times so that nearby First Nations could use it for spiritual ceremonies and gathering native plants. Other areas have been declared off limits to non-Indigenous hunters. I thought the point of reconciliation was that Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadians should respect one another, not that non-Indigenous “settlers” should bow and back away slowly. I want First Nations to share in the resource wealth of their land, to be economic partners with companies and non-Indigenous communities. And increasingly, that is happening. But muddying the waters are Indigenous claims to exclusive use of what are public lands to the exclusion of the public. Now, thanks to the Richmond decision, it’s possible there will be demands for exclusive use of private land as well. And it’s not just B.C. Recently Sagkeeng First Nation, along the Winnipeg River at the southern end of Manitoba’s Lake Winnipeg, posted its land claim. “No Trespassing, No Hunting or Fishing” without the prior approval of the chief and First Nations council. Their justification? They have occupied their reserve and lands beyond its boundaries “since time immemorial.” The Richmond decision, despite being activist, need not turn out badly. If homeowners and businesses can make annual lease payments to the First Nation instead of the property taxes they have been paying to the municipality, the harm could be minimized."
Of course, the Cowichan First Nations are not going to provide municipal services to Richmond, so good luck filling the hole. Probably effective property taxes will go up
Aboriginal title has become a constitutional threat in Canada - "If you own a house, you probably own the “fee simple” in the land. Fee simple is the highest form of private ownership in Canadian property law. No one has a better title to the land than you. That may sound like no one can take your land away. It isn’t so. In 1968, then-justice minister Pierre Trudeau released a consultation paper that proposed a constitutional charter of human rights. It was the first iteration of what would become the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In the paper, Trudeau proposed to guarantee a right to property. So did drafts that followed. But some provincial governments were dead set against entrenching property rights. By 1980, property had been dropped from proposals. The final version of the Charter, adopted in 1982, does not mention it. Canada’s Constitution does not protect property rights. Except for Aboriginal property. Trudeau’s 1968 paper made no mention of Aboriginal rights, nor did drafts leading up to the 1980 proposal. Aboriginal groups and their supporters launched a campaign to have Aboriginal rights recognized. They succeeded just in time. Section 35, essentially an afterthought, recognized and affirmed the “existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada." That section was put into the Constitution but not as part of the Charter. That might sound like section 35 is weaker than a Charter right. It is the opposite. Section 35 affirms Aboriginal rights that existed as of 1982. But since 1982, the Supreme Court of Canada has used section 35 to champion, enlarge and reimagine Aboriginal rights. The Court has “discovered” rights never recognized in the law before 1982. In 1997, it articulated a new vision of Aboriginal title. In 2004, it established the Crown’s “duty to consult.” In 2014, it recognized Aboriginal title over a tract of Crown land. In 2021, it gave Aboriginal rights under section 35 to an American Indigenous group. Courts have not yet granted Aboriginal title over private property. Can it be done? The Supreme Court of Canada has not yet answered the question. But the New Brunswick judge in the Wolastoqey case said that it can... Since section 35 is not part of the Charter, it is not subject to the “Notwithstanding” clause. Legislatures cannot override it. Not that they would anyway. The British Columbia government, for instance, recently signed an agreement granting Aboriginal title to Haida Gwaii, notwithstanding the property interests of many non-Aboriginal people within the territory. A self-flagellating pathology has gripped our ruling class."
David Eby states “crown grant of land is invalid therefore titles that followed are invalid” : r/CanadianConservative - "The joke here is that the land title is invalid but the Cowichan asked for money from the Crown to clean up the garbage dump they permitted on their 'unceded territory.' Flags of Convenience, every fucking time."
David Eby states “crown grant of land is invalid therefore titles that followed are invalid” : r/CanadianConservative - "First time in history the conquered people are taking back the land they LOST by simply whining and complaining enough"
David Eby states “crown grant of land is invalid therefore titles that followed are invalid” : r/CanadianConservative - "Hopefully this is a wake up call for British Columbians."
"Nope. It won't be. We'll vote them back in again."
"Why do we hate ourselves"
"I don't think we realize that we're hurting ourselves as we hate everything else? Hate progress, hate rich people, hate capitalism, hate consumerism, hate white people, hate history. It's Karl Marx wet dream :("
B.C. NDP mislead the public to further its 'reconciliation' agenda - "The B.C. government’s secretive and exclusionary approach to “reconciliation” took a sordid turn recently, with the ministers of Indigenous relations and forests both caught in blatant and readily disprovable attempts to mislead the public. Meanwhile, British Columbians have yet again been left on the outside as huge tracts of land are signed away, one-sided “consultations” are held in secret and the public interest is ignored. On Sept. 5, the B.C. Supreme Court issued an order granting Aboriginal title over the entirety of Haida Gwaii, including private property and all Crown land. The declaration was supported by the B.C. and federal governments. While the Haida Nation have openly celebrated the monumental nature of the judicial order,Victoria and Ottawa have yet to issue any official statement at all, apparently preferring to keep the public in the dark about their crucial role in the matter. Haida Gwaii property owners and other directly impacted stakeholders do not appear to have been represented at all in these proceedings... Aboriginal title is protected by the Constitution, while private property rights are not. The issue is of even greater concern today than when the agreements were signed, given the B.C. Supreme Court’s recent Cowichan decision recognizing Aboriginal title over part of the city of Richmond. In that case, the judge troublingly stated that certain fee simple land titles — the typical form of private property ownership in Canada — in the area are “defective and invalid,” on the basis that the Crown had no authority to issue them in the first place. As constitutional law professor Dwight Newman pointed out, if past fee simple grants in areas of Aboriginal title claims are inherently invalid, “then the judgment has a much broader implication that any privately owned lands in B.C. may be subject to being overridden by Aboriginal title.” This ought to have given the federal and provincial governments ample reason to rethink their support for a judicial declaration of Aboriginal title in the Haida case. Instead, they persevered. And now, with Aboriginal title officially recognized by the court, the problematic provisions of the Haida agreements have graduated to an effectively irreversible right under the Constitution. Given the massive implications, one might think the federal or provincial governments would have found time to notify the public. However, despite scores of news releases issued between them since the declaration was made, not a single one mentions the judgment. If not for the Haida Nation news release, citizens would be totally in the dark. Worse yet, in a belated response to growing pressure on the issue, Indigenous Relations Minister Spencer Chandra Herbert attempted a “nothing-to-see-here” post on social media. But in doing so, he knowingly attempted to mislead the public — and got caught... Forestry Minister Ravi Parmar was caught in a separate effort to mislead the public on a related file. Under fire for its secrecy around proposed UNDRIP-related amendments to the Heritage Conservation Act, the B.C. government was called out by Vancouver Sun columnist Vaughn Palmer for forcing local government officials to sign non-disclosure agreements before they could access the full scope of the proposed changes. Parmar’s vigorous denials of these NDAs were exposed as misleading given that Palmer had been shown a copy of one of them. These are but the latest examples of how B.C.’s NDP government is steadily eroding public trust in a reconciliation agenda that’s already viewed with deep skepticism."
Richmond Mayor: "Nobody is going to want to buy a property that is affected by aboriginal title and the businesses are going to have their lenders questioning the financial viability of the company" : r/ilovebc - "I’m kind of glad this happened. There needs to be a solution and answer to the question on what “unceded” means. It would give me a sense of schadenfreud if all the people giving land acknowledgments and complaining about “colonisers” lost everything to land title."
"The only people I know that preach this landback bullshit can't afford property, they have nothing to lose"
Adam Pankratz: The Cowichan ruling is already causing a property rights panic in B.C. - "The City of Richmond has launched the first salvo in what will ultimately be the battle to decide the future of private land ownership in British Columbia. By failing to make its best arguments to defend the public interest, British Columbia’s NDP government has created uncertainty in private property ownership, the economically crucial real estate market, and cast a cloud over any future investment in the province related to land. The issue is complex but at its heart comes to down to a simple question: will Aboriginal Title ultimately supersede fee simple title, which guarantees private property rights? In August, a landmark court decision concluded that the Cowichan First Nation had Aboriginal title to land claimed and that fee simple title land in that area was “defective and invalid,” raising the prospect that private property could be revoked. The province, the city of Richmond (where the fee simple land is found), along with the Musqueam Nation swiftly appealed the ruling. The ruling caused understandable alarm and the B.C. government has been criticized for not defending property rights as vigorously as it could have. It is likely that B.C. did not make its best argument to defend property rights in the Cowichan case. Namely, that Aboriginal title had been “extinguished” when the fee simple title was granted. The directive not to argue this point was established when B.C.’s current premier, David Eby, was the attorney general. The chickens of that scandalous directive are now coming home to roost. The uncertainty the ruling created has already caused upheaval locally. Last week, the City of Richmond sent out a letter to property owners in the area concerned, informing them “the court has declared Aboriginal title to your property which may compromise the status and validity of your ownership.” Clearly, the City of Richmond believes there is potential here that the current landowners do not, in fact, own the land they believe they do. It does not take a genius to realize that this has the potential to ignite a political and economic firestorm in B.C. and across Canada, as the ruling could set precedent for the entire country... while landowners may not be physically thrown off the land they purchased, it would be exceptionally naïve to think the decision will not have a slew of possibly very negative consequences. What cannot be contested is that the decision has definitely created uncertainty for British Columbia property rights and investment in its economy as well as laid the groundwork for public repudiation of anything labelled “reconciliation.” First, the uncertainty. Uncertainty of property rights is not some idle point. As economist Hernando de Soto has argued , secure and strong property rights are the essential difference between rich, prosperous countries and those that suffer from extreme and ongoing poverty. The reason is simple: with strong property rights and protections, owners of land or property are able to leverage their resources and create wealth. This is something we in Canada take for granted. Having fee simple title declared “defective and invalid” throws this all into question... Second, we must confront the issue of the loss of public support for anything “reconciliation.” It is fair to assume that most Canadians would recognize that the Aboriginal peoples of Canada have legitimate grievances and historically have been poorly treated. As a result, there has, up to now, rightly been broad support for efforts to elevate the economic and social standing of First Nations. This has been a good thing. However, the public goodwill and support is at extreme risk if part of the required remedy to past injustice results in the diminution or elimination of the property rights of non-indigenous Canadians. If the public sense a threat to their homes and property — which they would not be unreasonable in sensing — support for reconciliation of any kind will be vaporized in a dramatic explosion of public fury. In some respects, the result of the Cowichan case is almost a sideshow to its broader implications. Even if private property rights end up affirmed, there will be years of uncertainty and legal limbo created for those affected. Other Canadians will have taken note and much of the progress made on Indigenous relations could well be lost. That serves no one and makes our country poorer in the meantime. The letter the City of Richmond felt compelled to send is a reminder that endless land acknowledgments and the degradation of non-indigenous Canadians as evil “colonizers” has consequences. We are about to experience those consequences and they are unlikely to be pretty."
Left wing virtue signaling has very real costs
Tasha Kheiriddin: Cowichan decision exposes toxic 'colonizer' narratives - "The irony is that the Cowichan did not seek to seize private land from homeowners. Judge Barbara Young expressly said that private fee-simple interests held by individuals were not at issue in the case and remain valid until further litigation or negotiation. But her conclusion that “a declaration of Aboriginal title may give rise to some uncertainty for the fee simple title holders” throws all titles into limbo, effectively making these properties unsellable. A second irony is that the claim was not only opposed by the federal, provincial and municipal governments, but by the Musqueam Indian Band and the Tsawwassen First Nation, because the Cowichan only used the lands on a seasonal basis. They fished in the same area as other First Nations, whose rights have now been discarded. In a press release , Musqueam Chief Wayne Sparrow said, “It is especially concerning that they resorted to the colonial legal system, which was not established to respect or reflect our traditional teachings.” The decision has exposed the perils of the “settler-colonial” conversation that Canada’s been having. Non-Indigenous Canadians are constantly reminded, through land acknowledgements and reconciliation mandates, that they are guests on Indigenous land. Follow this to its logical conclusion, and even people who never “colonized” anything greater than a condo in downtown Richmond could see their homes put at risk. The trial judge said the government should now negotiate “in good faith” with the Cowichan, implying some kind of financial settlement. Indigenous leaders say the case is not about challenging homeowners’ titles, but lawyers warn governments could be on the hook for hundreds of millions in compensation. Extend this to the rest of B.C., and the financial implications for taxpayers are staggering. Premier David Eby says that while his government will appeal the decision, it won’t be seeking to take the case to the Supreme Court of Canada because that would risk an “academic” decision disconnected from the “realities on the ground.” That is a mistake. Property owners need to know where they stand and not have to spend years in legal limbo: the original case alone took 11 years. The greater lesson here is that we must stop dividing Canadians along the lines of colonizer and colonized. Reconciliation should not mean undermining the rights of Canadians who built homes, started businesses and built communities."
"Reconciliation" means proclaiming that some animals are more equal than others, and that a racial caste system is a good thing
First Nation files lawsuit demanding Aboriginal title over lands in western Quebec : r/canada - "How did anyone expect any outcome other than this from truth and reconciliation? You can’t spend 10 years legitimizing ideas of Canadians being thieves with no right to their land and Canada being an illegitimate state built on stolen land without eventually getting to the point that the country collapses entirely as all its territory is handed to 100 different independent groups and eventually a cohesive, albeit evil, country like the US or god forbid Russia swoops in and takes over. This wave of legal challenges about who "owns" Canada means that Canadians have a choice right here right now to decide that we either are a real country or we aren’t. I don’t feel hopeful about what the end result will be"
First Nation files lawsuit demanding Aboriginal title over lands in western Quebec : r/canada - "While this is an unfortunately logical result from the Cowichan case, the precedent it sets coupled with the number of FNs across Canada has turned this country into a playground for foreign interference to make Canada non-functional as a nation."
First Nation files lawsuit demanding Aboriginal title over lands in western Quebec : r/canada - "Reconciliation is an industry at this point. Lawyers are milking this for beyond it's worth. I wonder how much of the total reconciliation payouts have been given to lawyers."
"Any time there’s a goodwill service or program people will inherently exploit it. Typically, companies or government step in and put additional safeguards so that doesn’t happen again. What makes these cases special is that it involves indigenous communities. And based on the current state of things, if the government even sneezes the wrong way, there will be at least one person who will find it racist lol. It will be interesting to see how the government AND Canadians handle this as it can easily spiral out of control. And before anyone says anything, no I’m not saying only indigenous people are exploiting this. It’s the lawyers and the firms representing the indigenous communities."
First Nation files lawsuit demanding Aboriginal title over lands in western Quebec : r/canada - "This land owner interviewed at the Richmond, BC town hall meeting that just occurred regarding this issue is saying that his mortgage provider is not renewing his mortgage because he does not legally own the title to his property."
"So if you stop paying the mortgage and don’t renew what happens? The bank can’t repo a property they don’t own"
First Nation files lawsuit demanding Aboriginal title over lands in western Quebec : r/canada - "Same thing in New Brunswick They want half the province and all of the hydro dam ownership https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/river-and-reconciliation-at-heart-of-wolastoqey-nation-s-historic-title-case-1.7646625 The Wolastoqey Nation in New Brunswick is entering its fifth year of litigation against the province, seeking recognition of Aboriginal title to more than half the land in New Brunswick. The Nation maintains that it never surrendered title of its ancestral lands and waters when it signed the Peace and Friendship Treaties with the British Crown in the 18th century."
B.C. cedes much of Nuchatlitz provincial park to Nuchatlaht First Nation - The Globe and Mail - "The B.C. government has quietly ceded control of a large portion of a provincial park off the west coast of Vancouver Island, in response to a precedent-setting court ruling on an Indigenous land claim. Public access to parts of Nuchatlitz Park is no longer assured, after the B.C. Supreme Court declared last year that the Nuchatlaht, a First Nation with 180 members, has proved Aboriginal title to 1,140 hectares of land on the north end of Nootka Island. The remnants of the park are not marked, and the province says it is up to visitors to ensure they are not trespassing. Kayakers and recreational boaters are only just learning, through word-of-mouth, that the popular destination is no longer public land. Meanwhile, the First Nation is building a road through the former parkland for its members. The lawyer for the Nuchatlaht says it is the first time parkland has been included in a title ruling from the courts... While he supports the Nuchatlaht people in asserting their Aboriginal title, Mr. Devault said the province should have negotiated some protections. “We have entrusted the government to save those parks for everybody, for the future, not only humans, but for the environment. And so it’s a betrayal.” The NDP government has committed to reconciliation with First Nations. Last year, it signed a groundbreaking agreement to recognize that the Haida Nation has Aboriginal title to all one million hectares of the Haida Gwaii archipelago. It has also agreed to temporary close the popular Joffre Lakes Park near Pemberton for parts of this summer, at the request of the Lil’wat and N’Quatqua First Nations... The province still promotes Nuchatliz Park as a destination for wilderness camping... Jack Woodward, the lawyer who represented the Nuchatlaht, said that the courts have set a precedent establishing that Aboriginal title can supersede park protections on Crown land... Jacinthe Goulet, a spokesperson for Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada, said there are no Aboriginal title lands outside of British Columbia, although there is active title litigation across Canada... Thomas Isaac, an expert in Aboriginal law at the Vancouver law firm Cassels, said the province has legislative tools to protect the park, but is not using them. “The legislative objective of protecting the environment can justifiably infringe an Aboriginal right, including title,” he said. “The government is negligent, asleep on the job. The Nuchatlaht is not responsible for the public interest‚“ he said, adding that it’s up to governments to balance Indigenous interests with those of the wider public. Several environmental organizations supported the First Nation in its court battle. “Colonial governments and corporations have degraded the splendour of Nootka Island,” the Wilderness Committee wrote in a 2022 report about to the case."
Public parks aren't for everyone, after all.
If indigenous people ruin the wilderness, it's the fault of colonialism, of course
Push for Richmond property tax reassessments amid uncertainty around Cowichan case - "A group of Richmond property owners has launched a campaign to reassess their property taxes amid the uncertainty surrounding the Cowichan court ruling. “In fairness, I think it would be hard to argue that these properties have not had their values affected by this decision,” Paul Sullivan, principal and practice leader of advocacy and tax policy for Canada at Ryan Tax Firm, told Global News. “And since value is used to collect property taxes, it would be only fair for us as tax agents to represent as many of them as possible in a mass property tax appeal and at least do something for them by lowering their property taxes through an appeal of the value.”... Most of the properties within the 5.7 square kilometres of land are commercial and industrial but there are about 150 residential properties. Sullivan said they will be reaching out to everyone affected. “Taxation in British Columbia is so high now,” he said. “With the additional school tax over $3 million, residential tax rates really aren’t that far off of commercial tax rates anymore. You know, if you happen to have vacant land, maybe you’re also dealing with speculation and vacancy tax. So all of these things are based off of assessed values, and it seems unfair that people should be paying the same level of taxation when they don’t even know what their property rights are anymore.”... Any privately-held properties would only be affected once they’re sold, lawyers for the First Nations have said, though it remains unclear what the impact could be on future sales of those properties. The ruling, however, declared fee simple titles held by the Crown and the City of Richmond invalid under Aboriginal title, leading to the overall confusion."
Bruce Pardy: Courts and governments caused B.C.’s property crisis. They’re not about to fix it - "Courts and governments have caused this problem. The framers of Canada’s new constitution, adopted in 1982, excluded rights to private property. But at the last hour , they guaranteed existing Aboriginal rights and title. Over decades, the Supreme Court of Canada has expanded the scope of those rights. The recent decision about Richmond is a culmination of its work... It’s not just the courts. In 2015, the Trudeau government agreed to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ( UNDRIP ). UNDRIP says that Aboriginal groups have the right to own, use, develop and control any lands that they traditionally occupied or used. In 2019, the B.C. legislature incorporated UNDRIP into BC law. Known as DRIPA , the statute requires B.C. law to be consistent with UNDRIP. The NDP government has been granting Aboriginal title and control across the province accordingly. What can be done? The Canadian constitution has an onerous amending formula. Repealing the section on Aboriginal rights would be next to impossible. So would adding private property guarantees to the Charter. But last week, Dwight Newman, professor of law at the University of Saskatchewan, suggested an alternative in the Post. Rather than attempt wholesale change, he proposed an amendment specific to British Columbia. Section 43 is one of the ways to amend the Canadian constitution. It allows changes “in relation to any provision that applies to one or more, but not all, provinces.”... Even if Section 43 could be used to fix the property mess, it requires both the province and Ottawa to act. In addition, B.C. legislation requires that such changes be first approved by referendum. The B.C. and federal governments have helped to cause the crisis and continue to do so. They seem intent on undermining the system of land tenure in their own society. They are not likely to disrupt the constitution to frustrate their own work. Moreover, there are other, simpler places to begin. The federal government could reverse its support for UNDRIP. The B.C. legislature could repeal DRIPA. Neither sitting government will do that. Few political actors will step out of line on Aboriginal questions, even to defend the country’s land, economy, and people. Will we discover whether there is anything more Canadian, after all, than acquiescence? In Canada, truth and reconciliation has morphed into fiction and capitulation. Canada’s property crisis runs deep, and not just in B.C. Aboriginal rights are widely regarded as the natural and proper order of things. Special status for Aboriginal people is deeply ingrained in Canadian culture as well as the constitution. But it is dead wrong. Legal rights should not depend on lineage or group affiliation. Everyone born in Canada is native to the place. In a free country, laws apply not to distinctive peoples, but to individual people and their private property."
Too bad left wingers love a caste system
