First Nations left empty-handed

[chuckChuck]

Are those not all based upon interpretations of interpretations of writing s and deals which were sometimes so unclearly defined that no one knew what they meant? And its still all based on an unproven premis that the land was owned previously is it not?

Which means as I said governments that control the courts that spend millions on deciding these things which wouldn't there be no reason for dispute if it was as clear as wickey makes it look are making these decisions politically and not factually?

Medicine chest until the sun stops shining and rivers stop flowing. There is no sun every night and there isn't a river that hasn't gone dry in Canada since those agreements were made if we were to be technical??? Or not???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsilhqot%27in_Nation_v_British_Columbia
Aboriginal title

The court held that Aboriginal title constitutes a beneficial interest in the land, the underlying control of which is retained by the Crown.[4] Rights conferred by Aboriginal title include the right to decide how the land will be used; to enjoy, occupy and possess the land; and to proactively use and manage the land, including its natural resources.[5] But, the court set out a Sparrow-style mechanism by which the Crown can override Aboriginal title in the public interest:

the Crown must have carried out consultation and accommodation;
the Crown's actions must have been supported by a compelling and substantial objective; and
the Crown's action must have been consistent with its fiduciary obligation to the Aboriginal body in question.[6]

[Guest]

See your all over this one chucky!

Feeling guilt that the environazis are keeping natives repressed!

Keeping them dependant on government, is a political tactic the left uses for natives in Canada and Blacks use in the USA.

this is what's gonna happen to us here, it's started already

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Interesting read.

First nations have been put in a position of having to go after any economic activity and benefits they can find even if they are divided on how to develop and use their lands.

Since all of Canada was essentially owned and occupied by First Nations before European settlement there is strong case to argue that they are entitled to a share of all the resources developed on their former lands not just their reserve and treaty lands. This would certainly help to make them more economically self sufficient.

If you apply that logic here, does it also apply everywhere else in the world, and how do we decide how far back to go? Just for a warm up exercise, lets try to solve the never ending middle east crisis by this method, who were the first people in Uruk 6500 years ago, and how many could lay claim to it in the interim, who were the indigenous people there before the city of Uruk was built? The issue is somewhat more cut and dried here, but what about land claims between tribes, are we to believe that the situation was static from the time the first people crossed the bering straight, until the white men came, and no group can make claims on any others territory, there were no wars of conquest between tribes, no overlap, no slavery, no eradication, or oppression? What happens if new evidence is found that proves "first" nations are actually second or third nations, or that they came from different waves at different times from different ancestors? What constitutes irrefutable evidence of events from 10,000 years ago or much more?

In the increasingly insane world of equality and political correctness, animals are slowly receiving more rights, how long before we need to concede that we stole it from them ( many already consider this to be the case). If you think that is a ridiculous statement, consider how much media attention and police resources are devoted to a poached grizzly bear, compared to the complete lack of both when an indigenous girl goes missing, it sure looks like the bear has more rights. Yet these are the same bleeding hearts who want to protect the bears and claim to stand up for the rights of indigenous people, how hypocritical on both counts.

[blackpowder]

No amount of cash alone will ultimately solve the Natives' problems.
Doesn't anyone know how it works when the patch comes to the reserve?

'Reconciliation' is taking on a forever guilt profile.
Deed them their damn reserves already. Stop being so damn naive!!

[farmaholic]

It is time to move on....

A cousin of mine has attended several school and other functions and part of the opening or closing comments are about thanking Treaty "such and such" for the land and blah blah blah.

Look, I am all for First Nations getting a leg up!! All overdue but I don't want to be held hostage forever!

[ag-boy]

it make no sense all these pay outs to first nation , of course can not blame
them , so lucky the white people came along to look after them very well.
yet our good people here in Canada will share with them .
we are all immigrants here to work together,
our mix of settlers here in Canada, make me a proud Canadian ! best country
in the world ! think about that, and not all bad reading on agrivil !

[fjlip]

No amount of cash alone will ultimately solve the Natives' problems.
Doesn't anyone know how it works when the patch comes to the reserve?

'Reconciliation' is taking on a forever guilt profile.
Deed them their damn reserves already. Stop being so damn naive!!

Totally agree, ownership= responsibility=self reliance=just like everybody else...

Remember Chretien wanted to do that but Turdo the first didn't let it happen...