Treaty Process Put to Test Today
By 250 News
The review of the failed ratification vote on the Lheidli T’enneh Treaty is now in the hands of the Lheidli T’enneh.
A spokesman for the BC Treaty Commission says it will be up to the Lheidli T’enneh to review the material, and make a decision on what their next steps will be.
The review involved discussions with Lheidli T’enneh leaders, both elected and those recognized by members of the community to find out what convinced them to vote against the treaty in March of this year.
The review was delivered on the eve of the Tsawwassen Nation's vote on its negotiated treaty. The results of the vote today, could have a major impact on the treaty process throughout the province.
Finlay Sinclair of the Regional District of Fraser Fort George was very involved in the negotiations with the Lheidli T’enneh and says the Tsawwassen vote is being watched very closely. “The impact will be huge” says Sinclair “The Tsawwassen vote will be seen by some as a statement on the success of First Nations negotiations.”
If the treaty is rejected , it would be second final agreement to be rejected in less than 6 months and will likely bring into question the entire treaty process.
The province has 47 negotiations underway.
There are some who were involved in the treaty process in Prince George with the Lheidli T’enneh who are hopeful the band can find a way to revisit the treaty that was developed. To that end, the Regional District and the City of Prince George have written letters to the Federal and Provincial Governments requesting the lands negotiated as part of the treaty settlement be held for a time.
In a letter to P.G. Mayor Colin Kinsley, Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation Mike de Jong says the Province will work with the Federal Government “in the interest of ensuring that the commitments in the Final Agreement including the land package will be maintained until March 31, 2008.”
Following the rejection of the Lheidli T’enneh Treaty, (former Premier) B.C. Treaty Commissioner Mike Harcourt, wrote an opinion-editorial piece which concluded:
“Treaty making is troubled – it always has been – but not in trouble. There are compelling historic, legal, economic and intergovernmental reasons for treaty making, At the end of the day, the solution lies in negotiating the terms of reconciliation and the options for ongoing recognition.”
Previous Story - Next Story
Email
Print
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Del.icio.usReturn to Home
Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on July 26 2007 7:45 AM
The problem lays in the fact there is no individual ownership of any property. The band is run by the chief and he/she gets to take as much cash as they want, the left overs pass through committes of the chiefs closest friends, and the slim pickings that gets to the band members is not enough to make a living or get ahead. But the band members can always go back to the government for more money.
If the members sign off on a treaty the band members just gave all that money and control to the chief and his friends. Once that bunch has pisses it all away, the members will have nothing. What native in his right mind would agree to that crazy settlement? I certainly would not sign off, never ever!! Not unless I was given personal property and cash that the chief couldn't touch.