Lots of internal politics in the band. Good luck.

Everything is based on honesty, integrity and truth. If any of them are missing, or in question, it's difficult to move on. Chester

Perhaps everyone who gets upset at the results after the next federal election can have a meeting and if we don't like or agree with who won, we can just have another election. Simple, eh? First Nations democracy different? Jest wunderin'.

Misconceptions about the treaty? Could that be the same as misconceptions about our politicians too? I want another vote if I don't like the results of any next election. Of course if I wait four years again and get my numbers up, I can change the course. I also like the word "speculation". By who or how many? Also looks like if they had a proper "process", they wouldn't be re-visiting this thing. Lots of things, eh? Are they gonna vote again to see if they should vote again? Talk about perpetual motion.

Money, money, money, money!

This isn't some weird First Nations perversion of democracy. It is perfectly normal for the same issue to be considered more than once. It is not uncommon for Parliament or the Legislative Assembly to take up an issue several times over a period of years before enough of a consensus is reached to pass a bill.

Furthermore, in this case there is good evidence, from things that opponents of the treaty have said, that some opposition was due to misunderstanding. It is entirely reasonable to vote again after making sure that everyone is clear on the pros and cons.

@billposter:

"...that some opposition was due to misunderstanding."

Isn't ALL opposition dut to "misunderstanding" from the perspecitve of the proponents?

Of course it's entirely reasonable to vote again after making sure that everyone is clear on the pros and cons, and be clear we mean "see more pros than cons."

hey people ...... remember STV????? it was voted donw the last time ...!!!!

Guess what .... some thought it should have been accepted because it was so close .....

Some sort of misconception?????

Guess what .... it's going to be on the ballot again next election......

The First Nations learn fast how white society works .. ..

You people obviosuly don't since you are so biggoted!!!!!!!

Good for us ... but not good for them, eh?????

How about the Dyno Nobel plant in Crescent Spur. The Board seemed to be for it...... then, a few months later, it was turned down by the RDFFG ..... why? What happened? Some sort of misconception in the first go around .... ????

This happens so often in our society when it comes to contracts, aggreements, etc ...

This is not a vote for people to represent anyone. It is a treaty, a contract, an understanding. If you haven't read the treaty, the contract, the understanding and someone gives you a twisted view of it when you are asked to cast your vote, why shouldn't you have another go at it? It happens to us and it happens to them.

Unless you can back up your statements in regards to someone giving a twisted view of the facts before the vote Owl you are just making noises.

You and many others know full well that if this motion had passed with the same percentage,no one would, under any conditions have allowed a revote. It is only when vested interests do not get their way, that we have to revisit the situation.

We had this kind of interference in the Teresan Gas issue, and we are presently in the process of getting it from the PAC People.

Get IPG to get the issue going. Set up an ex councillor to head up a committee. Go through the community and sign up people to join the Society, use City money and personal to advance your cause, and then when you get everything in place, have a referendum on the borrowing, and get all you hangers on people to vote to borrow the money, and you have just subverted democracy.

City Hall is supposed to have a hands off policy when it comes to these kinds of issue, however it seems that they just ignore it and go ahead full steam. They also work closely with other (puppet) organizations in the City to advance their causes.

Same thing applied to the Cameron St. Bridge, 5500 signatures required to stop the borrowing, however only 300 (Vested Interest) signatures to get all levels of Government to reconsider the electorial boundries.

Do you see a pattern. I could give more examples, over the years but it is just a waste of time. As long as people in this town insist on follwing on the heels of the Pied Piper, taking tax dollars and spending them foolishly we basically have nothing.

You had a perfect example of Vote Buying this week-end. Money being thrown all over the place, people dancing in the streets, shaking each others hands, crying, and generally having a good time. However at the end of the day these things have to be paid for, and thats when that time worn phrase **It seemed like a good idea at the time** comes into play.

There is fiscal responsibility and there is fiscal irresponsibility. I beleive that we are deep into the latter in this City. We still have huge expenditures on the drawing board in addition to those announced this week-end.

At the same time. Downtown bathroom facilities for people are ignored, even though everyone in this City knows it is a serious health hazard.

Garbage rates increased.
Taxes increased.
Snivilling cheap (almost good for nothing) paving program.
Swap Shop closed down
Rate at Transfer Station increased from $2.00 to $4.00
Unable to negotiate a five year contract with Pine Valley Golf. What is that all about. Does the City want this property to sell to developers. Will they also sell the Playhouse Theatre.

Is anyone minding the store.

All these problems stated above will be completely obliterated and/or ignored when the next municipal election comes along. I have a conspiracy theory that city hall puts something in the water to make us forget all these mistakes, blunders, tax increases, stupid rubber stamping decisions, etc. When the polls open.

"Unless you can back up your statements in regards to someone giving a twisted view of the facts before the vote Owl you are just making noises."

So, I am just making noises about the STV? ... Why in the heck should I have to bow to your condition of twisted fact? ... Twisted fact is a matter of personal opinion, even if it were to be a condition precedent.

So, then I decide to skim over the rest of your ramblings Palopu and it is the same soapbox stuff you always bring out every opportunity you have .....

If you know how things get by the public, what is your favourite project and how would you get it past the public? And, why haven't you?

• "Get IPG to get the issue going.”

The issue was started back in the mid 1960’s when the community arts council wanted to build an 1100 seat PAC, similar to the one built in Kelowna at about the same time. It last reared its head when it was mentioned in the Harris report for marketing Prince George and more specifically the downtown part of the City. I would say it is quite reasonable for IPOG to follow up on that report to see if they wanted to get it implemented.

• “Set up an ex councillor to head up a committee.”

As far as I understand he was one of 13 selected by about 50 or so people who shoed an interest after an initial meeting. As far as I know, he was selected by the 13 or so probably because he was just finishing with the sports centre project. Where is the set up?

• “Go through the community and sign up people to join the Society”
And the problem you have with this? What group of people who wish to get something accomplished don’t try to get others of similar interests to back them? It seems to me that is a common method unless one is in a dictatorship.

• “use City money and personal to advance your cause”

It will be a City facility if it gets built. Why should private money support something that will be a public building?

• “and then when you get everything in place, have a referendum on the borrowing, and get all you hangers on people to vote to borrow the money”

Now comes the big problem, doesn’t it? So far, it has gone to referendum twice, both times not from the point of view of whether the PAC should be built, but what should be built first.

• “and you have just subverted democracy."

????? after having a referendum and winning it, democracy has been subverted? How can that be? Just as the provincial taxpayers paid to have public hearings on the STV process, and then there was a referendum, which the taxpayer also paid for, a similar process of the taxpayer funding a study so that a question can be properly put in front of the people is used in most instances.

However, if you think democracy has been subverted if the referendum results in a vote that you do not agree with, then I would have to argue that democracy would also be subverted if the vote supported your opinion, such as the last time the question was posed to the people and the PAC came out at the bottom of the list.

Of course, this is all off topic, so let’s just ignore it…..

;-)