Container Port issue plays out in the Vancouver Papers

It would appear that our twenty four days of February won’t be quiet ones, as the Federal Government decides what approach they will take to the challenge by Northwest First Nations to the container port project.

Earlier this week the First Nations said they would engage in a bit of breathing room on the issue, allowing the new government of Stephen Harper to study the situation with a bit more depth. They stated that they would not proceed with their planned court challenge to the project until the 24th of February, and with that, the issue which tends to get everyone emotional in the area, was allowed to cool off a bit.

However, an editorial in the Vancouver Sun on January 26th, and a rebuttal to it from the Metlakatla and Lax Kw’alaams band councils has brought the issue back to the front pages and has once again become the main conversation topic in Prince Rupert.

Here at the Podunk, we’ll endeavour to track down both the source editorial and the rebuttal for inclusion in their original form on our blog. Until then we leave you to your reading of our Podunkicized version of today’s headline from the Daily News.

BANDS LAY OUT PORT STANCE
By Leanne Ritchie
The Daily News
Thursday, February 2, 2006
Story appeared on pages 1 and 3

The Metlakatla and Lax Kw’alaams band councils fired back yesterday in a letter to the Vancouver Sun after an editorial in the newspaper alleged the bands were “playing high stakes poker” with the container port.

In the Jan 26 editorial, the Sun writes: “The bands have filed a notice of application in Federal Court against the federal transport minister and the attorney-general, alleging that Ottawa has failed to consult and accommodate them in the first phase of the project….

“The allegation that the federal government has failed to consult with the Lax Kw’alaams and Metlakatla seems disingenuous. There were exchanges of letters between former transport minister Jean Lapierre and his department officials, who responded to the bands within a reasonable time frame and invited them to meet.

“Even (Gary) Reece admits they met with federal and port authority officials; it’s just that the bands didn’t get what they wanted. What they want is a share of revenues from the container port, in which they have no financial interest.

“So this confrontation isn’t about consultation, or fairness or respect. It’s a negotiation over money.”

The editorial goes on to define the bands’ position as one of “if they don’t get what they want, nobody will get anything.”

The Sun’s editorial concludes that “The Court should refuse to hear this case and move the matter quickly into arbitration to obtain a reasonable settlement without delaying a project that promises to improve the economic prospects of everyone in the region including First Nations.”

However, yesterday, Gary Reece, chief counselor for Lax Kw’alaams and Harold Leighton, chief councilor for Metlakatla, responded in a letter by saying the editorial suggests they should just sit idly by while “while our rights and title are ignored yet again, in the larger interest of regional development for everyone else.”

“Two hundred years ago (and for thousands of years before that) the Prince Rupert harbour area was an area of bustling population, commerce and culture.

“It was home to the 10 villages of the tribes of the Coast Tsimshian peoples, who now compose the Lax Kw’alaams and Metlakatla Bands. We had a highly developed commercial base and a legal system that recognized property ownership throughout the area.

“When the Europeans came, we were pushed aside, and our property was converted to various economic uses, without compensation or recognition of our rights.

“Our reserves were pushed to outlying areas, and we have largely been left out of the various booms in the regional economy, although we constitute almost 40 per cent of the population.

“We believe that “reconciliation” of aboriginal title with provincial and federal government economic objectives requires us to work together. We are willing to do so. We have tried to negotiate. But Ottawa has delayed, avoided and finally denied our rights” they write.

They say it’s hard to negotiate with people who deny that there is anything of substance to negotiate, but claim the right to proceed anyway.

“We are disempowered in this process,” they said.

The federal government is refusing to acknowledge their claim over anything but the .72 hectares of new dock, arguing they’ve already given up their claim on the part of Fairview which was built in the 1960’s.

“The Supreme Court of Canada confirmed the existence of aboriginal title (Delgamuukw, 1997) – aboriginal peoples hold title to the lands that were possessed under their laws at the time of colonization – and in 2004 the court (in Haida), directed that where treaties don’t yet exist, accommodation should be negotiated before the Crown may proceed with new development,” they said.

“The Crown ‘acting honourably cannot, cavalierly run roughshod over aboriginal interests,’ Our property rights are no longer only moral issues; they are legal ones.

“Despite this change in the laws, the federal government has been slow to react. The process of denial continues. It is the Crown who is playing brinkmanship – “high stakes poker” as the editorial puts it – by denying our rights, offering us little, and then leaving us with no other option but to turn to the courts.”

They go on to say they have not shared equally in economic development in the region over the past 150 years.

“Property values have risen 25 per cent in Prince Rupert since the port proposal, but few of our members own property (and our members in Prince Rupert must now pay higher rents)”

“We won’t get a fair share of jobs – the International Longshore and Warehouse Union insists that all jobs are tied up with “seniority” – and unlike other governments, we don’t have the right to collect property tax on the new wealth, nor income tax on new jobs and businesses, nor resource royalties and sales tax.”

They say they are simply seeking “a fair share of the economic opportunity.”

“We need land to build businesses, a share of new revenues created, or some economic benefit to offset more losses in our traditional lands and our traditional way of life

“This does not seem unreasonable to us. This port’s own study estimates benefits to Canada and B. C. of $2.7 billion and $1.4 billion respectively.

“We will see almost none of that, unless changes are made for us.”

Ultimately, they conclude they are not opposed to economic development, “nor to seeing our neighbours prosper” but they cannot accept a denial of their legal title.

“When property rights are at stake in Canadian law, there are mechanisms to protect them and the Supreme Court of Canada has extended such mechanisms to First Nations. We want nothing more than to be treated fairly and lawfully,” they wrote.
“The new federal government has a chance to get this project moving, and to establish respect for First Nations’ existing legal rights. We look forward to a better relationship.”