When the Nisga'a Treaty was first put forward, during the Premiership of Glen Clark, the fisheries and other measures were lambasted by BC Liberals, and by some of the national CBC Liberals, as "race-based" privileges.

Now the Liberals say they are defending Aboriginal interests against Conservative incursions. Liberals like Terry Glavin, since the last federal election, have been making the case that Aboriginal voters in BC must take direction from their leaders and vote Liberal. An NDP vote is a vote for the dreaded Tories. It's a "vote strategic" pitch for the Aboriginal market, and with Harper's help it's going to have some legs.

But please, make no mistake. This is not about fisheries resource management or even about Aboriginal economic development on either side, though those objectives may well be impacted. It's about party politics, electoral politics. About importing the enire Red/Blue stuff to Canada with the colour scheme somewhat reversed.

Hi Budd,

I don't write on Provincial politics and this post is in keeping with that principle. Keep that in mind as you read what is below. Aboriginal concerns and rights are a federal-treaty issue.

Provincial governments have found out repeatedly that they do not have jurisdictional authority to sign treaties with aboriginals. Even the Nisga Treaty is on shaky ground as provincial authority does not apply over treaties with aboriginals. These issues are federal.

The ultra-right's attempt (Tom Flanagan and Steve Harper) to relegate aboriginal issues to the status of a municipality (which is merely a delegated jurisdiction under provincial authority) is not legal nor possible under either the Canadian constitution nor treaty law.

Clark's NDP government never quite got the above point and the Nisga treaty is not as solid as you seem to think. The Campbell government was educated (see my Times Colonist Editorial � aboriginal territories are principalities not municipalities). The Campbell provincial government rightly reversed itself on its position on aboriginal jurisdictional rights and now *seems* to recognize that any attempt to resolve provincial issues with aboriginal communities must involved a federal treaty (or at least a federal negotiated settlement).

Unfortunately, we currently have a federal government that does not understand (because of a bigoted attitude towards treaty rights, constitutional law, and historical president in general) that aboriginal jurisdictions exist on-par with the federal government, which require treaties and federally negotiated settlements in order to resolved disputes.

Aboriginal hunting and fishing rights (including both status �Indians� and Metis) exits under constitutionals law and treaty law. Steve Harper�s attempt to reverse this is in direct contradiction to numerous provincial, federal, and Supreme Court decisions on this issue. The supreme court of Canada has already repeatedly ruled on this issue and the CPC�s position can only be called ignorant or bigoted � or both.

Really, Eugene, I don't think you know what you're talking about.

Aboriginal and treaty matters may be federal. But without provincial participation in lands, resources, and property matters it's not really possible to conclude effective treaties.

As for the politics, I think you might have a point that Harper, and guys like Randy Kamp, by attacking the Aboriginal commercial fishery (a policy innovation of the Mulroney Tories, remember) are playing to the white people in pickups. Just as the Terry Glavin Liberals are playing to the Native vote. It's all electoral politics all the time.

Budd writes: "Aboriginal and treaty matters may be federal. But without provincial participation in lands, resources, and property matters it's not really possible to conclude effective treaties."

You should take a look at most municipal maps... say Langford’s or sannich's. Where the aboriginal land begins (even without treaty), the maps show a "hole" i.e. not under provincial jurisdiction.

Generally land and resources are under provincial jurisdiction - sort of. However, only sort. And in the case of aboriginal title, the province does not have jurisdiction in the first place so the situation is out of the province’s control. Generally, both BC court’s and the Supreme Court rule that the province does not jurisdiction - in favour of both the feds and aboriginals. For example, the resent fishing ruling was that the feds could uphold frazer valley fishing for aboriginals.

That is why aboriginals can, and pretty much will, do whatever they want with regards to provincial land authority and why the province must go the feds for assistance with grievances. The same holds true across the country and that is why these cases so easily end up with the Supreme Court… these are treaty and federal matters.

Nevertheless, you allude to a good point. Any real solution must work for everyone – including neighbours. Negotiated settlement involving all stakeholders that produces a win-win for all is best. However, one must recognize that aboriginals already have rights, which is an asset to them that they don’t want to lose. They don’t want to lose it just because Steve Harper wants to imagine it away.