" As has been repeatedly pointed out, the Tsawwassen First Nation have a memorandum of agreement with Deltaport to permit the use lands within their traditional territory for port expansion. And yes, they will be paid for the use of that land. And yes, that land is in within the agricultural land reserve. But what is not mentioned is that all of these things would happen regardless of the ratification of the treaty."

Very good point...

Don seems to be setting up the straw man here in order to knock it down.

The fact is that if the BC Liberal government had attempted to remove prime farmland from the Agricultural Land Reserve for Deltaport expansion all hell would have broken loose.

What the did instead is use the Tsawwassen First Nation's treaty as a way of avoiding the potential political disaster of unilaterally over-riding the ALR to get that land.

To say "the BC Liberals were going to do it anyway" has no bearing on the current issue of the Tsawwassen Treaty wrongly excluding farmland from the ALR. That is a hypothetical situation.

I also strongly disagree that continuing to support the long-held principle of preserving farmland that the NDP government of Dave Barrett legislated in BC somehow means one wants to perpetuate aboriginal inequality.

There were and are alternatives to paving farmland in order to create income and jobs for the Tsawwassen First Nation. The BC Liberals have refused to pursue those alternatives and have so far successfully convinced many people who should know better that those alternatives don't even exist.

Don Anderson makes an interesting point, if I understand him correctly. I believe he is making the same point that Mike Harcourt did at a forum at SFU last month sponsored by the SFU Cities program. He said it was a myth that this was farmland, which I took to mean that while it is in fact growing crops at this minute, and has been for a century or so, it was designated as port development land by the Govt of BC in the 1960s when WAC Bennett expropriated it.

And from that one may infer that the BC Govt could, at any time, remove it from the ALR without going through a Commission hearing process by declaring this to be a move needed for economic development purposes.

However, people would be within their rights in opposing such a move on the grounds that the relative needs of port development and agricultural preservation have changed since the 1960s, and that there are unused industrial lands around Vancouver that some want to convert to residential that could serve as container yards.

Anderson's demand that everyone put their motivations face up on the table is one I agree with. So, Don, ... what's your's???

Finally, a progressive who will speak on the issue without wrapping him in the usual holier-than-thou paternalism that continues to cloud judgement of anything Aboriginal in BC.

It's frankly amazing, no absolutely startling that BC's Aboriginals have managed to live here for millenia without the advice of those who claim to know what's best for them.

There is green space all over the lower mainland that could be captured (or recaptured) as agri-lands if the will is there.

Better that, rather than continuing to insist that Aboriginals, who have never ceded any of the lands they are now finally getting clear title to, be restricted on their use of their lands.

Perhaps, if opponents put as much energy into halting the spread of blacktop more farmland would be available or does the right of someone from Delta or WhiteRock to cruise solo into Vancouver daily and back trump everything else?

bleedingheart, I know this is a complete waste of time, but what on earth are you talking about?

bleedingheart, I know this is a complete waste of time, but what on earth are you talking about?

It may be expedient for political folks to dismiss all criticism as paternalistic or anti-treaty but the impression I get is that neither the Liberals nor NDP leaders--cowards both--are willing to confront and publicly debate the real issues here, which have nothing to do with the Tsawassen FN and everything to do with sustainable development -- i.e. the loss of agricultural lands/integrity of ALR and the wisdom of the whole Gateway/port expansion plan in the context of our supposed commitment to take action on climate change.

Most people seem to support a fair settlement for the Tsawassen, so let's assume for a moment that giving them the 207 hectares of farmland for transfer to port development was the only sensible way to do that. Principles of sustainable development therefore suggest that both Liberals and NDP have a duty to find another 207 acres of industrial land somewhere else to put back into the ALR or else to explain to the public why it's OK to give up good farmland despite the need to feed an ever-expanding Lr Mainland population--especially one that will have to rely increasingly on food grown close to home when a diet based on foods shipped halfway around the world becomes unaffordable.

The Liberals also have to explain how the whole Deltaport expansion/Gateway thing is consistent with the need to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But they're unlikely to do that unless the NDP finds the guts to function like a real Opposition and actually ask the questions. If they won't, perhaps some new Green MLAs will...