OPINION

Canadian Politics: Native Treaty Rights And Land Claims

Written by Richard Marcus
Published June 13, 2007

There's been a lot of talk in Canada recently about the treaty rights of various Native bands across the country. The thing is a lot of people don't really understand what those rights are. They make comments about lazy buggers who get more than they deserve in the first place, or they lost a war so screw them.

Well the problem is that treaty rights in some cases were settlements for losing that war. When nations agreed to terms of surrender with the government of Great Britain, who ruled this land in those days, they were ceded control over certain territories in perpetuity. As the saying says: "As long as the grass is green and the water runs," they were promised full sovereignty over those lands under the Kings and Queens of England.

For some other tribes their lands were given to them as reward for loyalty to England. During the revolutionary war that brought about the birth of the United States, certain members of the Iroquois Nation sided with the British. Chief among them were the Mohawks and the Oneida.

Both nations were given large tracts of land in Southern Ontario to resettle in, as they had to leave their home territories in the United States after the war. As with the treaty rights of other nations in other parts of Canada their new territories were guaranteed to them forever.

Of course this was in the days long before anyone considered the value of what could be under the ground, or that a golf course would work really well there. In the dark ages of Canadian and Native relations, when the federal government was trying to solve the "Indian Problem" by committing cultural genocide with residential schools, they also ignored governments at the provincial and municipal levels developing and selling treaty lands.

Anyone with ready cash was allowed to do whatever they wanted from building gravel pits to housing developments. Trapped on their reservations and kept ignorant of their past through federal policy, most nations had no idea what was being done to them. Occasionally in attempts to make things look kosher, a government would agree to "lease" the land from the nation affected on condition that it would be returned when they were done with it.

But most times they didn't even bother and would just sell it out from under them. Some nations wised up before others. On the West Coast the Niska nation began fighting in the courts for the return of their treaty lands in the 1950's.

By the time they won their case some forty years later in the 1990's they were the proud owners of large chunks of expensive sub-divisions that had been built on their territory illegally. There was a great hue and cry from the right wing about "Indians" throwing people out on the street without having to pay for the houses.

page 1 | 2 | 3
Copy02-11-Richard portrait-72-4x4.jpgRichard Marcus is a long-haired Canadian iconoclast who writes reviews and opines on the world as he sees it at Leap In The Dark and Epic India Magazine.
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Canadian Politics: Native Treaty Rights And Land Claims
Published: June 13, 2007
Type: Opinion
Section: Politics
Filed Under: Culture: History, Culture: Society, Politics: Government, Politics: Law and Rights, Politics: Policy
Part of a feature: Canadian Politics in Review
Writer: Richard Marcus
Richard Marcus's BC Writer page
Richard Marcus's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
Articles in this series
BC articles by Richard Marcus
Culture: History
Culture: Society
Politics: Government
Politics: Law and Rights
Politics: Policy
All Politics Articles
Richard Marcus's personal weblog
All Opinion articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — June 13, 2007 @ 16:40PM — Shawn

You really know how to spin a story to suit your motives, I'll give you that.

The officer at Oka was 'shot', but Dudley George was 'killed'.

Also, all private land in the Nisga treaty remained private and under the juristiction of the provincial government. Only rented Crown land was returned.

This story is so biased it makes me ill.

#2 — June 13, 2007 @ 18:11PM — Zedd

Shawn

I want to understand this issue.

What do you object to.

#3 — June 14, 2007 @ 17:56PM — moonraven

I suppose he objects to having the Canadians look bad.

As a Mohawk, I believe that the article was very subdued.

#4 — June 15, 2007 @ 10:12AM — Shawn

My generation doesn't feel the 'white guilt' that previous generations have. We see the free rides and exceptions that are made for natives and we're tired of it.

By keeping reservations in their 'third world' conditions, more hard-working and abitious natives will leave and integrate into normal Canadian society.

We also have an increasing immigrant population, many of which are minorites. These people won't sympathize with you when they see you taking for granted what they've worked so hard to achieve.

Also, the more inter-racial native marriages there are, the less natives there will be. I have family who are half or one-quarter native. They consider themselves Canadian, the idea that they're 'indians' is laughable to them.

Considering all these factors, the native population will fade into the background and disappear in 50 years. Then we'll all finally be just Canadians.

#5 — June 15, 2007 @ 17:32PM — Zedd

Shawn

I sense that you think that being Canadian is superior to being and living as a Native North American.

Also, KNOW that your cousins are embarrassed of the native heritage. Mainly because of attitudes such as yours. Also KNOW that some of them will grow out of it and embrace, respect and revere their Native heritage. It is who they are.

You see, there is an entire world that you are ignorant of. You don't have a conception of their world just an opinion (one which has no substance). It is you who are at a deficit because of your ignorance about Native people.

#6 — January 15, 2008 @ 21:26PM — Mike

Yes well, the only issue I have with this is that none of the "natives" I know, and I know alot... would benefit one bit from things staying the way they are. Its time to say "times up" catch up with the world or get left behind. I was born here too! I will not tolerate someone my age getting freebies because of who they were born too! I think that blockades and destruction of property should be met with violence and arrest, if they are armed SHOOT THEM. Thats what you would do with any other criminal in Canada. Oh, and Dudley George was no saint, he was a protagonist. If any land I own comes under native "protest" The Dudley George thing will look like jaywalking I can promise you that.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/65194)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments