LILLEY: Who owns Vancouver after agreement with Musqueam Indian Band?

· Toronto Sun

Has the Mark Carney government handed the ownership of all of Vancouver and much of the surrounding area to the Musqueam Indian Band?

Based on the language in a government news release issued nearly two weeks ago, that would be a logical assumption.

Visit arroznegro.club for more information.

In an agreement that covered fishing rights, marine management and territorial rights, the federal government used language that has many people wondering what just happened. The news release talks about several agreements, but those agreements weren’t released with the news release.

“(An agreement) recognizes that Musqueam has Aboriginal rights including title within their traditional territory and establishes a framework for incremental implementation of rights and nation-to-nation relations with Canada,” said the news release .

At another point, the news release quotes Musqueam Chief Wayne Sparrow asserting title and right to their traditional land and saying the federal government agrees with them.

“In signing these agreements, the government of Canada is acknowledging Musqueam’s Aboriginal title and rights to our traditional territory and recognizing our expertise in both marine management and fisheries management,” Sparrow said.

Agreements a source of confusion

In common law, having right and title to a piece of land denotes ownership.

Between the government statement and the quote in the news release from Sparrow, anyone with any understanding of the way the law works in Canada would be forgiven for thinking the federal government just signed an agreement to grant ownership of all of Vancouver and the surrounding area to the Musqueam Indian Band.

Think of what that would mean for homeowners in the area, for business owners who are concerned about their own right and title to the land they paid for and perhaps what this means for the mortgage they still have on their land.

In light of the Cowichan Tribes v. Canada court case, where a court granted right and title to a different band, that’s not a crazy concern. Already, homeowners in that area are fearful they won’t get their mortgages renewed while ownership is in question.

A big part of the problem is that the Carney government issued this news release about the agreements, but didn’t release the details of the agreements. That leaves everyone looking for more and wondering what it really means.

RECOMMENDED VIDEO

Deals ‘do not impact private property,’ minister says

The federal minister of Crown-Indigenous relations took to social media to say the agreements won’t impact ownership.

“These agreements do not impact private property,” Rebecca Alty said in a post on X.

“This is preferred to the more uncertain alternative of determining Musqueam’s Aboriginal title through the courts. By negotiating, we are able to uphold existing property rights and advance reconciliation.”

In a statement released on Monday, Sparrow said that in his view, the agreements were not about land ownership.

“Musqueam is not coming for anyone’s private property. Our approach to traditional unceded territory is one of partnership and relationship with our neighbours, not trying to take away our neighbours’ private property,” Sparrow said .

The problem is that in choosing to use the term rights and title, the federal government has implied ownership. The 31-page agreement tries to define right and title on page 13 of the agreement.

“’Rights and Title’ means the existing Aboriginal and treaty rights recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and, for greater certainty, includes Aboriginal title and self-government rights,” the document says .

Home, landowners should be concerned

Throughout the document there are several very blunt statements including in section 2.1, which states: “The purposes of this agreement are to: (a) recognize Musqueam’s Rights and Title within Musqueam Territory; (b) demonstrate progress in incrementally implementing Musqueam’s Rights and Title.”

The document goes on to describe how the agreement will honour Musqueam legal tradition and the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This document, the way it is written, should be of concern to every single homeowner and property owner in Vancouver, West Vancouver, West Burnaby, Richmond and Delta.

Any lawyer worth their salt could gently open up what this agreement says to mean much more than what Sparrow said it does. The words in the agreement go much further and given the nature of our activist courts, this is a major concern for any property owner in British Columbia.

Now, B.C. is different than most of the rest of the country given that there are next to no treaties covering B.C. and much of the province is claimed by one band or another. That isn’t the case in the rest of Canada, where for the most part treaties are long established.

The Carney government said they are trying to provide certainty with this agreement; they may have opened a brand new can of worms.

Read full story at source