December 11, 2001
Kamloops Daily News


"It will be politically binding," but "it won't necessarily
be legally binding."  That's what Attorney General Geoff
Plant had to say about  his government's referendum on
B.C.'s native land claims.

Let me translate that into plainspeak.   To suggest that the
results of a referendum are politically binding is like
suggesting that the results of a opinion poll are
politically binding.  They are binding only to the extent
that the government wants to listen to them.

To say that the results of a referendum are not legally
binding is unnecessary, except to dispel notions that some
voters may have that we live in a direct democracy.  Ours is
a parliamentary democracy based on representation.   The
government has the legal duty and responsibility to govern,
not voters.  This includes making laws.

If the results of the referendum are not politically or
legally binding, why spend $9 million to hold it?   Because
the B.C. Liberals made the referendum such a big issue in
the last election, that's why.   They are determined to hold
this referendum come hell or high water.  

Referendum on not, there are good reasons to resolve
legitimate native  land claims.  Lost revenue due to
uncertainty of land claims costs our province an estimated
$1 billion annually.  Sun Peaks alone lost about $1 million
in potential development during the Neskonlith protests
during the Much Music televising of their festival.

And the treaty process in B.C. seems to be going nowhere. 
Provincial and native representatives have invested half a
billion dollars in research and negotiations in the last
decade with nothing to show.  Exactly zero agreements have
been concluded.   Well OK, one agreement in principle has
been reached, but the Sechelt Nation has decided to shelve
it in favour of litigation.

A referendum will muddy the waters, not make them clearer. 
Despite what John Les, chair of the government's Aboriginal
Affairs Committee, says.  "We have been extremely clear
right from day one this is not a referendum on aboriginal
rights,"  Aboriginal rights are already entrenched in the
constitution, he adds.

Aboriginal rights may be clear in chairman Les's mind.  But
many British Columbians will see the referendum not only as
a vote on aboriginal rights but as a way of chastising
natives.  "The natives are acting like a bunch of spoiled
children," says E.A.  Drinkwater of Kamloops in his letter
to the editor (November 3, 2000).  "It's long past time they
quit their crying and joined the rest of society,"
Drinkwater continues.

What if the mocassin were on the other foot?  What if B.C.'s
natives had held a referendum on the "immigration problems"
they faced in 1871, when British Columbia joined Canada?  At
that time natives outnumbered immigrants.

One question might have been "Should immigrants be allowed
to own  land contrary to our tradition of communal
ownership?"   Others might have been "Should immigration be
limited to ensure that they are always in a minority?" and 
"Should immigrants be placed on reserves of land for their
own protection and to preserve our environment and natural
resources?"

It didn't happen that way.   The immigrants unwittingly
released a biological terror -- smallpox and other viral
diseases -- on natives, decimating their population.  The
immigrants proceeded to dismantle Indian society through the
Indian Act of 1876 in which Potlatchs and Sun Dances were
outlawed. 

Most importantly, the immigrants  brought the concept of
land ownership and free trade.   If Indians would just sell
their land, trap as many beavers as possible, kill so much
game that they would become extinct, everyone would be
better off.   As we know from the promises of modern free
trade, it's just colonialism by another name.

The song of colonizers is always the same, although the tune
may change.   Today's version of song is called
globalization.  "Dismantle your social programs and we will
wipe every tear from your eye," croons the World Bank to
third world countries.  "Sell your goods at the lowest price
and you will prosper," they serenade.

Since the B.C. Liberals are so keen on privatization, let
them contract a polling firm to conduct a survey on native
land claims.  A privately run opinion poll could save us a
lot of time and money.  And it would have as much legal and
political weight as a referendum.

go back to my Columns in the