How the province is moving forward on assistance for the Lytton area has made for some significant debate in the Legislature this week, that as the Provincial government and Minister of Municipal Affairs Josie Osborne steer the legislation of Bill 2 through the Chamber.
Among those raising some questions related to the Bill has been Skeena MLA Ellis Ross, who made note of the process ahead as well as to some areas of concern he has over the timeline of engagement with First Nations in that region of the province.
Towards the current discussion, the Skeena MLA spoke in the late stages of the Monday debate towards Bill 2 and some inconsistencies he believes have been highlighted by the Province's approach to notification of First Nations living in the Lytton area.
I think it was important for the people of Lytton and the First Nations people to understand that this is very specific. It's very focused. It's very isolated, and really doesn't…. It's probably step one probably a ten-step process, from what I can understand. So there is really no real timeline for this. There's no real objectives laid out for this. This doesn't really speak to anything except the idea that a council now will have bylaws related to enforcement, I guess.
But that brings us back to the overarching question that my colleague from Penticton brought up. In terms of this legislation, the minister said that they notified First Nations when my colleague asked: "Was there consultation?" There is a difference between consultation and notification. It's laid out in the courts of B.C. and Canada.
And so In terms of the notification, was it a notification to talk about, "Yes, we have enabling legislation" or was it notification that says: "Yes, we want to start the consultation process on Bill 2, Municipalities Enabling and Validating Amendment Act of 2022?"
While reinforcing his support for the rebuild of the Lytton area, Mr. Ross continued to outline his view of how the province is not following up on its own guidelines on consultation
We all want the village of Lytton to be rebuilt. I'm just trying to see if the government is going to live up not only to the Aboriginal rights and title case law established in the courts of B.C. for the last 40 years but also to their own promises, when they're bringing in new legislation, to ensure that every piece of legislation is in alignment with Aboriginal interests.
I'm not talking about the outcome of this enabling legislation. I'm talking about what the provincial government actually agreed upon when they actually brought this Bill 41 to the House in the first place.
So the question just remains the same. I'm not sure if it's really answered or not. Meaningful consultation means going in and talking to the rightful title holders. It doesn't mean going to a law group or a bunch of advisers, or an advocacy group, or a lobby group and saying: "Do you think we should consult or not, yes or no?"
And if they say no, which is what I'm hearing, then the government has already made a decision on Aboriginal rights and title interests in respect to Bill 2: that it does not need consultation, it just needs notification, which actually contravenes Bill 41, this B.C. government's own bill.
A portion of the debate also focused on how the Provincial measures towards the Lytton actions, with Liberal MLA Michael Lee picking up on the themes of UNDRIP and the confusion that the Liberals suggest is being created through the Lytton focused legislation.
But consultation, collaboration, comanagement, in fact, is all referred to in the way the government is proceeding. So it would be surprising that the government, as it moves forward with addressing the real, urgent need of getting Lytton rebuilt, would take a full six months to notify First Nations.
And again as we've said, notification is not sufficient. It's very concerning — the absence of the action plan, what this government is doing.
26 months to implement UNDRIP, and we're still talking and wasting time in this chamber trying to get clarity from ministers on that side of the House as to how they're dealing with implementing UNDRIP.
This is what we're left with. It's very frustrating, certainly, for us and for the residents of Lytton. We need to get clarity. This is why we're spending the time here.
Towards a reply for the range of questions on the afternoon, the Minister provided much the same commentary, though with a few variations to each of the questions presented.
As provided in a previous answer, the Indigenous law group did review this specific set of amendments. These are very narrow in scope, affecting the corporation of the village of Lytton, required to provide that legal certainty to be able to rebuild the full suite of bylaws for their strong governance and operations of a centre in a region that services many, many people. It was the determination that notification was the appropriate method.
The debate towards those themes and more on the Lytton rebuild plans will continue this week.
The Monday debate can be explored further from the transcript of the Legislature Minutes here, as well you can view the discussion in the Chamber
from the Video Archive page.
Mr Ross followed up on his appearance in the Legislature with as social media note Monday evening, towards the topic of consultation and how he views the way the government is making use of the UNDRIP legislation and how the process is not in his view, engaged with the proper representatives.
No comments:
Post a Comment