Winnipeg, Land Claim

[Ken7]

Land settlement with the Metis, they have settled a claim which includes the City of Winnipeg.

Now, how does this work if you own a home and the land in that claim? It might be interesting!

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/ ... 43961.html

But tensions between the Métis and First Nations over competing land claims are on the rise, sparking worry the federal government will pit the two indigenous groups against each other.

Trudeau, wouldn't do this intentionally would he??

[Donald G]

The only people making money out of the negotiations are the "politically connected" lawyers.

[occasional thoughts]

I don't understand it all, but what I have to keep reminding myself is that the Supreme Court of Canada makes rulings on the basis of laws, not politics or social trends or pandering or bleeding heartism or . . . or . . . . Supposedly and I sincerely trust and hope.

In the case of B.C., the British government, our ruler of the day, commanded in the 1800s that treaties be entered into with all natives, and they were not, so we're left with our provincial jackpot.

In the Manitoba case, to the extent I gathered until I stopped reading the details, the problem was with the implementation of a historical treaty or agreement.

Good luck.

[erinmore3775]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/metis-federation-of-manitoba-signs-mou-1.3604370

There is no settlement yet only a Memorandum of Understanding is in place. It sets out the rules/framework for future negotiations. "The signing of this historic document sets the stage for the parties to advance their exploratory talks on reconciliation in response to the 2013 Manitoba Métis Federation et al v. Canada decision of the Supreme Court of Canada," the Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs (INAC) said in a news release."

I do not believe that homeowner, businesses, or citizens of Winnipeg have anything to worry about with their land rigts. I believe the eventual settlement will focus on education busaries, health benefits, job training, and other similar features for the Metis people. This settlement with the Federal and Provincial governments will set the stage for all other settlements with Metis and Natives that involve land claims that include established areas like cities and industrial areas.

[occasional thoughts]

I'd read in the original link to Winnipeg Free Press the following, which indicated something in history:

"Two years ago next month, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled government delays and ineptitude, as well as land speculation and swindlers, blocked thousands of Métis children from receiving much of the 566,000 hectares of land promised by the federal government when Manitoba entered Confederation. The government's bungling of the land disbursement has impacted thousands of descendents of the original Red River Settlement."

Just my ongoing clarification and understanding of a new issue to me.

[zzontar]

It's a good thing this isn't jurisprudence for the rest of the world. Can you imagine if everyone made a land claim based on the fact they had ancestors there?

[occasional thoughts]

I'm not sure that's fair. Land claims in B.C. flow from a legal right conferred by the British Crown and never extinguished. The issue in Manitoba apparently flows from alleged skullduggery by our federal government in implementing an agreement long time ago. Besides, I think other countries do have issues with their aboriginal populations. The alternative which in hindsight makes it really tidy for some jurisdictions such as Argentina and certain of the United States was to exterminate their natives.

[Ken7]

It's a good thing this isn't jurisprudence for the rest of the world. Can you imagine if everyone made a land claim based on the fact they had ancestors there?

I agree, it has also been said if each Band is given what they want for land claims here in BC we need 25% more land base.
Just where will the line be drawn, I was once married to a Aboriginal woman, am I also entitled to a piece of the pie??

When a male marries a non-native woman, she gets treaty rights.

IT was and still is, if a woman marries a non-aboriginal male, he gets nothing. I'll bet it Tony Merchant was put to work on a Class Action suit, the males would be now included and it might be revised to give them treaty status as it does the females.

[occasional thoughts]

Lots of b.s. in our nation's "Indian Affairs", including embedded sexism/chauvinism over what a man and/or a woman gets by marrying outside the ethnicity. I don't know why anyone gathers up treaty right through marriage. But it doesn't extinguish treaty rights granted by Queen Victoria. That's why it's called the rule of law that we live under and supposedly cherish, and makes ut different from other non-democratic, run-rampant-over-law, jurisdictions.

[Graham Adder]

It's a good thing this isn't jurisprudence for the rest of the world. Can you imagine if everyone made a land claim based on the fact they had ancestors there?

Better yet:
Imagine if everyone was to think these claims are based solely on the fact that they had ancestors there.
It's a good thing not everyone sees the world through an a-crack. That can create a really narrow view of the world beyond.
It's great that you posted this, zoontar. It offers a way to measure ourselves.
I think I'm doing just fine.
There's so much more to land claims and treaty settlements than meets the eye. People that use the same rhetoric over and over really do offer a measure. It's a shame that they don't see it that way, as that opening of the mind is exactly what we all need to move forward.
Some like that back row, corner seat though. It has the best window view and the least pesky interruptions.

[zzontar]

There's so much more to land claims and treaty settlements than meets the eye.

True enough. Treaties never included dental care, use of vehicles, appliances, electronics, store bought clothing, modern medicine, and all other amenities they can enjoy daily.

[Graham Adder]

True enough. Treaties never included dental care, use of vehicles, appliances, electronics, store bought clothing, modern medicine, and all other amenities they can enjoy daily.

Try again.
Your lack of knowledge is astounding.
Truly.
Do you have issue with educating yourself before speaking?
Try it out. It feels good to have an idea of what you're trying to speak on.
Your posts aren't even opinion. They're just empty.
I suppose if all you intend to do is get attention, then it's working for you.
Carry on.

[zzontar]

Try again.
Your lack of knowledge is astounding.
Truly.
Do you have issue with educating yourself before speaking?
Try it out. It feels good to have an idea of what you're trying to speak on.
Your posts aren't even opinion. They're just empty.
I suppose if all you intend to do is get attention, then it's working for you.
Carry on.

Instead of always acting like a pompous *bleep*, why don't you just post links that these things were part of the treaties then? You're so wise and all-knowing that it shouldn't take long... unless you think that whenever I make a point, it gets nullified by your tedious "you don't know anything" comments.

[zzontar]

Better yet:
Imagine if everyone was to think these claims are based solely on the fact that they had ancestors there.
It's a good thing not everyone sees the world through an a-crack.

You say no one would want to live somewhere like Attawapiskat, but the natives claim that as well as all the land in Canada plus 25% more land than even exists. Perhaps with you can explain to the good people what these claims are based on.

[occasional thoughts]

zz, do you really want to get dragged into that exchange? Suffice it to say "aboriginal" people of Canada and not merely people with ancestors were granted certain rights by the British conquerors, and they have not all been fulfilled.

That 125% (or whatever) of our total land base is now claimed is superficially bizarre, and may indicate greed by the Indian bands of today. But let's remember that some tribes were nomadic, there's a time element of hundreds or thousands of years and different tribes may have moved in and out of areas over time, and so forth. They make a claim, we hope our people negotiating are smart enough (and this may be in doubt) to come up with something that's fair and equitable.

Our conqueror forebears did us no favours by not negotiating treaties (B.C.) when they were supposed to, and by the way they handled native lands issues since.