[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by FireFly

It seems to me like you're questioning my stance on the issue. I'm not saying it SHOULD be any different, I'm saying it IS different. I didn't make the laws. They have self-government. As such, there is stuff that the provincial government will have no control over. Why do they get their own reserve police? Why can't the RCMP take care of crime on the reserves? Well I'm sure they can... when the reserves allow it. Remember the murder on reserve land last year where the reserve police requested that the RCMP be called in for? Why do you think they had to request it? Like it or not, it's just different there.

Perhaps they can pass it if they pass it as safe workplace regulations... but the ban is more encompassing than that, as far as I can tell. Doesn't it include sidewalks and whatnot? How do you figure they'll claim that as worker safety? Perhaps they'll say the streets on reserves do not count as public places so smoking will still be allowed there, but not within businesses... I don't know.

I'm not saying it should be different, I'm just saying that there's a very real possibility that if the reserve natives press the issue with the Supreme Court, it'll get trumped. In a perfect world, this would cause the renegotiation of treaties... IE: you don't follow our health laws, you're going to pay for your health care, etc.

Fine, but you said this:

"I don't think the provincial government has the right to ban smoking on what is essentially private property"

I was making the point that that was some incredibly flawed logic to be applying to this arguement. The government has, and most certainly does excercise the right/ability to ban any number of things on private property. Some laws supercede any sort of self government held by reserves. If some band wanted to pass a law that said it's okay to kill white folk on the reserve, it most certainly would not be a valid law because the general no killing rule supercedes it. I'm certain that the government of Alberta could also make the case that a provincial smoking ban supercedes any preceived "Right" to alllow smoking on a reserve.

As for smoking on sidewalks (which I'm fairly certain you're mistaken about), I'm sure they could come up with any sort of pretence to pass it such as public health concerns. Either way it's irrelevant, because my point is that saying the government can't dictate what happens on a reserve simply because it is "Private property" is flat out wrong. There may be provisions in the treaties that cover situations like this, but they have nothing to do with the "Private property" issue.