Drivers charged $20 'toll' after deadly crash forces detour through First Nation

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

If the end goal of reconciliation is equality of treatment and a colourless approach to Canadian society, I am not of the belief this supports that end goal.

True reconciliation isn't just formal equality, it's equality of results. Again, it's not on the victim to forgive and forget the actions of their transgressors, especially when the transgressions are still ongoing, often unapologetically. You have people like our dickhead Aboriginal Affairs minister who refused to stand during the Truth and Reconciliation findings. Saying "it's not going to get any better unless they agree to move forward" is essentially victim-blaming.

EDIT: Anyways, this thread shouldn't even be about the reserve system but here we are. I'm going to stop derailing now. People can PM me if they want to further the discussion.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I agree Ken, but if the push is towards reconciliation then these types of actions don't help, IMO.

I have said before the native population of Canada has had a raw deal, but I have also said that if the truly wish to move forward they need to do just that move forward.

I have to say I agree with you there. I guess the question becomes- who should be the first one to make these kinds of moves that you speak of? What has the Canadian gov't done recently to work towards reconciliation?

There have been moves in the past from the FN side. The Tsuu Tina ring road deal is one. The deal they wanted in 2013 was identical to the 2010 deal; they just wanted the language clarified. The 2010 deal had a lot of conditional statements; for legal reasons. The fact that the Tsuu Tina didn't up the asking price was a good gesture. Now the provincial gov't needs to complete the agreement in full. Hopefully in doing that it strengthens relationships.

And I still think letting people through with paying a toll was a compromise on their part. We see it as a cash grab, but then how else were the people that used the road going to return the favour?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by rubecube

True reconciliation isn't just formal equality, it's equality of results. Again, it's not on the victim to forgive and forget the actions of their transgressors, especially when the transgressions are still ongoing, often unapologetically. You have people like our dickhead Aboriginal Affairs minister who refused to stand during the Truth and Reconciliation findings. Saying "it's not going to get any better unless they agree to move forward" is essentially victim-blaming.

EDIT: Anyways, this thread shouldn't even be about the reserve system but here we are. I'm going to stop derailing now. People can PM me if they want to further the discussion.

In my opinion it is on the victim, who else can forgive?

I take issue with you saying I am victim blaming, I am not. I have said a million times, at some point there needs to be steps forward (yes I am white 43 yr old man). But if the native population ever want to heal there needs to be forgiveness.

The minster is a dickhead, agreed.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I have to say I agree with you there. I guess the question becomes- who should be the first one to make these kinds of moves that you speak of? What has the Canadian gov't done recently to work towards reconciliation?

There have been moves in the past from the FN side. The Tsuu Tina ring road deal is one. The deal they wanted in 2013 was identical to the 2010 deal; they just wanted the language clarified. The 2010 deal had a lot of conditional statements; for legal reasons. The fact that the Tsuu Tina didn't up the asking price was a good gesture. Now the provincial gov't needs to complete the agreement in full. Hopefully in doing that it strengthens relationships.

And I still think letting people through with paying a toll was a compromise on their part. We see it as a cash grab, but then how else were the people that used the road going to return the favour?

Ken, I don't disagree. I am speaking more about how the general population views this type of thing. As you know not everyone believes this are tuff for the natives.

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by blankall

In Canada - with some rare exceptions, such as railway land - the vast majority of land is technically owned by the crown and the "owner" just has a fee simple, which gives them exclusive rights to its use and occupation (within limits).

Reserve land would be owned by the specific band and can't be, by definition, owned by any specific individual. The band would "own" it but under much stricter limits than the fee simple of private individuals. For example, they can't do anything to it that would change its nature from generation to generation without permission. Their level of ownership is seen as holding it in trust for future generations.

The term "private" ownership is complicated in Canada, but I was using it in the sense that it's not open to the public as a whole.

A property lawyer can correct me...

So I'm confused. Is the land owned by the Crown or the band?

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Crazy Flamer

So I'm confused. Is the land owned by the Crown or the band?

Yes.

The title belongs to the crown but the land has been set aside for the band. They have exclusive use and benefit of the land as a band.