Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

FELDSTED – The protesters are the essence of spoiled brats … demanding, despotic, discontent, ill mannered, unsatisfied and useless


Our Prime Minister was on television tonight. He had been asked question related to the Canada wide “protests” in respect of the British Columbia pipeline under construction for Coastal GasLink.

Mr. Trudeau stated that “everyone has the right to peaceful protest.”


Since when?

Where is that articulated in our legal system? We have the freedoms of belief and expression and can tell the world that we disagree with building a pipeline or anything else if we wish to.

We are not entitled to a public platform to express our views. If many of us want to get together and hold a parade to express our common views, we apply for permit and obey regulations to hold our parade.

Holding an impromptu “protest” on busy streets during rush hour is not “peaceful protest”.

Camping on a railway track in Bellville, Ontario -- about 4,600 kilometres and 45 hours driving from where the pipeline is under construction -- and disrupting passenger and rail traffic, is not “peaceful protest”, it is anarchy.

Our freedoms and rights have limits. We cannot exercise freedoms and rights that infringe on anyone else’s freedoms and rights. 

The common law expression is “A’s rights end at the tip of B’s nose.”

If “A” exercises rights that infringe on “B”’s normal activities “A” is no longer protected under rights legislation. “A” has crossed a line and is now acting illegally. A’s freedoms of belief and expression do not give him licence to sermonize in “B”’s living room.

Media misrepresentation of the issues is not helpful.

News anchors refer to indigenous lands which is incorrect. Lands claimed by hereditary chiefs are lands in dispute; no settlement has been made and the claim does not constitute ownership.


“Protesters” have been interviewed and come up with some pretty bizarre claims such as … “We were here long before confederation, so we do not recognize colonial laws and tribe councils.”

That has not been thought through. That is a claim to separate sovereignty. It is a claim to give up all current relations with Canada and operate as a foreign nation.

That means hard borders between the land claimed, and Canada … no one in or out without passing through customs, loss of Canadian passports, no access to Canadian currency, and so on. The disputed territory would have to create and enforce its own laws and create its own economy. There is no evidence that the people the hereditary chiefs claim to represent would support such drastic action.

Our Prime Minister is so steeped in politically correct ‘progressiveness’ that he cannot call a spade a spade and deal with it for fear of being accused of demeaning dark-skinned people - again. We are stuck living in a bad farce presentation in some obscure revue. We can be forgiven for wondering how we wound up on a different planet where everything is backward and upside down.

The root of all this is the federal departments of Indigenous Services Canada and Indian Affairs and Northern Development. It is difficult to find out what they spend, but a couple of hours sleuthing revealed expenditures of about $16 billion. That does not include operational costs of Indigenous Services which I could not find.

Those are not sums spent on indigenous people because they include operational costs – offices, personnel and expenses. That is a lot of bureaucracy and jobs to protect. Having Indigenous Services in charge of indigenous reconciliation is one of the worst cases of conflict of interest imaginable.

Indigenous people have legitimate concerns we need to address. They have been badly treated for decades and deserve better. Indian Affairs is a big part of the problem. We cannot fix problems under the Indian Act and using Indian Affairs. We must admit we have failed and reset the clock.                          

At the very least we need a Reconciliation Agency independent of government and reporting to Parliament. Agency members should represent the business and social community and be appointed by the Governor General.

We need adult to adult negotiations with indigenous people to resolve issues.

Indigenous people must decide who will represent them in negotiations. The notion that a handful of hereditary chiefs in northern British Columbia speak for, or represent, the entire indigenous community across the nation is breathtakingly insane.

Our government is allowing these Chiefs to drive the reconciliation agenda and Canadians are fed up with the spineless twits in charge.


John Feldsted
Political Commentator, Consultant & Strategist
Winnipeg, Manitoba

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...

FORSETH – My question is, ‘How do we decide who is blue enough to be called a Conservative?’

How do we decide who’s blue enough to be a Conservative? AS OF TODAY (Friday January 30 th ), there are now eight individuals who have put their names forward to lead the Conservative Party of British Columbia. Having been involved with BC’s Conservatives since 2010, and having seen MANY ups and downs, having 8 people say “I want to lead the party” is to me, an incredible turn-around from the past. Sadly, however, it seems that our party cannot seem to shake what I, and others, call a purity test of ‘what is a Conservative’. And that seems to have already come to the forefront of the campaign by a couple of candidates. Let me just say as a Conservative Party of BC member, and as someone active in the party, that frustrates me to no end. Conservatives, more than any other political philosophy or belief, at least to me, seems to have the widest and broadest spectrum of ideals.   For the most part, they are anchored by these central thoughts --- smaller and less intru...

Labels

Show more