Scott Fraser was the Minister of Indigenous Relations and
Reconciliation in the government of the late Premier John Horgan
It's a far cry from what the previous Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation (Scott Fraser) said in the house about how DRIPA would have no force or effect.
THE NDP insisted DRIPA would not impact private property rights or have sweeping legal consequences. Their previous Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliations’ own words are now meaningless:
Quotes from 2019 Debate
“The legislation sees us bring provincial laws into harmony with the UN declaration over time.” – Scott Fraser, Hansard, Oct 10/24
No Force and Effect
“I stated earlier that Bill 41 doesn’t give the UN declaration itself the force of law and doesn’t create any new laws and new rights. That’s inclusive of private land.” – Scott Fraser, Hansard Nov 25/19
“There are no new rights created within this bill, within Bill 41, but it does affirm the rights within section 35, jurisprudence.” – Scott Fraser, Hansard, Nov 21/19
“With the passage of this bill, this will be, still, an interpretive tool. Bill 41 brings no legal force and effect to the UN declaration.” – Scott Fraser, Hansard, Nov 19/19
“I’ll just repeat. There’s no legal force in effect.” – Scott Fraser, Hansard, Nov 20/19
Interpretive Aid
“The courts may look to the declaration as an interpretive aid — where if there’s ambiguity in legislation such that there’s an interpretation that aligns better with the declaration, that interpretation would be preferred.” – Scott Fraser, Hansard, Nov 26/19
“It’s dealing with the idea that the courts could still….There’s nothing in this act that would prevent the courts from using the UN declaration, as they can already, as an interpretive tool.” – Scott Fraser, Hansard, Nov 19/19
Not a veto
“It is not a switch that will change every statute and process in the government the day after this act is proclaimed, nor is it a veto over development.” – Scott Fraser, Hansard, Oct 30/19
It didn't create new rights. Aboriginal title is an existing right, affirmed under section 35 of the Constitution. Aboriginal title exists in Canadian law and the courts have constantly said that the onus is on governments to work together to clarify what those rights mean. The courts have not ever wanted to be the ones to define those rights, but if governments won't negotiate, what choice to First Nations have to get clarity on Aboriginal title? That doesn't mean that we don't have to work out how those rights and title issues work together, but DRIPA did not create new rights in British Columbia. Nothing has superseded Constitutional rights.
ReplyDelete