You are hereTown Portal Categories / Community Events / TFN Treaty Signing
TFN Treaty Signing
I was lucky enough to attend a landmark event this afternoon. An afternoon my daughter and I will never forget. It was emotionally charged, as it should be, and I am personally so very proud as a South Delta Resident and as a Canadian that this first "Urban treaty" on the road to ratification.
I am also very proud to have people like Chief Kim Baird and her staff living so very close to me. I am hopeful that they will be a caring and thoughftul member of the GVRD community.
Politics is about compromise and I am happy to that this is happening here.
Mike Schneider
- 586 reads
Tags
Boy...I thought there would be broad support for the treaty but one only has to look at response in the Delta Optimist over the past few weeks to see that there is a large anti-treaty stance out there. lots of reporting on the thoughts of Bertha Williams and John Cummins and we all know Lois has never been interested in seeing anything happen here. Is there anyone in Tsawwassen that the Optimist would like to interview that is enthusiastic about the treaty? Just wondering.
Are you suggesting that the TFN treaty is some sort of Ploy? That is unfortunate. You look at this as business further expoliting the TFN. I look at it as Government doing whatt is right by enabling the TFN.
Look, The Municipality of Delta does not even provide water for the TFN. How lame is that?
The expansion of Delta Port and the "Gateway" project is a 2 billion dollar project to ensure that Canada remains as a strong intermational trade partner.
The Geographical proximity of the TFN should afford them to partcipate in this economic development don't you think? Or, is industrial and commercial growth a "settlers' past time only?
This is a comment that was posted and subsequently lost on this thread due to a "Cron Run" error........... TP Admin...
A wile back, in the beginning of the provincial Liberal mandate, there
was a distinct, and to me worrisome, anti-treaty referendum...
I am concerned that the newfound "pro" attitude of the government is
really a bad sign. Some people have figured out how to get around
general community objections to private development on crown assets
(like rivers/streams for run-of-river hydro projects) and the erosion of
reserved land like Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR). By having a treaty
in place and/or exploiting the poor economic conditions of most native
nations, the government and the companies are forging ahead - all in the
name of free-enterprise and profit and self-government of sorts. They
do not particularly seem to care that once the agricultural land is gone
and the public assets are sold off for private profit, there will be
little the population can do to be self-sufficient in food-production
(that is how they're selling the private electricity generation! - in
the name of self-sufficiency). When much of the hydro-generation is
private, there will be less money in the public purse to finance our
universal social programs - the one thing that distinguishes us from our
neighbours to the south.
I believe it is our everlasting shame that so few treaties have been
concluded! But, it is even more shameful that governments and private
enterprise actions point again to an exploitation of natives while
characterizing it as a good thing.
Gudrun Langolf
I'm happy for the TFN and think they will have lots of positives to contribute to the GVRD.
The point is that the lands have been taken out for this deal period. It doesn't matter how much.
The lands in question are not currently being used to farm because they are, for the most part marshlands.
Furthermore, this "ALR" land accounts for about 2% of Delta's total ALR land.
A deal had to be made and this is a good compromise.
I have to apologize to several posters on the Treaty ALR issue.
The "cron run" that checks this site for spam was mistakenly altered and as a result. we have lost some commentary.
Please feel free to comment again and I apologize for the miscue.
TP Admin
Post new comment