Discussion · Government Orders

Jamie Schmale Conservative

“We support this self-government bill because the land claim was already settled in 1993. We can also support treaties that involve land, as long as they protect private property.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that would be impossible to say, because most self-government agreements include a land claim, so those two things are not separate. They can have modern treaties that involve land in what we would be supporting. What I was going to say to supplement, and should have said during the first round, is that what makes this piece of legislation very easy to accept is that the land claim was done in 1993. The land claim was already settled. This one, however, is focused on government, but there are many treaties that have come forward that we have supported, one being that of Whitecap Dakota Nation, that actually involved land and that we supported and rushed through the House in just a few days. Therefore, there are opportunities for treaties that involve land, as long as they are not impacting private property, or they include protections for private property. That is a line we cannot cross.

No comments yet.

Comment rules