“A judge said messing with private property rights would hurt reconciliation. The government is making it worse. We need to work together to fix this.”
What they said. What they meant.
Plain-language translations from the House of Commons.
Recent debates
8 latest topics
Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act
57 statements
Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act
19 statements
Arab Heritage Month Act
5 statements
The Economy
15 statements
Government Priorities
2 statements
Government Priorities
2 statements
Housing
12 statements
The Environment
2 statements
Government Orders
Business of Supply
The House debated the impact on private property of the legal uncertainty created by the Cowichan Tribes v Canada court decision. Conservatives accused the Liberals of failing to swiftly and robustly appeal the ruling, contributing to public anxiety and economic disruption in B.C. Liberals argued they have taken appropriate steps to defend private property rights and accused Conservatives of sowing misinformation. Much of this debate was taken up by efforts to clarify and distinguish the positions of the two main parties on the issue, rather than concretely advancing the topic.
“I want the government to clearly support private property rights. The government has been silent. People are worried. Businesses are hurting. The government should stop avoiding the question and give a clear answer.”
“You screwed up. You were late. You tied lawyers' hands. And now you say nothing.”
“I want this to pass quickly. People in my riding are worried. The government should work with us on a solution now.”
“That speech was great. The government says it supports property rights. But they already stopped arguing for those rights in 2018. How can the government win in court with an argument it didn't use before?”
“The government has a choice. They could say they made a mistake in 2018. Or they could say they still support the 2018 directive. Either way, Canadians lose. Richmond pushed to keep the fee simple argument in the appeal. Thank you to Richmond. Shame on the government.”
“I want the government to stop saying Conservatives are fearmongering about property rights. We never said Cowichan band would kick people off their land. We said the decision creates uncertainty in the market. That's true. British Columbia had to step in. The government stopped arguing for fee simple property. The government itself caused this uncertainty.”
“You can't use that argument in court. The government lost its chance. The court took away parts of the Land Title Act. Private property rights in B.C. are undermined. The government can't win with this.”
“You say we're fearmongering. But I say that court decision is causing real problems. Here's one example. A land development project is now complicated because of that decision. This isn't just fearmongering. I'm stating facts. Do you have anything to say about that?”
“You say this is a provincial issue. But you asked the Prime Minister about it. You blame the city too. They fought in court for property rights. Why didn't the government fix this?”
“I want the government to protect private property rights. The current government is causing uncertainty and division by failing to do this. I hope everyone will support our motion to create a committee to study how we can protect property rights. The government needs to change course because their current approach is creating problems for Canadians.”
“I want to defend the past Conservative government's record on indigenous issues. The current government should not dismiss our efforts before 2015. I propose that all parties work together in a special committee to make progress.”
“I don't get your point. Of course I respect the Constitution. I'm just trying to make a special committee. It's to work together and move forward. I hope you'll work with us. It's good for everyone.”
“I don't like it when you bring up the past. It's not fair. We have a right to ask questions and suggest things. The government should respond better.”
“I tried to focus on facts in my speech. This is a complicated case. The government made it worse. We need to work together to find a solution.”
“This court decision creates confusion and tension over private property rights in British Columbia. 98% of respondents are very concerned. It affects financing for projects. The federal government needs to engage with British Columbians throughout the judicial process.”