Translate Politics Parliament in plain language.

Indigenous Affairs

In question period, members discussed a court decision involving the Cowichan Nation and related land-title concerns in British Columbia, and a Conservative motion on private property rights that the House was to vote on later that day. Conservatives said the decision and a Musqueam agreement had left homeowners, businesses and municipalities uncertain about their land, and urged the government to change its legal approach and support their motion to prioritize private property rights. Liberals said the government is appealing the court decision alongside British Columbia, the City of Richmond and First Nations, that it stands for private property rights and reconciliation, and that no Canadian has lost private land in an agreement with an Indigenous community; they accused the Conservatives of raising unnecessary fear.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text

10 statements

Jamie Schmale

Conservative
“I want the government to vote for our motion today. It protects private property rights in agreements with First Nations.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, immediately following question period, the House will vote on our Conservative motion to protect homeowners from a failed Liberal approach that is putting British Columbians’ homes and futures at risk. Our motion would prioritize private property rights in the Cowichan case, require explicit private property rights protections in future agreements with first nations and force the government to establish a plan to protect affected Canadians. Will the government support our common-sense motion, yes or no?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Taleeb Noormohamed

Liberal
“Conservatives are spreading false claims. Our government is appealing the Cowichan court decision and protecting private property owners. No Canadian has ever lost private land in an agreement with an Indigenous community. The Conservatives are putting the economy and reconciliation at risk.”

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 29 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, yet again, it is either misinformation or disinformation coming from the Conservatives. Either way, Canadians need to understand the facts. The facts are that the government is appealing the Cowichan decision in the courts today and that the government has stood up for the rights of private property owners. It is also important that Canadians understand that not a single Canadian has ever lost any private property in any agreement with an indigenous community. Conservatives are spreading misinformation, risking substantial economic growth in British Columbia and putting at risk true reconciliation and economic growth.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade C– View analysis

Jamie Schmale

Conservative
“The government is hurting reconciliation and creating uncertainty by failing to protect private property rights in British Columbia. I want the government to support the Conservative motion to fix this problem.”

  • Opposition question in Question Period

    Respect 72 of 100

    This statement targeted a person rather than their actions or views: “that member from British Columbia, who should know better”.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the only people putting reconciliation at risk are the Liberal government members and that member from British Columbia, who should know better. The amount of uncertainty created in British Columbia, not just in the city of Richmond, is the result of the Liberal government’s failing to stand up for private property rights. It appealed at the last minute. It put so much uncertainty in the air. The only organization appealing for private property rights is the City of Richmond. The government has failed. It needs to do better. Will it support our Conservative motion to fix the problem the government created?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Jill McKnight

Liberal
“We will protect private property rights in British Columbia. The opposition is trying to scare people, and that does not help anyone.”

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 46 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Signal 41 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, our colleagues across the way have brought up this issue numerous times, and we have been very clear that we will stand for private property rights and protect those rights in British Columbia. This is about creating fear and uncertainty where it is unnecessary, and it is not helping us to move forward as a country, as a province and as a community. We are focused on defending private property rights in Canada, period.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade C View analysis

Brad Vis

Conservative

Linked statement

“Recent legal decisions have made homeowners in British Columbia worry that their land is not safe. The government is not protecting private property rights. I want the Liberals to change their legal approach and support our motion to protect people's property.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are failing to defend Canada’s system of private property rights and indefeasible title while sowing confusion and fear among homeowners about whether their land is secure. With the Cowichan decision and the Musqueam agreement raising serious and valid concerns, British Columbians are wondering whether their private property rights will be defended at all, especially after the government constrained its arguments on extinguishment. Will the Liberal government fix its litigation and negotiation policies and commit to protecting Canadians’ property rights by supporting our Conservative motion today?

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Gregor Robertson

Liberal
“The opposition is scaring people about private property rights. Our government protects private property rights and supports reconciliation with Indigenous people. We joined B.C., Richmond, and First Nations to appeal this court case. The opposition needs to stop scaring people.”

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Signal 44 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 91 of 100

    Of this answer, 93% addressed the question that was asked.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is shameful to continue to hear members of the opposition fearmongering about private property rights. We, on this side of the House, stand for private property rights. We stand for reconciliation. We have appealed the case alongside the B.C. government, the government of the City of Richmond and first nations. We will continue to be there for private property owners and to work for reconciliation. The fearmongering has to stop.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade B– View analysis

Jeff Kibble

Conservative
“The Prime Minister's handling of Indigenous land deals has made homeowners and businesses on Vancouver Island worry about their property. I want him to support our motion to protect property rights.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, families on Vancouver Island worked hard, played by the rules and bought their homes in good faith. They deserve certainty about their property and their futures, yet under the Prime Minister’s watch, the mishandling of the Cowichan case and the closed-door Musqueam agreement have shaken that certainty. Industry, businesses and homeowners are anxious. Communities are divided. Meaningful reconciliation has been set back by division. Leadership means bringing people together. The Prime Minister has failed that test. Will he finally show any leadership and support our Conservative motion to protect property rights, restore confidence and unite rather than divide the people he is supposed to serve?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Randeep Sarai

Liberal
“The Conservatives are just trying to scare people. Nobody's private property rights are at risk. Our government is protecting them, and we always will.”

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Signal 39 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the only party in the House that is bringing that fear is the Conservative Party of Canada. The only party in British Columbia that is doing that is the Conservative Party of British Columbia, and the only reason they are doing this is to instill fear. Everyone knows that their private property rights are not at risk. The government is defending them as we speak, and that is how we will always protect the property rights of all individuals in Canada.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade C– View analysis

Chak Au

Conservative
“A recent court decision leaves landowners with too many questions about their property. I want the government to vote for our motion to protect private land rights.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are in denial. Canadians are demanding certainty, yet the Liberal government continues to leave homeowners, businesses, farmers and municipalities in limbo after the Cowichan decision. Conservatives have put forth a motion that would compel the government to replace litigation guideline 14, put private property first in the Cowichan case, secure fee simple property protection in future agreements and publish a plan to protect Canadians’ land titles. Will the Liberal government finally stand with homeowners and vote for our Conservative motion to protect private property rights in Canada?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Stephanie McLean

Liberal
“Our government supports the people of British Columbia, private property owners, and Indigenous people. We are challenging the court decision. The Conservatives are spreading false information to scare homeowners, but we are protecting them.”

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 30 of 100

    None of this answer addressed the specific question that was asked.

    See full analysis

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Signal 19 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, our government has said time and time again, and has shown through action, that we stand with the people of British Columbia, we stand with private title rights holders and we stand with indigenous people. We are taking the appropriate action, and we are appealing the decision in the courts. It is frightening how the Conservatives are attempting to whip up disinformation and scare private property owners, who need to know the government has their back.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade D View analysis

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 121

All 59 items ·
  1. Private Members' Business Criminal Code 10 statements
  2. Private Members' Business Points of Order 2 statements
  3. Government Orders Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 37 statements
  4. Government Orders Government Orders 17 statements
  5. Oral Questions Taxation 6 statements
  6. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Relations 6 statements
  7. Oral Questions Employment 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions Finance 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Taxation 4 statements
  10. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 6 statements
  11. Oral Questions Public Safety 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Foreign Investment 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 10 statements
  14. Oral Questions Justice 6 statements
  15. Oral Questions Foreign Affairs 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions CBC/Radio-Canada 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions The Environment 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship 7 statements
  19. Government Orders Privilege 4 statements
  20. Government Orders Military Justice System Modernization Act 2 statements
  21. Government Orders Government Orders 2 statements
  22. ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS 2 statements
  23. Government Orders Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 61 statements
  24. Oral Questions The Environment 4 statements
  25. Oral Questions Aerospace Industry 2 statements
  26. Oral Questions Taxation 8 statements
  27. Oral Questions The Economy 6 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  29. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  30. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  31. Government Orders Spring Economic Update 2026 Implementation Act 41 statements