Adjournment Proceedings

An adjournment debate on the Cowichan land claim court decision and its implications for private property rights in British Columbia. Brad Vis of the Conservatives asked whether the government will defend private property rights in response to the decision, saying uncertainty over it is reducing investment and putting home values at risk, and criticized the government for not explicitly defending fee simple land ownership in court when the case began. Ryan Turnbull of the Liberals said the case remains before the courts and the government is limited in what it can say until its appeal arguments are filed, but that the government is appealing to protect private property rights while respecting the Constitution, supports private landowners making their own submissions in court, and will continue working with all parties.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text (opens in a new tab)

2 statements

Ryan Turnbull, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)

Liberal
“The Cowichan land claim case is still in court, so I must speak carefully. We are appealing to protect private property rights while respecting the Constitution. We also support letting private landowners share their views in court to bring more clarity to everyone.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 93 of 100

    Of this reply, 94% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, let me start by pointing out that the Government of Canada will be in a much better position to speak publicly once we have formally submitted our arguments for the appeal. The Cowichan case remains before the courts, and it is important that all members of the House, including me, speak carefully and responsibly while that process is under way. I will emphasize that keeping private property predictable and stable is our priority. We are carefully considering all viable arguments on the appeal to protect private property rights while also respecting the Constitution. I recognize the uncertainty and concern many Canadians might be feeling right now, particularly private property owners in British Columbia. We hear those concerns and are working to get the clarity that everyone in Canada is deserves. Private property ownership is a foundational part of Canada’s legal system. It gives people predictability and confidence in their homes and businesses. It is important to Canadians, it is important to our economy, and it is important to all of us. All parties to the decision are seeking greater clarity from the courts as its interpretation and implications are clarified. To gain that clarity, the Government of Canada’s grounds for appeal are focusing on specific legal questions. We are also hoping to gain additional clarity through the Montrose application, which seeks to reopen the trial in a limited way and add Montrose as a party to the proceedings. The Montrose application was heard by the British Columbia Supreme Court on May 25 and 26, 2026. Justice Young has reserved her decision, and there is no indication of when she will give her decision. Canada’s response is consistent with the position it took in 2017 when Canada applied for private landowners within the claim area to be made aware of the case. It is important that parties that may be affected by the court’s decision have an opportunity to be heard. Private landowners are best placed to share any uncertainty they are feeling arising from the decisions that could impact them. If the Montrose application is successful, it would allow Montrose to participate formally in the proceedings as a party or intervenor, and it would reopen portions of the trial so evidence and perspectives related to the impacts of the ruling on Montrose can be considered by the court. It would also introduce evidence that was not before the court during the trial. Our approach going forward continues to be grounded in respect and constructive dialogue with all parties. This is the foundation for both advancing reconciliation and addressing further uncertainty. This approach is also how we negotiate on modern treaties and self-government agreements with first nations. These types of agreements provide clarity, stability and long-term predictability for everyone. Importantly, these measures provide a path forward that respects privately owned property while addressing land claims responsibly. We will keep working to gain the needed clarity that the member opposite seeks and that, I am sure, all British Columbians and all Canadians seek from the courts to build a future grounded in respect, stability and lasting predictability for everyone.

Ryan Turnbull, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue and to the Secretary of State (Canada Revenue Agency and Financial Institutions)

Liberal
“I know private landowners are worried about this court decision. We will argue in court to protect private property. We want to respect Indigenous rights while keeping property owners secure, and we will keep working with everyone involved.”
  • Reply to a comment in debate

    Clarity 45 of 100

    Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member’s concern. As I said in the remarks I have given here tonight, we understand that the decision may cause uncertainty and concern for private landowners. People want to know what this means for their homes, their communities and their futures. We hear those concerns, and we take them very seriously. Keeping private property predictable and stable is fundamental, and we will advance all viable arguments in court to protect it. Our goal is to advance reconciliation in a practical and responsible way that both respects indigenous rights and also gives property owners confidence and peace of mind. We will keep working collaboratively with all parties to the litigation and remain available to them throughout this process.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 128

  1. Oral Questions The Economy 11 statements
  2. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  3. Oral Questions The Economy 15 statements
  4. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Persons with Disabilities 2 statements
  6. Oral Questions International Trade 14 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  8. Oral Questions Infrastructure 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Health 6 statements
  10. Oral Questions Finance 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  14. Government Orders Government Orders 50 statements
  15. Private Members' Business Old Age Security Act 12 statements
  16. Adjournment Proceedings Steel and Aluminum Industry 4 statements
  17. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  18. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements