Schmale repeatedly pushes the government to do more to protect private property rights, arguing they failed to make the case in a key court decision. He presses for clarity and certainty around land title in the wake of that ruling. On indigenous issues, Schmale says Conservatives support self-government and resolving land claims, but with caveats around private property impacts. He also frequently brings up resource development, calling for faster approvals and less red tape to boost jobs and prosperity, especially in the north.
“I'm trying to argue that my party cares about affordability more than yours. I don't like the government's grocery plan. I want the government to hurry up and get more housing built.”
“I want to remind everyone that I gave a speech. If we build projects faster that will be good for everyone. The government is moving too slow. It should move faster. That will create jobs, opportunity, and wealth.”
“I don't want to give a clear answer. I'm saying you're asking something too broad. I won't clarify my position on self-government until you give me a specific example.”
“I want to argue about property rights. I want to complain about the government. I don't want to clearly support or oppose this bill.”
“I'm worried that U.S. tribes are trying to get involved in Canadian decisions. They shouldn't interfere with our projects and our resources. The government must make sure these decisions stay domestic, not international. Keep foreign influences out of our business.”
“I can't answer blanket hypotheticals. Every self-government deal is different. Some involve land, some don't. We've supported ones that include land before, as long as they don't threaten private property rights. This one's easy because the land claim was settled decades ago.”
“Here's my big plan to make sure First Nations get money from resource projects. They need jobs from projects. I have a lot of ideas for different payments and agreements. And my tax idea gives companies a way to pay them.”
“I'll help you pass this kind of bill again. Just don't touch private property. Then we have a deal.”
“We like the idea of self-government. Conservatives did this in the past. I want to support the bill but I don't like how the current government handles other indigenous issues. The north needs more economic development. I want more focus on creating jobs and opportunity there.”
“When the government does a good job, things go fast. But there's a problem in B.C. It's causing a lot of uncertainty. U.S. tribes are trying to get a say in Canada's energy projects. They want to be part of the consultation process. The government isn't doing anything to stop them. When will the government stand up to these U.S. tribes and say no to foreign interference?”
“I want the government to approve a replacement for the Line 21 pipeline quickly. I want to claim the government is causing unemployment and blocking energy development. I want to say this delay is an emergency.”
“I'm asking the minister to make businesses stay open in Norman Wells. I'm implying the government should force a business to keep running even if it wants to leave. I want the minister to do something to make the company stay open. I want the minister to stop the environmental assessments that could block the pipeline. I want the government to make sure the village can keep getting tax money from this business.”
“You caused this reconciliation mess. You are failing on private property rights. You even failed the city of Richmond. We fixed it. Support our solution.”
“I don't want the government enforcing unclear property rights. It puts homeowners at risk. My motion would protect property owners. Will you vote yes? It's common sense.”
“I did not say Cowichan Tribes would force people off land. The government caused uncertainty. Even B.C.'s NDP Premier says it threatens property rights. A $100 million hotel was canceled. Uncertainty is widespread in B.C. The government should fix that uncertainty.”
“I respect the member for Edmonton Northwest. I've learned from him on the indigenous northern affairs committee. But the member for Winnipeg North just read a statement that claimed the exact opposite of what the Liberals are doing. In 2018, they made a conscious choice not to argue for fee simple property rights in court. That means they can't bring it up on appeal or at the Supreme Court later. How do the Liberals expect to use this argument in court when they've already given up the right to argue it? They're contradicting themselves.”
“I want to criticize the government for not giving clear answers about property rights. I think there's too much uncertainty. I don't want to take a side on what the actual policy should be, I just want to say the government should fix it.”
