Skeena MLA Ellis Ross had some questions for Mike Farnworth as part of the ongoing debate on the government's proposed Firearms Bill, asking if the NDP had followed their own guidelines through the UNDRIP process as they crafted the bill.
The topic at hand was related to a clause that currently has been 'stood down' or paused if you will, for further study by the government side.
In the Wednesday debate, Mr. Ross returned to some previous concerns over how the NDP has introduced the UNDRIP process and highlighted some of the areas that he believes still need to be addressed when it comes to the firearms bill.
The subject matter at hand from my colleague from Saanich North was: was proper consultation carried out? According to the UNDRIP bill put together by the government, as well as case law, as well as consultation with the wrong parties altogether, says to me that it was not carried out correctly.
It was actually given to political bodies to actually to represent the rights and title of 203 specific bands in B.C. that each have specific rights and individualities in terms of what we're talking about here.
Now, this government said that they would consult on legislation and make sure that all laws were aligned with UNDRIP. But they keep changing the goalposts.
Just recently, the question was asked on a finance bill.
The last answer given by this government said: "Well, we don't have to consult because it doesn't affect rights and title."
Well, that's not what I remember when we were debating the UNDRIP bill. I don't remember that. In fact, some of the language there says that all laws in B.C. will be aligned with UNDRIP.
I'll say it again. This is what I warned about when you start to play politics with rights and title.
When we have a clear road map with case law that defines the rules and the responsibilities of each party, whether it be the First Nations side or the Crown or the private sector.
There was rules. Yes, you had to interpret them a bit, but now you've got the interpretation of UNDRIP.
This government is actually stepping aside of those promises they made in their own UNDRIP bill, and they're going with consultation with the leadership council, meaning BFN, the summit.
To further his commentary on the topic, Mr. Ross highlighted some of the safety issues that he believes need to be clarified by the Government noting how any confusion on interpretation is something that he is most concerned about.
So what I'm asking…. I'm all for safety. First Nations are all for safety. I mean, we want to do that. But we don't want the confusion to face our people on the ground.
We don't want the confusion to face law enforcement people on the ground, when they're trying to interpret this, when they meet up with a First Nations person who might be carrying a firearm for the purposes of exercising their rights and title.
I'm asking you: if the stand down is going to be to do proper consultation, will the proper consultation involve the leaders that represent Aboriginal rights and title on behalf of the true holders?
And that's the communities of B.C. — the Aboriginal communities of B.C. That's my question.
In reply, Mike Farnworth the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General, observed that the government has taken the steps it believes are required as far as consultation, and will review the issue at hand further.
I have already answered that question. We believe that we have done the appropriate consultation required under UNDRIP, but I am also mindful of an issue that the member for Saanich North and the Islands raised.
I agreed to stand down that section to look at some concerns that he raised, and I have made that commitment. So that's why this section has stood down.
As I said, with the rest of the legislation, again, we have followed the appropriate consultation. I appreciate the member's concerns, but I believe I've answered the question.
The full exchange on the theme can be reviewed from the Legislature archive page here, starting at the 4:25 PM minute mark of the Legislature session.
You can also view the discussion from the Legislature Video archive for Wednesday, as for the print archive, the discussion starts at the 4:25 PM minute mark
For more notes on the work of the Skeena MLA in the Legislature see our archive page here.
Cross posted from the North Coast Review.
No comments:
Post a Comment