Treaty is a worthy agreement | Vaughn Palmer

Vancouver Sun Column [04/24/99]

_ _ _ _ _

We have gone too far down the road to turn back. The Nisga'a have accepted our word that this was the way to settle land claims.

VICTORIA - Sure, Glen Clark's high-handedness makes it harder to support the Nisga'a treaty. For most of a year he's exploited the agreement for crass political purposes, then this past week his government rewrote the rules of the legislature to prevent any further scrutiny by the Opposition.

By shutting down the debate, the government ensured that the treaty would be passed without proper examination of many controversial provisions, from the Nisga'a-run justice system to Victoria's ongoing financing of Nisga'a government.

Yet I can remember when Mr. Clark was skeptical about the treaty process. As a cabinet minister in Mike Harcourt's government, he was barely supportive of land claims negotiations. There might not have been a Nisga'a agreement if Mr. Clark had prevailed at the cabinet table.

Even after Mr. Clark became premier in early 1996, inheriting the agreement-in-principle signed by Mr. Harcourt, he remained a reluctant supporter of the deal. In contrast to his current insistence that British Columbians endorsed the Nisga'a agreement by re-electing the New Democratic Party, he refused to be drawn into any debate during the campaign and ducked all questions about specific provisions.

As recently as last spring, he was expressing reservations about the way the agreement limited the democratic rights of non-natives living on Nisga'a land. Only last summer did the premier "get religion on the Nisga'a treaty," to quote cabinet minister Ian Waddell. Only then did he begin portraying treaty supporters as angels, the critics as devils -- i.e. "racists."

But the premier's methods, objectionable as they are, haven't changed my opinion that the treaty is a worthy agreement. I'm skeptical about some provisions, what the critics call "race-based government" being the obvious example. I think there is good reason to be concerned about the cost of implementation and better reasons to worry about overlapping jurisdictions, including the overlaps with rival native groups claiming the lands affected by the treaty.

Nevertheless, I believe B.C. has gone too far down the road to turn back. This type of settlement has been implicit in the approach taken by the federal government dating back to the 1970. The courts have pushed governments in this direction since the 1980s. The provincial government has been negotiating along these lines throughout the 1990s.

Over all those years the Nisga'a have participated in the process, accepting the word of duly elected federal and provincial governments that this was the way Canadian society intended to settle native claims. I don't see how the province could repudiate the treaty at this late date without also repudiating the negotiating process and setting up a poisonous confrontation with the courts, the federal government and the aboriginal community.

I also think provincial negotiators did a good job of improving the agreement beyond what either Ottawa or the Nisga'a wanted. In particular, there is the agreement that natives will pay taxes, plus the progress that was made in ensuring that Nisga'a government would be compatible with provincial laws and regulations.

Because I believe this is probably the best deal that could be obtained in the circumstances and because I believe it is time to give it a try, I think B.C. is fortunate to be dealing with the Nisga'a.

They have proven themselves to be prudent, patient and mindful of the great responsibility of being first in line. They are also isolated enough from the rest of the province to have a shot at making it work.

Not persuaded? Feel free to disagree. Unlike some of the New Democrats, I won't suggest you are motivated by racism in doing so. But as time goes on, opinions for and against the treaty matter much less than the unavoidable fact of it coming into being.

As of this past week, the legislature has spoken. Parliament is likely to enact the provisions this year as well. Barring intervention by the courts, the treaty could be made effective with the millennium. After that, British Columbians will have to learn to live with it and they'll need help from their governments.

On that point, the wisest comment comes from an opponent of the treaty, Jack Weisgerber, who last December urged the New Democrats to stop patting themselves on the back and consider the hard work that will be needed to improve the lot of native people in B.C.

"You have very much only started a process," Mr. Weisgerber said. "It is much more complex and much more difficult that those making the brave statements would lead us to believe."
_ _ _ _ _