Indigenous leaders unpack the BC Conservative leader’s statements on DRIPA, First Nations title and more.
The Tyee: Regional Chief Terry Teegee admits that he isn’t really one to get political.
But in a recent interview with The Tyee, Teegee was blunt about what it could mean for First Nations if the Conservative Party of BC forms government.
“I think John Rustad is a threat to First Nations and a threat to reconciliation,” Teegee said.
The Conservative leader has said he would repeal B.C.’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, legislation considered foundational to reconciliation, and reverse other agreements made under the current BC NDP government.
“A party that threatens our rights, I think I should be vocal about that,” Teegee said.
In addition to saying he would repeal DRIPA, Rustad has flip-flopped on support for a groundbreaking title agreement with the Haida Nation and said he would scrap a commitment to protect 30 per cent of provincial land by 2030, an initiative undertaken in large part with First Nations.
Indigenous leaders The Tyee spoke with called his comments irresponsible and reckless. They said his proposed policies would mark a massive step backward for reconciliation in the province and that, if a Conservative government were to halt or reverse steps to recognize Indigenous rights and title, it would drive a deeper wedge between First Nations and the provincial government and lead to a wave of legal actions.
The Conservative Party of BC did not respond to The Tyee’s interview request, nor did it provide answers to emailed questions. The party’s platform was not available at publication time, and an “ideas” page on its website did not directly mention Indigenous relations. Instead, The Tyee examined comments made by Rustad in the months leading up to the election.
BC ‘must repeal’ Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act
When B.C. passed DRIPA five years ago, it was hailed by former premier John Horgan as “a stepping-stone” that would ensure human rights for First Nations in the province.
Every MLA in the legislature voted in favour of the legislation. Rustad, then a BC Liberal MLA and the former minister of Aboriginal relations and reconciliation, was among them.
But earlier this year, as the NDP government moved ahead with an amendment meant to bring B.C.’s Land Act in line with DRIPA, the Conservative leader appeared to change course, accusing the NDP government of attempting to quietly push through “sweeping changes” that would impact private property rights and public land use.
In the same statement, Rustad called to “repeal” DRIPA.
B.C.’s NDP government has since paused the Land Act amendments.
The amendments would have added wording to the act to allow B.C. to enter into joint decision-making agreements with First Nations. Each agreement would be subject to further public consultation and cabinet approval, Lands Minister Nathan Cullen previously told The Tyee.
Experts have described the changes as more administrative and incremental than sweeping.
B.C. has already signed two agreements under DRIPA’s Section 7 with the Tahltan, which give the nation an equal voice in the expansion of mining on its traditional territory.
Union of BC Indian Chiefs Grand Chief Stewart Phillip told The Tyee that repealing DRIPA would “represent an enormous step backward” for Indigenous rights in the province.
“We’ve made amazing progress on environmental protections, children and family, economic reconciliation in regard to a multitude of joint agreements that have been signed under the David Eby NDP government,” he said. “All of that would be destroyed in a heartbeat in the event that Rustad were to rip apart the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.”
Phillip, who is married to NDP MLA Joan Phillip, said the move would “create economic uncertainty and political and social chaos” in the province.
It could also mark a return to litigating outstanding title claims after B.C. signed a significant number of modern-day treaties and other rights and title agreements with First Nations this year.
“The reality is that if we don’t sit down and negotiate agreements like mature adults, then we are going to be litigating in court,” said Adam Olsen, BC Green Party MLA for Saanich North and the Islands. Olsen, who is a member of the Tsartlip First Nation, is not running for re-election.
“John Rustad is charting the most irresponsible, the most reckless — I call him ‘Reckless Rustad’ — path forward in our province,” he said.
While the courts have tended to uphold Aboriginal rights and title claims — landmark decisions include Haida, Tŝilhqot’in and Blueberry River First Nations — they have encouraged the parties to settle their differences through negotiation rather than litigation.
“The Crown is under a moral, if not a legal, duty to enter into and conduct those negotiations in good faith,” Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote in Delgamuukw, the groundbreaking 1997 decision that first defined Aboriginal rights.
Olsen said he believes the courts would “not take kindly” to B.C. changing course on its commitment to negotiate title agreements.
He pointed to the Gaayhllxid/Gíihlagalgang “Rising Tide” Haida Title Lands Agreement, which recognized the nation’s title over Haida Gwaii earlier this year, as proof that the provincial government can successfully negotiate with First Nations to return agency to their lands.
First Nations title agreements ‘undermining private property rights’
Although Rustad initially expressed support for the Haida agreement as it passed its first reading in the legislature, he appeared to do an about-face a day later when he posted a video calling it “a mess.”
“The Eby NDP is undermining YOUR private property rights. The Haida deal means First Nations title could end up being applied to ALL private property in B.C.,” Rustad wrote on X.
Rustad raised the issue again at last week’s Union of BC Municipalities convention.
“There’s a deal on Haida Gwaii for title. I fully support title. I think it’s the right thing to do,” he said. “But title on Haida Gwaii will now exist underneath your private property, underneath your communities. That also means Haida law will apply to those communities.”
The Supreme Court of Canada has defined Aboriginal title as the traditional and ongoing occupation of land by a First Nation. In a 2004 decision, it determined that the Haida Nation had a strong case for title.
Olsen described Rustad’s comments as ironic, noting that the Haida agreement explicitly protects “fee simple interests.”
That makes it one of the few places in the province with formal recognition of private property rights, he added.
“The greatest threat that British Columbians with private property should feel is having these situations left unresolved,” Olsen said.
‘A champion of resource development and economic reconciliation’
To help sum up his position on Indigenous rights in B.C., Rustad has pointed to his own record as minister of Aboriginal relations and reconciliation, the position he held for four years under the BC Liberals.
“I spent a lot of years as a minister associated with this file and I signed 435 agreements with First Nations,” he said in a recent interview with far-right media personality Jordan Peterson. “We did a lot of what I called ‘economic reconciliation’ with First Nations, which is about getting them engaged economically.”
Rustad’s bio on the BC Conservatives’ website describes him as “a champion of resource development and economic reconciliation” who “created economic opportunity for not only the province but also the nations involved.”
But Olsen described agreements signed under the previous BC Liberal government as outdated and paternalistic, adding that they didn’t recognize the complexity of First Nations governance systems.
Among them were benefits agreements related to pipeline development, including an agreement Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs symbolically burned last month as a demonstration of their opposition to the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission line.
“Basically, he’s bragging about tying Indigenous Peoples to these very regressive-style agreements,” Olsen said. “The level of toxicity that those agreements could potentially create in First Nations communities is completely irresponsible.”
There was no mention of Indigenous relations on the Conservatives’ “ideas” web page. Before most of its content was removed earlier this week, the page included plans to “dramatically expand” LNG production, “get pipelines built” and “hold activists accountable” for impeding resource development — apparent references to pipeline opposition in the province.
The party did not respond to The Tyee’s question about whether the comments were a reference to Indigenous land defence and what measures it would impose beyond the existing justice system.
Wet’suwet’en opposition to the Coastal GasLink pipeline has resulted in several police actions and dozens of arrests over the past five years. While most of the nation’s band councils have signed agreements with the company, its traditional leadership has long opposed pipeline development on the territory.
The RCMP’s response has attracted criticism from the United Nations, Amnesty International and the Union of BC Indian Chiefs.
Backing away from title and joint decision-making agreements with First Nations would lead to more demonstrations and court actions, both Olsen and Teegee said.
That would make negotiations more difficult and set the parties further apart, Olsen added.
“It is just better if the government and First Nations can sit at the table without this tension so that they can negotiate an agreement that recognizes Aboriginal title,” he said. That “begins to build an economic and social system that allows for Indigenous people to prosper and grow wealth off of their land.”
BC’s ‘nonsense’ plan to protect 30 per cent of provincial land
As president of the Na̲nwak̲olas Council, Dallas Smith is immersed in the work of creating economic development for First Nations that also protects the environment and Indigenous culture.
“We’ve shown that the economy is just as important as the ecology,” Smith said in a recent interview with The Tyee. The work has been painstaking, he added, “because we take a real balanced approach to try and make sure we get the economics, the ecology and the human well-being part right.”
The council has been working to implement the Great Bear Sea, an Indigenous Protected and Conserved Area, or IPCA, that would provide marine protection adjacent to the Great Bear Rainforest.
B.C. has committed “to protect and conserve biodiversity, habitats, and species at risk in the province” in 30 per cent of provincial lands by 2030.
The commitment is one Rustad has said he would do away with.
“It’s 30 per cent of all of our ecosystems,” Rustad told the Narwhal. “What are we going to do if we have 30 per cent less food production? What are we going to do if we’re going to have 30 per cent less forestry production? What are we trying to achieve here as a province?”
The “30 by 30” commitment is a federal target established following the United Nations Biodiversity Conference, COP15, in December 2022. B.C. followed last year by signing a tripartite agreement with Canada and the First Nations Leadership Council to “protect and conserve biodiversity, habitats, and species at risk” in partnership with Indigenous communities.
If successful, the commitment would double B.C.’s protected area over the next five years.
IPCAs will be necessary to reach that goal, said Justine Townsend, a University of British Columbia post-doctoral researcher who works with IISAAK OLAM Foundation, an organization advancing Indigenous-led conservation.
“If John Rustad pulls out of it, it’ll be pulling out of alignment with a federal initiative that so far everyone is on board with,” she said. “I don’t think that will go over very well.”
While B.C. has yet to formally recognize any IPCAs, Townsend said that at least a dozen are in various stages of development in the province. They include the Tla-o-qui-aht Tribal Parks, Dasiqox Tribal Park Initiative, Ktunaxa Tribal Park and Ashnola IPCA.
“A really unique piece” of the process is how economic development fits with conservation plans, Townsend said.
“Mainstream conservation — conventional parks and protected areas like national, provincial and territorial parks — are more of a strict conservationist model,” she said. “IPCAs are actually modelling a different approach to conservation that includes social and economic well-being, not just conservation.”
That includes food security, she added, with Indigenous food gathering forming part of the economic and cultural component. Most agriculture takes place on private land, she said, adding that she believes Rustad’s comments about reduced food production amount to “fear mongering.”
Smith said he’s trying not to sweat the upcoming election. He said Na̲nwak̲olas Council’s work on the Great Bear Sea is “not solely dependent” on the provincial government, and he chalks up much of the rhetoric to political posturing.
But he acknowledged that a Conservative win could lead to some uncomfortable conversations.
“Do I think that I’m going to have some challenging discussions should John Rustad be premier next month? Yeah, I think there is a lot of refocusing around ‘What is reconciliation?’” he said.
He said the Great Bear Rainforest “told the world that reconciliation mattered in B.C.” when it was implemented under the previous Liberal government.
“John Rustad was part of that government,” he said. “We started a path together with the Crown and we’re going to keep working with the Crown till that’s through, regardless of whether it’s a left, right or centre government.”
Amanda Follett Hosgood, The Tyee
Amanda Follett Hosgood is The Tyee’s northern B.C. reporter. She lives in Wet’suwet’en territory. Find her on X @amandajfollett.