And now:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (S.I.S.I.S.) writes: FEUDS OVER NATIVE LANDS FLARING UP ACROSS BC The Vancouver Sun, January 16, 1998 by Dianne Rinehart [S.I.S.I.S. note: The following mainstream news article may contain biased or distorted information and may be missing pertinent facts and/or context. It is provided for reference only.] A fight over huge rent increases and the doubling of taxes for non-natives on Musqueam land appears to have blown the lid off a number of feuds over taxation without representation on Indian reserves across B.C. Since 1991, the federal government has quietly transferred taxation authority to 53 bands in B.C., depriving thousands of non-natives of their right to vote for the government to which they pay taxes. Already, 26.9 per cent of B.C. bands have taxation rights over their non-native residents, while in the rest of Canada only six per cent of bands have that authority. According to 1996 census results, the impact is enormous. One-third of people living on B.C. reserves -- almost 20,000 people -- are non-natives. In some areas, such as the Central Okanagan region, non-natives comprise more than 90 per cent of residents on reserve lands. Yet many are being taxed and governed by band councils for which they cannot vote. Residents interviewed on three of the band lands that have taxation without representation -- Musqueam, Westbank and Adams Lake -- say the impact has been to embroil them in disputes with band leaders who are not responsible to them. The disputes involve such things as rent increases of more than 7,000 per cent on the Musqueam reserve, huge tax increases on the Musqueam, Adams Lake and Westbank reserves and worries about emergency backup water systems and access to library systems on the Westbank reserve. The band councils are not only not responsible to these taxpayers, they don't even have to allow them into their meetings. Musqueam non-native residents discovered that recently during their battle over rent increases -- to amounts ranging from $28,000 to $38,000 a year -- that have rendered worthless the homes they built on land leased from the band. Non-native residents on the Musqueam lands are not alone in their disputes with band councils. Relations between the Westbank band and non-native residents, who make up 89 per cent of the population on one reserve and 96 per cent on the other, have been strained for years, says non-native resident Craig Saunders, a former member of the executive of the Lakeridge Park Homeowners Association. In December, Chief Ron Derrickson responded by promising non-native residents he would establish an elected, non-native advisory council. But residents on the reserve know there is no political power in an advisory role, Saunders says. He says non-natives living on the Westbank band lands are paying 20-50 per cent higher taxes than people living in similar homes only streets away from band property. The band didn't listen to earlier protests from resident homeowners' associations, he says, and has made it clear it won't be obliged to act on any recommendations from the new advisory council. Jon Kesselman says the experience of non-natives on the Musqueam reserve was the same. Recommendations made to the band council by the Musqueam Taxation Advisory Council -- which was made up of Musqueam band members and elected leaseholders -- were ignored, he says. "It didn't get anything of substance" in all the years it met, and when tensions rose to the boiling point over the proposed rent increases, he says, the band simply stopped calling meetings and hasn't called one for nine months. On the Adams Lake band lands, there is no consulting advisory board for non-natives to sit on, although the band says residents are free to discuss their concerns. Jim Wiggins, a Surrey resident who owns a cottage on leasehold Adams Lake band lands, isn't consoled. He has spent years waging a battle over taxes and his lease with the band. Taxes levied on Wiggins cottage have more than doubled to $1,400 a year from $600 since the band took control, he says. Meanwhile, he has been unable to sell his $50,000 cottage because the band refuses to guarantee potential purchasers it will renew a lease on the land in the year 2000 -- a promise he says was made to him in writing before he built the cottage. Neither Chief Ernest Campbell of the Musqueam band nor Chief Derrickson of the Westbank reserve returned repeated phone calls to discuss the issues. But Alan Pineio, the Adams Lake band manager, says tax increases on the Adams Lake lands are based solely on an increase in service costs from the municipalities providing services to the band lands. And he says the delay in responding to Wiggins' request for a lease renewal is based solely on a delay in working out the legal language of the new leases. "We don't want to take the properties over. We want good solid tenants in there and that's what it's about. We will be renewing." But at what price, remains unknown, although Pineio says he expects increases to be small since the leases have been subject to rent reviews every five years. The Musqueam raised rates by more than 7,000 per cent to reflect market rates of lands that have increased in value by more than 5,000 per cent since leases were signed 30 years ago, the bands says. But the city of Vancouver is planning to raise rents on similar leases it holds, on lands that have increased in value at the same rate, by 200 to 500 per cent. The difference? City leaseholders vote, non-native Indian reserve residents do not, critics say. "No one wants to deal with the real issue," says Saunders, referring to federal and provincial government representatives. "It's taxation without representation." The current situation of taxation without representation is a difficult one for federal and provincial representatives who have promised self-government to Indian bands. Providing non-natives with a vote would end the dream of self-government for many B.C. bands where natives are outnumbered on their reserves. Both Premier Glen Clark and Indian Affairs Minister Jane Stewart argue that the Nisga'a treaty resolves the issue of taxation without representation. While non-Nisga'a will be able to vote, they will also not be directly taxed by Nisga'a governments, according to the treaty. But Reform MP Mike Scott -- whose riding includes the Nisga'a reserves -- points out the Nisga'a agreement provides for the possibility of taxation without representation in the future. The treaty says: "From time to time Canada and British Columbia, together or separately, may negotiate with the Nisga'a Nation, and attempt to reach agreement on: a) the extent, if any, to which Canada or British Columbia will provide to Nisga'a Lisims [central] Government or a Nisga'a Village Government direct taxation authority over persons other than Nisga'a citizens, on Nisga'a Lands." Warns Kesselman: "The Nisga'a did not assume any tax powers at the outset, but they clearly envision doing these things in the future. How can we have confidence in either government [federal or provincial] when you have already granted 53 bands powers of taxing, while disenfranchising [non-native] residents?" Provisions in the treaty that call for Nisga'a governments to consult with non-Nisga'a are no consolation, critics say. "Provisions require them to have an advisory committee of non-native citizens. But it doesn't require them to listen to them," says Delta municipal councillor Vicki Huntington, who also sits on the Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee. Huntington says the federal and provincial governments have no idea of the magnitude of the problems they are creating with the treaty, which Clark says will act as a template for the 51 treaties now under negotiation with other B.C. bands, she says. Vancouver Mayor Philip Owen agrees. "I think it sets a bad precedent and it will continually haunt us and cause friction for decades to come." Still, Clark argues no B.C. band will sign any treaty which does not grant them self-government. They will simply sit with the status quo, given to them under the Indian Act, which allows them to take over taxation. "I submit to you the Westbank aboriginals would never agree to a treaty that will allow the majority to govern the reserve," he said in an earlier interview. And the federal government argues the new treaties don't take away non-native rights because they've never had the right to vote for band councils. But, that argument ignores the fact that it was the federal government that transferred taxation authority to the bands under the Indian Act. A senior federal spokesman, who asked not to be named, said non-natives on Indian lands can take their tax disputes to the federally-established Indian Taxation Advisory Board, headed by Chief Manny Jules of the Kamloops Indian Band. And both the federal and provincial government have argued non-natives can take any disputes to the courts -- where their Charter rights will prevail. Liberal MP Ted McWhinney, whose Vancouver Quadra riding includes the Musqueam band lands, has even suggested that non-natives on Nisga'a lands might win their right to vote by taking their cases to the Supreme Court of Canada. But non-native residents on Indian lands say advisory councils and recourse to the courts are no answer to rights they should be entitled to without years of court battles costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. "I am increasingly resentful that my rights as a citizen are being abrogated," Wiggins wrote in a letter to Indian Affairs Minister Jane Stewart. "I've been turned into a second-class citizen," he told The Vancouver Sun. "I think the whole idea of having a government where the membership and the voting potential is based on race is abhorrent," says Iain MacKay, a non-native resident on the Musqueam reserve. "It's anti-Canadian. It's apartheid. It smacks of the same kind of injustices [as were imposed on blacks in South Africa]. "If you have one privileged group having power over another group, and you have no rights to be heard, you can obviously have abuses," he says. MacKay is the former leader of the Yukon Liberal party, which campaigned in support of native land claims. But those claims revolved around land, money and traditional hunting rights," he says. "I still feel that's where it should be at. Self-government should be municipal governments." "These are fundamental matters of democratic rule," agrees Kesselman. "It is disturbing that our governments would agree, with and without treaties, to approving provisions that strip away British Columbians' basic rights as citizens." But many analysts say non-natives will have to forgo their votes for local band councils, and content themselves with the fact they can still vote for their provincial and federal representatives. It's a price that has to be paid to make up for past abuses of First Nations residents, they argue. Both Nisga'a Chief Joe Gosnell and former Musqueam chief Gail Sparrow point out that natives didn't have the opportunity to vote until 1961. And that's an argument Simon Fraser political science professor Paddy Smith agrees has merit. "We're not here [at this point of race-based governments] without a history. We need to treat these people differently. What this represents is some of the kind of rocky road we can expect as we move to a different arrangement." But Canada's foreign affairs policy with foreign governments who may use historical or cultural precedents to deny human rights is much different. Denying fundamental rights, like those to vote, based on history or culture is verboten, says Foreign Affairs spokesman Stewart Wheeler. Asked about basing a denial of voting rights for non-natives on past injustices against Indians, he said: "The answer to that is that natives now have the right to vote and that's an improvement in human rights. Our efforts in extending fairness and equality should always be forward moving. "It sounds convenient," he said of the "historical" argument. "But it goes against the grain of anyone who says they support the extension of human rights." This is just the kind of talk the provincial government doesn't want on the front pages of newspapers as it attempts to adopt the Nisga'a agreement, and critics like Huntington and Owen say the provincial government is aiming to curb debate on the merits of the treaty. Clark called the legislature back two weeks early from Christmas holidays to prevent the Musqueam situation from tainting the Nisga'a debate, analysts say. But they say speeding up the debate may not be enough. "The story has real implications," says Paddy Smith. "Even if the Nisga'a deal gets pushed through in the next few weeks, this will make other ones harder." :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: OVEREIGNTY IS THE ANSWER - CANADA IS THE PROBLEM More information on the Nisga'a agreement: http://kafka.uvic.ca/~vipirg/SISIS/Clark/BCgovt.html#nisgaa Letters to the Vancouver Sun - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
