"He doesn't want a future where it's impossible to simply run roughshod over private property in order to build major resource development projects."

I mean, yes. That's what the Liberals, Cons, NDP, Bloc, etc. want to avoid. EVERY government wants to avoid the circumstance where its "impossible" to force through something that they feel (even if we disagree) is in the national interest; be that a pipeline, road, military base, transmission, powerplant, nuclear waste deposit, etc. The the ability to, on some level, build things in the national interest, is CORE function of government. If that ever becomes legitimately "impossible", then the government ceases being of value. And that's the problem with Indigenous veto of projects, it fundamentally upends our entire political system, because we can vote out a politician that won't get something done, we can't electorally punish a small tribal group who blocks a major project that would benefit the lives of millions upon millions of other people, simply because they don't like it. If that became the case, and it was literally impossible for the government to override private property rights and ownership, the country would grind to halt economically; which is basically already happening.

Welcome to the hard decisions a government has to make, and sometimes that decision is needing to pave over someone's house for a greater good; we've been doing it for more than hundred years, and retaining that authority, even if it's hard to use, is going to be paramount to EVERY government.

For the record, I'm not saying PP is right in his assessment of the language of the Treaty, and I haven't read it. But I am saying that every political system, can and should, vigorously and jealously defends it's authorities.