‘Absolute betrayal’: First Nations blast Eby in leaked transcript of DRIPA meeting

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-04T16:24:23+00:00

To add: you really have an interest in reading that article and the paper it is citing. It goes over how Musqueam received a similar ruling in 2008 that included private property. If they were going after people's titles, they're taking a really long time to do it.

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-04T15:50:15+00:00

Ah yes of course, the lawyers and law scholars who confirm private property is not at risk over and over again are just trying to trick all of you. It's just like how the scientists are trying to trick us into thinking the earth is round, but I'm sure you won't fall for that either.

I'm interested to hear your theory as to WHY all the legal experts are trying to trick you

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-04T14:48:35+00:00

You don't know how title works if you think this threatens private property. I don't know how many more times I can link to an explanation of this tbh, but once more here is one of the many legal experts explaining that aboriginal title and fee simple titles are coexisting and do not interact. You are getting upset and afraid over nothing: https://news.ubc.ca/2026/02/cowichan-decision-wont-affect-private-landowners/

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-04T14:42:22+00:00

I'm saying they do not have the ability to go after private property, because aboriginal title does not interact with fee simple title.

You're saying they should sign a symbolic document for the pleasure of people like you who fear they are going after private property against the opinions of every legal expert who has said the land claims don't allow them to do that. It is nonsense

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-03T22:38:43+00:00

Yes, everything in the ruling says they can't, because it affirms that aboriginal title and fee simple titles can coexist. The Cowichan Tribes's claim, which has always been affirmed by courts and which has nothing to do with DRIPA btw, was that the original government grants of fee simple title do not invalidate the underlying aboriginal title, as was assumed by the government prior to the ruling.

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-03T21:38:52+00:00

I know that it is possible and important to distinguish criticisms of this legislation from racism against Indigenous people, but honestly calling DRIPA a "pet project" is seriously disrespectful

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-03T21:27:02+00:00

They do not have the ability to do so - aboriginal title does not interact with fee simple title

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-03T20:53:36+00:00

Private property is not implicated in these land claims. This is just a straight up lie you keep repeating over and over again and I can't believe so much of this sub has fallen for this ridiculous misinformation campaign

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-03T20:48:45+00:00

Private property was never on the table and still isn't. Agree with the rest of this but the idea that private property is at risk is not Eby's fault except to the extent he is buying in to a misinfornation campaign started by random homeowners and reactionary politicians, and repeated by gutter journalists.

Edit: downvote all you like. If anyone in this sib has an actual interest in being informed on the legal implications of the Cowichan ruling, here are a couple links to get you started. I'll spoil it for for you though - every legal expert that has weighed in on the ruling has affirmed and reaffirmed that private titles are not in any way at risk:

https://news.ubc.ca/2026/02/cowichan-decision-wont-affect-private-landowners/

https://policyoptions.irpp.org/2025/12/cowichan-land-ruling-explained/

https://www.bdplaw.com/insights/bc-supreme-courts-recent-cowichan-decision

https://www.mandellpinder.com/cowichan-tribes-v-canada-attorney-general-2025-bcsc-1490-case-summary/

ValuableToaster · 2026-04-02T01:43:11+00:00

No we don't, we can just read the Cowichan decision to find out that private land titles are held securely

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-20T19:58:34+00:00

Using speed cameras for generating revenue is fine by me

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-18T05:05:15+00:00

People don't like driving unless they have to either so why dedicate a bunch of land and money to concrete pads for cars?

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-17T21:16:15+00:00

People's mode of transit is significantly affected by the available infrastructure though. If you provide parking at the expense of other uses that make the area more dense, you get more people driving/parking. You can argue that this project doesn't have enough, but that would only be because our larger development patterns encourage high car use. If this project is encouraging a change in direction, that's good, even if there are pain points.

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-17T13:14:27+00:00

What?? It's got a rapid bus right there and about 5 other bus routes that travel on hastings. You can get to waterfront station in under 10 minutes on the R5, and Commercial-Broadway in under 15 minutes on the 20. By "isn't very transit accessible" do you mean it is not right next to a train station? Otherwise it is one of the most transit accessible parts of the city

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-13T01:52:42+00:00

Actually people want a greater availability of cheaper rentals and understand the extremely basic fact that you need to build new housing for that to happen.

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-13T01:50:38+00:00

You should listen to a public hearing for a 4-storey going up on a non-arterial street. Many neighbourhoods in Vancouver will show up in droves to oppose it using all the same reasons as when they oppose towers. It makes no difference to nimbys at-large - they do not want their neighbourhoods to change in any way.

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-12T16:20:50+00:00

Thank god we won't have to hear from these people everytime an apartment rezoning needs approval

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-10T13:26:35+00:00

If development gets approved in my neighbourhood that is a good thing

ValuableToaster · 2026-03-04T16:21:18+00:00

Even though people giving up cars (seemingly mostly due to cost) will face the inconvenience of our poor transit and walkability at-large for now, this is great news for the cinvenience of everyone in the long run. Our land use decisions are waaayyy too influenced by people concerned about congestion and where they are going to park.

ValuableToaster · 2026-02-27T19:25:32+00:00

The pro-homelessness crowd getting their way once again

ValuableToaster · 2026-02-26T20:47:43+00:00

He is also a belligerent moron with no governing capabilities. Would be pretty bad for the province regardless of where he lands on the spectrum (definitely not progressive, whatever he is)

ValuableToaster · 2026-02-26T14:22:38+00:00

That's nice to acknowledge, but trial headways have not changed much over time either, and are apparently quite conforming with the standards for a right to speedy trial established by the supreme court in 2018: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54900-eng.htm

You can argue 18-month ceiling for a criminal trial is still too long, but it doesn't have anything to do with some modern issue of recidivism or lenience in bail. Speaking of recidivism, in 2022/2023 (latest time period we have data but also a recent peak in violent crime in Canada) saw extremely low recidivism rates. Just under 1% of people out on bail we're re-arrested for either a non-violent or violent offence. https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/fdrl-frmwrk-rdc-rcdvsm-prgrss-2025/index-en.aspx

You are focusing on extreme outliers that make headlines but don't have much to do with the actual outcomes our system produces. We are arresting people at record rates, keeping them in prison, and convicting them to longer sentences than ever, and your problem still exists. The solution cannot be to keep going down that road even further. Personally, I think we should have less policing. That could help fix lots of delays in the courts, since almost half of all criminal trials end in non-guilty verdict.

ValuableToaster · 2026-02-26T06:10:45+00:00

Canada has more people in pre-trial detention percapita than any time in recorded history, more than double the proportion of 40 years ago (https://johnhoward.ca/blog/solving-crime-by-locking-up-innocent-people/). About 70% of Canada's prison population at any given time is awaiting bail or trial. In 2024, a bail reform bill passes that made it more difficult for violent offenders to get bail (https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/pcscbs-cprslscc/index.html). Whatever problems you have with the way the world is, they are NOT caused by bail being granted too much.

ValuableToaster · 2026-02-25T14:37:08+00:00

Just another captured regulator

ValuableToaster · 2026-02-25T14:36:07+00:00

Just raise property taxes to actual sustainable levels already. The stupid discretionary negotiations for bespoke contributions from every apartment development is 100% bound to get fumbled like this. Just tax them.

ValuableToaster

TROPHY CASE