Mr. Speaker, the amendment before the House at the moment is to institute a six month delay on the bill. I would like to approach the discussion from the angle of representation.
When asked about the fact that the polls in B.C. clearly showed that a majority of people were opposed to this deal, the member for Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Valleys said that he did not want to be a courier to this place or what would be the point of being here. There was a time, in a former lifetime perhaps, when the NDP prided itself in being representatives of the people or what was the point of being here. That marks a major departure in political philosophy between the NDP and the Reform Party. We feel we have an obligation to represent the concerns of the people of B.C. in this place.
From a philosophical position I can understand why the NDP would support a socialist structure of government, which is certainly the structure that is to be set up by the Nisga'a deal. But the evidence from all around the world is that socialism does not work. It depresses the people. It suppresses initiative and it always results in a lower standard of living. I think we can see that in what has happened with existing treaties on reserves across Canada. In fact, I would challenge any member in this place to show any treaty passed in the last 200 years that has resulted in a higher standard of living for people on reserves.
In terms of representation, why has the government side not bothered to ask those Nisga'a who voted against the deal why they are opposed to it? If it had taken the time to do so, it would have discovered that the opponents are afraid that the treaty will entrench a system which will confer benefits on a few at the expense of many, particularly at the expense of individual rights.
As my colleague from Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca said a few moments ago, it smacks of segregation. I can tell the House that literally dozens of immigrants from South Africa who live in my riding have phoned and written to me to tell me that they call it apartheid. They pull no punches about it. They told me on the telephone, in person and in letters that they do not understand why Canada is pursuing exactly the same course that they were criticized for in South Africa. The whole world reacted against South Africa and imposed sanctions. They do not understand why we are going down the same road.
Speakers from other parties asked us what Reform would have done to solve these problems. Let me put in a suggestion based on representation.
If the people of B.C. had been asked or allowed to vote and indicate to their government whether they agreed to land being involved, whether there should be individual or collective rights, whether there should be money transferred, and the basics of treaty making had been passed in some sort of referendum in the province of B.C., the politicians would have had the mandate to go ahead and negotiate a treaty. It would have been endorsed and supported by all of the people of B.C. That did not happen.
Today we have a situation where poll after poll in B.C. is showing strong opposition to the agreement. In fact in the ridings of Liberal MPs in this House, Vancouver Centre and Vancouver South—Burnaby, up to 70% and 80% of the people are opposed to the Nisga'a deal.
It is just not good enough to say that they do not want to be couriers to this place. They should be coming here, standing in the House and saying why the people in their ridings are opposed to it.
Instead, we have a situation where all of the other parties are attacking Reform, and completely unfairly. We saw today in question period a member of the PC party standing to ask a question about the Mi'kmaq and the lobster fishers on the east coast. There was not a single word of criticism or an attack against the PCs for expressing tremendous concern about what is happening in their ridings.
Look at what has happened in the House over the last six years. The member for Delta—South Richmond, five and six years ago, talked about the illegal fishing that was going on in the Fraser River and all of the fish that were being sold illegally in B.C. by native fishers. He was attacked. We were labelled as bigots and that other r word that I am not allowed to use in this House. We were attacked for representing our constituents. Now it is happening on the east coast.
Perhaps it is a little wake up call for the government and for everyone who does not understand what is going on in B.C. They will share in the strife if they continue with the process of setting up governments based on race.
Over 90% of all Indian bands in the country are in B.C. People who live anywhere else in the country, who have not experienced the difficulties, do not have even the slightest concept of what is happening in B.C.
The Liberal Party of B.C. fought this bill tooth and nail as it went through the legislature in British Columbia. It even filed a court case, claiming that this bill was unconstitutional. The fact that it was rammed through by the NDP government has put an aura of mistrust in place. The people of B.C. do not trust the NDP government. Just the fact that it was rammed through by the NDP is a bad mark for the deal. It would have been much better had the people of B.C. been allowed some say in it. The member for Vancouver Island North went into great detail about the process and how flawed it was.
I have on my desk many newspaper articles written by people who could not be labelled with the r word or called bigots or extremists. Barbara Yaffe, Rafe Mair, Gordon Gibson and many commentators in British Columbia have written about this treaty. A headline in one of Barbara Yaffe's columns read “Reality check for the Liberals: alienation is real and justified”. She went on to criticize the Prime Minister's task force and to explain why segregation based on race is not the way to go with Indian land claims.
Another column by Barbara Yaffe was entitled “Special rights for natives threaten our otherwise civil society”, and she related the Mi'kmaq situation to what is happening now in British Columbia.
Rafe Mair wrote:
A pall of madness has settled over the province of British Columbia and will soon spread across the country. Our representatives, both provincial and federal, have utterly betrayed our interests. We have, with the Nisga'a agreement now before Parliament, ensured there will be at least 50 semi-autonomous “nations” in B.C.
Despite what you may be told, these will not just be native “municipalities”. Nisga'a sets up a separate style of government to which powers, reserved for the federal and provincial governments, will be permanently ceded. Does all this really mean anything? You bet it does. It means that in British Columbia there will be between 50 and 75 “nations” that will govern themselves with constitutions, not on the level of municipalities but as part of the power-sharing process envisaged by the Constitution of Canada.
And B.C.'s voters have also specifically rejected the Nisga'a treaty when given the chance. Since the B.C. government refused to hold a province-wide referendum, some B.C. citizens' groups held their own instead. Earlier this year, 7,200 Prince George residents...voted on the Nisga'a treaty and more than 97% cast their vote against it. Residents of the northern region of Vancouver Island...said no to the tune of 97%. A poll in Ladner-Tswassen found 93% of 3,400 voters against the treaty. The turnout itself was damming: Two weeks later a school board election was held in a nearby area with twice as many voters as were eligible for the Nisga'a vote. There, only 2,600 people showed up to cast ballots.
That gives an idea of the relevant importance of these two issues in the Ladner area.
The article by Rafe Mair continued:
Am I some anti-native, red-necked racist looking for a forum to peddle hatred? Those who know me know I'm anything but. What I am, however, is one who, in a long life, has seen his country reach a point where, far from reducing racism, it is about to sanctify it for all time in the constitution of the country.
I congratulate Rafe Mair for the article that was printed in the National Post and I would ask members to read it in full. It illustrates and demonstrates beautifully what is happening in B.C. at the moment, why the Reform Party is so vigorously opposing it and why the member for Kamloops should be doing the same thing. He is not just a courier. He owes it to his constituents to bring their concerns to this place.
