SERVING RESIDENTS AND COMMUNITIES FROM MIDDLE POINT TO EARLS COVE/EGMONT

LATEST NEWS

GOVERNMENT SAYS LAND ACT AMENDMENTS NOT COMING BACK, BUT FILING IN BC SUPREME COURT SEEMS TO SAY OTHERWISE

On March 20, 2025, the BC Government held an information session on the recently released addendum to the shíshálh Nation / BC Foundation Agreement.  PHARA representatives attended and understood the government to say it will NOT be pursuing a joint/ consent decision-making agreement with the shíshálh Nation (under Section 7 of the DRIPA) for docks and instead will continue to use shared” decision making as outlined in the original Foundation Agreement.   


Such a Section 7 agreement was directly tied to the controversial Land Act changes that were proposed but scrapped last year after public furor.
 

But how does one reconcile the March 20 comments with a statement the Province made in a filing in BC Court just days ago?  Specifically, after several delays, the Province has finally filed its response to PHARAs legal challenge and it says this: 

… The Province and shíshálh Nation are not proceeding with s. 7 negotiations related to dock authorizations at this time. Further, the resumption of those discussions will involve robust public engagement, a subsequent mandate and legislative amendments to the Land Act…. (para. 65)  [emphasis added] 

 

Which is true?  Are the Land Act amendments coming back?  Is this pause just temporary while PHARAs case is going through the courts?  

 

One thing is pretty clear – PHARAs legal challenge struck a nerve. The government response also states: 

 “…None of PHARAs arguments have merit.  These arguments are political advocacy seeking to regress British Columbia to an impoverished bare minimumapproach to relations with Indigenous peoples”. (para. 10) 

 

The record of engagement presented in the petition is selective and inaccurate, and notably does not capture the extent to which PHARA declined to engage with the Province. (para. 54) 

 

Further or in the alternative, even a cursory examination of the constitutional arguments reveal that they are without merit.” (para. 67) 

 

PHARA, of course strongly disputes these assertions and looks forward to the court ruling on them. 

In the meanwhile, PHARA members and interested citizens are encouraged to read PHARAs Petition to the Court from September 11, 2024, and the Province’s Response to PHARA Petition. We also ask you to spread the word and encourage people to help fund our legal challenge. 

 

Donate to PHARA’s Litigation Against DRIPA