ADDRESSING ALONG-STANDING INJUSTICE

By HUBERT BEYER

VICTORIA -- "Settling native land claims is the largest outstanding social issue of our time." – Ted Hughes Chief federal land claims negotiator in a recent interview.

To say that Hughes is passionate about the issue of native land claims would be an understatement. He brings to his latest job the same drive and convictions that marked his years as British Columbia’s conflict of interest commissioner.

In that capacity, Hughes found himself presiding over the demise of Bill Vander Zalm, for which the former premier’s friends will never forgive him. But to credit Hughes with forcing the resignation of Vander Zalm would be wrong. The man single-handedly engineered his own downfall and the subsequent destruction of the once mighty Social Credit Party.

In his latest job, Hughes also doesn’t lack critics, the most strident of whom accuse him of being in charge of a process that will result in the whole province being turned over to the First Nations.

Hughes says he doesn’t mind constructive criticism. In fact, he welcomes it. No issue as important as settling the First Nations’ long-standing land claims, he says, should be dealt with in secrecy. That’s why the process is so open, he adds. Meetings are widely advertised, so that the public can participate.

What Hughes doesn’t like are the myths that have been swirling around the negotiations, one of which is the aforementioned claim that 100 per cent of British Columbia’s land will end up in native ownership.

"None of the land you and I own is on the bargaining table. And only a fraction of the land the First Nations claim will in the end belong to them," he says.

He points to the example of the Nisga’a Treaty which has been agreed to in principle by the three partners in the negotiations – the federal government, the B.C. government and the Nisga’a. In that case only a minuscule portion of the land the Nisga’a had claimed is now targeted for their ownership, once the treaty is ratified.

Another important clause of the treaty is that once in effect, the Nisga’a will no longer be exempt from taxation.

A second myth has it that First Nations self-government will result in numerous pockets of quasi-foreign nations within Canada, a claim Hughes dismisses as outright ridiculous.

Whatever form of self-government will be agreed upon, he says, Indian lands will still be governed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and the Criminal Code, the most important laws governing Canada.

Self-government may, in some cases, resemble municipal governments. Some bands may want more control over education within their territories. But the basic laws of Canada, Hughes stresses, will apply to all, including First Nations with some form of self-government.

The logistics of the treaty process are massive, with about 45 different claims under negotiation. And since British Columbia is the only province where no major treaty agreements were made in the past, all current negotiations are with B.C. Indian bands.

Under the terms agreed to by the two senior governments, Ottawa will provide the cash settlement, while British Columbia will turn over any Crown land destined for native ownership.

Hughes says settling the long-standing claims is important not only because it will finally rectify an injustice, but will also bring economic stability to British Columbia. Uncertainty over who owns what land, he says, discourages investment.

But more than anything else, Hughes hopes that a successful conclusion of the negotiations will help natives take their rightful place in Canadian society.

"Compared to the non-aboriginal population, natives have higher rates of illiteracy, unemployment, suicide and incarceration. The social costs of this are staggering," he says.

"Settling all claims won’t happen overnight, but we’re on the right track."