BC Oil Delgation visit Offshore Oil Rig


#1

cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2004 … 92-cp.html

The mayors of Prince Rupert and Massett and aboriginal leaders from northwestern B.C. and northern Vancouver Island were part of the tour, which was funded by the government.


#2

What’s going to happen is that they’re going to negotiate with the Haida’s about drilling for oil, there’s going to be a treaty and in the end they will start pumping offshore oil very soon… but the Haida’s get 50% of the profits…


#3

why? their ancestors used to gather crude oil from under the sea floor?


#4

Just as much as your ancestors did.

If they found oil on your farm, would you be entitled to any royalties? Does it matter if you ever had anything with oil before?

Why should Canada be entitled to royalties from the oil? Or BC? Answer those questions, and you’ll have the answer to why they feel they’re entitled to royalties.

Don’t play the “they didn’t do it traditionally” crap, it’s not a fair comparison. You’re using a computer, you drive a car, you have electricity and everything else that you didn’t have “traditionally” either.

If you want to take issue with their claim to ownership, there are better arguments than that.


#5

okay. how about they found oil on your lot. you don’t get any right to it at all. all you can do is charge the drillers a fee to cross your property.

it’s not really about ancestors, it’s about b.s. claims like trying to extend aboriginal claims to the seabed now. chunk of the jobs yes, royalties no flippin way. the oil belongs to all the people, not just some.


#6

Mig is right. The only problem I have is the racial differentiation that it implies. When it comes right down to it we’re all Canadians, can we let go of the past or do we continually need to cling to it to pick up these pay-offs.


#7

Shitdamn Hakki, is your avatar ever sweet.


#8

So by these arguments, if oil was found on land in the Ukraine which traditionally belonged to my family (but was seized by the Communists), would I be entitled to ask for some of that money? It’s been nearly a hundred years since my family lost the land, more or less the same as has happened here.


#9

I am simply pointing out that there is no law in effect now or ever, no treaty, no historical claim, nor any legitimate justification that the province of BC is ‘required’ to share royalties collected from offshore mining.

If the politicians do of their own accord they will set a precedent that will be called up every time. It will also appear to a huge number of people that they are offering the Haida a huge ‘bribe’ to smooth the permit process.


#10

[quote=“hoshq”]

So by these arguments, if oil was found on land in the Ukraine which traditionally belonged to my family (but was seized by the Communists), would I be entitled to ask for some of that money? It’s been nearly a hundred years since my family lost the land, more or less the same as has happened here.[/quote]

The communists would share it with everyone!


#11

[quote=“hoshq”]
So by these arguments, if oil was found on land in the Ukraine which traditionally belonged to my family (but was seized by the Communists), would I be entitled to ask for some of that money? It’s been nearly a hundred years since my family lost the land, more or less the same as has happened here.[/quote]

So you see how the argument isn’t about if they traditionally used crude oil or not, the argument is whether they own the territory or not.

If they own the territory, then don’t they have the right to profit from it? It’s irrelevant whether they are traditional oil-hunter-gatherers or not. Saying things like “why? their ancestors used to gather crude oil from under the sea floor?” is not relevant.

I mean, you get free health care in Canada, but your ancestors didn’t traditionally have free health care. How fair is that? See how totally irrelevant it is?


#12

Speaking of crude oil, 7-11s gas smells like it… I don’t know if it’s a lower grade or something, but it is the only fuel in town that smells like gear oil. Car still runs alright on it.


#13

Probably because the province of BC doesn’t have jurisdiction over offshore mining. There’s this little thing called the Constitution that makes offshore minerals the jurisdiction of the federal government, not the provinces.

BC would be just the like First Nations in this case, begging for a piece of the action.


#14

It is when they have publicly stated that their territory extends to the traditional fishing grounds and what’s under them.
The proper political approach to that is to say f u and then let the court decide if it gets there.


#15

You’re confusing two issues: the ownership of the territory (or waters in this case), with what was traditionally done on it.

If it’s their territory, then they are entitled to profit from it. If it isn’t their territory, they’re not entitled to profit from it. Who cares what they traditionally did on it?


#16

what they did on it is the basis of their claim to ownership. ownership is not a ‘native’ concept. native bands have never claimed they owned the lands, just that by our concept they must own the land cuz theyt were using it first


#17

So it’s just a circular argument.

“our concept” of ownership means that you have the right to profit from the territory. (BTW, it belongs to Canada, not BC)

“their concept” of ownership means you have used the land in the past.

You’re right about letting the courts decide, of course.

But ask yourself this: if a native band traditionally hunted Jackelope in a territory, and were therefore entitled to “own” that territory in a land-claim settlement, does that mean that they are not allowed to hunt for any other species, or farm, or do anything else on that land because they didn’t do it in the past?

Personally, I think BC is a bit blinded by the prospect of becoming oil-rich like Alberta. It won’t happen, of course, because while Alberta receives oil royalties, BC wouldn’t. The feds would. Ask Newfoundland how much it receives from Hibernia or Terra Nova fields.


#18

depends if the oil is off the west coast of the charlottes or in the straits. If it’s in the straits, it’s BCs royalties. If it’s 300 kms offshore it’s Toronto’s.

whups
i mean canadas heh heh


#19

No, off-shore is off-shore. Off-shore is federal jurisdiction, period. Doesn’t matter how off-shore it is. Same with fish.

Guess the provinces didn’t know about off-shore oil in 1867.


#20

they knew about fish. how’d they let that one slip thru?
i think the last gov’t said they would contest the inland waters. last socred govt