Колумбийские консерваторы обвиняют в расизме переговоры о земельных уступках, однако фактическая площадь затрагиваемых территорий значительно меньше заявленной

The Turner Files: The political gaslighting over treaty negotiations Published 1:32 pm Monday, August 17, 2026 What is a way to not sound racist while hoping no one notices that what you’re saying is couching racism? In the conservative world it is being done through demanding transparency, and fiscal and democratic accountability around treaty negotiations. Instead of racially charged language, this phrasing seeks to make racism palatable. The fear factor is stunning. Let me break it down for you. Here are some of the words being flung around by BC Conservatives. “24 million acres.” “Bigger than Portugal.” “Nobody voted for this.” “They’re giving away BC.” But what is actually happening? BC’s Public Accounts lists 334,643 acres of provincial Crown land tied to treaty negotiations. Let’s do the math. They arrived at their number by taking the confirmed number and adding about 23.7 million acres linked to separate negotiations with the Tahltan Nation in northwest B.C. The Tahltan talks are operating outside of the standard treaty commission. It’s a Foundation Agreement, being negotiated directly between the province and the Tahltan Central Government under BC’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA). This is the same legal pathway used for the Haida title recognition and the province is working on the agreement within the legal framework of that legislation. A court ruling in December found that those provisions are legally enforceable. Freedom of information requests show talks have been running since at least 2020, with terms still not public. It does raise legitimate questions about how the government negotiates title outside of the BC Treaty Commission process but the handwringing ignores much of the facts around other negotiations. The government’s own response confirms the facts. Ministry spokesperson Art Aronson said there is no mandate to negotiate title over the Tahltan’s entire traditional territory, and that even if one existed, it wouldn’t cover all 96,000 square kilometres the BC Conservatives claimed. The Public Accounts document states that not all First Nations pursue claims through the formal BC Treaty Commission process, with some instead going through the courts or direct negotiation over title and rights. The treaty commission’s six-stage process is one path among several, and Tahltan’s claim and its economic significance, partly due to mineral wealth and active mines, made the direct Foundation Agreement and DRIPA route the one the government chose. BC Conservative leader Kerry-Lynne Findlay adds to the outrage. “There will be nothing left of B.C. by the time they are finished,” she said. She is calling for the Legislature to be recalled to repeal DRIPA like it is a dire emergency. Caroline Elliott is calling the land negotiations a handout and a giveaway. Ron Sam, Chief and Chief Negotiator for the Te’mexw Treaty Association, provided a counter argument. He wrote that this would be like gifting someone something that was already theirs. This is what Elliott calls charity. This approach of stoking anger against the NDP government and First Nations is easier than doing the real work of reconciliation. It doesn’t come with solutions and depends entirely on whipping up resentment. It is fair to ask what a title transfer of public lands will mean in terms of access and management in the future. Chief Sam states this and says debate over the terms, including governance, public access, and the concerns of neighbouring nations, is appropriate. BC Conservatives know their positioning on this is at best troublesome. Scott McInnis, Official Opposition Critic for Indigenous Relations, acknowledged this in a social media post. He said the government “will do anything to keep its reconciliation plans quiet” and said he expected to be called “the typical names” for raising it. Typical names, like “racist?” His preemptive statement creating himself as a victim tells its own story. In a media release the BC Conservatives call the negotiations secretive. Conveniently, they seem to be hoping the public won’t look into the commission’s published timeline covering the majority of cases, the six defined stages, or news releases. The BC Treaty Commission describes the six-stage process as guided by agreements that have their source in the 1991 BC Claims Task Force report. Treaties are meant to address unresolved land questions. Minister Spencer Chandra Herbert said that claiming there is a secret list “isn’t just inaccurate, it’s a misrepresentation of what these lands are and why they’re being transferred.” He pointed out that negotiated agreements have been the path every BC government of every political stripe has pursued for over three decades, since most of the province was never covered by historical treaties in the first place. Understanding that the majority of BC was colonized without any treaties should help explain why continuing to kick the ball down the road is only aggravating the situation. Treaties are important not only in addressing Indigenous rights, but in creating economic stability and legal certainty by resolving outstanding obligations. While changes to ownership of Crown lands may reduce provincial revenue opportunities they will have little impact on the day-to-day life of British Columbians. Without the lengthy negotiations the government would most likely be forced into costly legal proceedings through the courts. One Indigenous person recently commented on social media. “Maybe what makes some people uncomfortable isn’t that First Nations are getting too much. Maybe it’s that after generations of governments making decisions about our lands without us, we’re finally getting a damn say.” In essence, what we can see happening here in the messaging from conservatives is twofold. Indigenous people are being told their rights aren’t real, that what they’re getting is freebies and handouts. Toward the rest of us, it is political gaslighting. Using partial truths and misinformation, and repeating it often enough, is how it becomes accepted as the truth. UBC lecturer Stewart Prest said the opposition is edging into demonizing the idea of land claims altogether, drawing polarizing lines that would create real problems if the Conservatives ever had to govern and deal with these same unresolved questions themselves. One thing we can all do is look up the facts. We can also ask for more transparency. Political fear mongering and using misinformation to drive wedges are known tactics of these operatives. It is a strategy to sway public opinion and consolidate power, and most often is absent of solutions. Let’s not buy into the hysteria. Wilbur Turner is a seasoned political strategist and community advocate based in Kelowna. Drawing from hands-on experience in political campaigns, he brings a passionate commitment to civic engagement and delivers incisive, approachable commentary on the political and social forces shaping our communities and nation. Honoured with an Honorary Doctor of Laws from the University of British Columbia for his profound community impact, Turner also pens thought-provoking pieces as QueerGranddad on Substack.