Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. Canada
  3. 9 First Nations ask court to strike down federal, Ontario bills allowing infrastructure fast-tracking

9 First Nations ask court to strike down federal, Ontario bills allowing infrastructure fast-tracking

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Canada
canada
18 Posts 11 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • R This user is from outside of this forum
    R This user is from outside of this forum
    randalthor@lemmy.ca
    wrote on last edited by
    #1
    This post did not contain any content.
    A B H 3 Replies Last reply
    73
    • R randalthor@lemmy.ca
      This post did not contain any content.
      A This user is from outside of this forum
      A This user is from outside of this forum
      arkouda@lemmy.ca
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Opposing the bills in court is fine, but expecting $100,000,000 in “damages” for the bills simply passing is absurd and unsupportable.

      C driftinglynx@lemmy.caD 2 Replies Last reply
      4
      • R randalthor@lemmy.ca
        This post did not contain any content.
        B This user is from outside of this forum
        B This user is from outside of this forum
        bookmeat@lemmynsfw.com
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        The government could instead fast-track green energy projects and tech investment, arts, or education for sustained, long term growth, but nooooooo, they’d rather rape the land.

        T 1 Reply Last reply
        16
        • R randalthor@lemmy.ca
          This post did not contain any content.
          H This user is from outside of this forum
          H This user is from outside of this forum
          hertzdentalbar@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Abolish the Indian act. And stop acting like indigenous people know something others don’t about managing lands.

          Humans are garbage it doesn’t matter what fuckin family we belong to.

          C G 2 Replies Last reply
          7
          • B bookmeat@lemmynsfw.com

            The government could instead fast-track green energy projects and tech investment, arts, or education for sustained, long term growth, but nooooooo, they’d rather rape the land.

            T This user is from outside of this forum
            T This user is from outside of this forum
            teppa
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Oil makes up a large portion of our current account surplus, nobody is paying us to build ourselves windmills.

            M 1 Reply Last reply
            4
            • H hertzdentalbar@lemmy.blahaj.zone

              Abolish the Indian act. And stop acting like indigenous people know something others don’t about managing lands.

              Humans are garbage it doesn’t matter what fuckin family we belong to.

              C This user is from outside of this forum
              C This user is from outside of this forum
              can@sh.itjust.works
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Here’s an example where they did.

              H 1 Reply Last reply
              5
              • T teppa

                Oil makes up a large portion of our current account surplus, nobody is paying us to build ourselves windmills.

                M This user is from outside of this forum
                M This user is from outside of this forum
                majormajormajormajor@lemmy.ca
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Crazy thought, why don’t the people all collectively pay a portion of what they make, and they use that money to build infrastructure and energy projects? We can call it takes, because it takes all of us to fund. Yeah…

                T 1 Reply Last reply
                8
                • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                  Opposing the bills in court is fine, but expecting $100,000,000 in “damages” for the bills simply passing is absurd and unsupportable.

                  C This user is from outside of this forum
                  C This user is from outside of this forum
                  coolbeanschilly@lemmy.ca
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Go figure, Indigenous peoples are just as greedy as any other group when it comes to things like money. All too human…

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  2
                  • M majormajormajormajor@lemmy.ca

                    Crazy thought, why don’t the people all collectively pay a portion of what they make, and they use that money to build infrastructure and energy projects? We can call it takes, because it takes all of us to fund. Yeah…

                    T This user is from outside of this forum
                    T This user is from outside of this forum
                    teppa
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    What they make requires exporting generally to pay for their imports. What would you suggest they produce that could supplant oil?

                    F 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • C can@sh.itjust.works

                      Here’s an example where they did.

                      H This user is from outside of this forum
                      H This user is from outside of this forum
                      hertzdentalbar@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      People all over the world did these things before capitalism and colonization ruined the old ways. Were not special man, just people.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      2
                      • H hertzdentalbar@lemmy.blahaj.zone

                        Abolish the Indian act. And stop acting like indigenous people know something others don’t about managing lands.

                        Humans are garbage it doesn’t matter what fuckin family we belong to.

                        G This user is from outside of this forum
                        G This user is from outside of this forum
                        garbagebagel@lemmy.world
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        Abolish the Indian act.

                        Had me in the first half, not gonna lie.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                          Opposing the bills in court is fine, but expecting $100,000,000 in “damages” for the bills simply passing is absurd and unsupportable.

                          driftinglynx@lemmy.caD This user is from outside of this forum
                          driftinglynx@lemmy.caD This user is from outside of this forum
                          driftinglynx@lemmy.ca
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          This is how bringing a lawsuit works. You need to quantify the “harm” and the amount here is to signify the scale of the harm to the court, not to seek this amount. The lawsuit uses this 100 million amount because of precedent, according to the article, which means similar cases specified similar amounts.

                          However what they’re asking for is the injunction, not damages; there’s unlikely to be any amount paid. Even there was an awarded amount this would be like a highball offer to start a haggling process, not a final selling price.

                          A 1 Reply Last reply
                          3
                          • T teppa

                            What they make requires exporting generally to pay for their imports. What would you suggest they produce that could supplant oil?

                            F This user is from outside of this forum
                            F This user is from outside of this forum
                            fireretardant@lemmy.world
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            The USA already buys a lot of electricity off of Canada so if we massively invest in green energy we could export the electricity to the USA. Given their current trade attitude the better plan would be invest in manufacturing our own green infrastructure and then export that stuff like windmill blades.

                            Also if Canada is serious about replacing all our cars with EVs but still won’t build any transit, we are going to need A LOT more electricty for ourselves.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • driftinglynx@lemmy.caD driftinglynx@lemmy.ca

                              This is how bringing a lawsuit works. You need to quantify the “harm” and the amount here is to signify the scale of the harm to the court, not to seek this amount. The lawsuit uses this 100 million amount because of precedent, according to the article, which means similar cases specified similar amounts.

                              However what they’re asking for is the injunction, not damages; there’s unlikely to be any amount paid. Even there was an awarded amount this would be like a highball offer to start a haggling process, not a final selling price.

                              A This user is from outside of this forum
                              A This user is from outside of this forum
                              arkouda@lemmy.ca
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #14

                              The First Nations are asking court to strike down the laws, require the federal and provincial governments to make a series of declarations about how they were passed without respect to First Nations or the constitution, and pay $100 million in damages to the communities.

                              driftinglynx@lemmy.caD 1 Reply Last reply
                              2
                              • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                                The First Nations are asking court to strike down the laws, require the federal and provincial governments to make a series of declarations about how they were passed without respect to First Nations or the constitution, and pay $100 million in damages to the communities.

                                driftinglynx@lemmy.caD This user is from outside of this forum
                                driftinglynx@lemmy.caD This user is from outside of this forum
                                driftinglynx@lemmy.ca
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #15

                                If they don’t ask for damages the implication is that there’s no damage that needs restitution so no action is necessary from the courts to address the zero harm.

                                “And so, we simply applied precedent. There’s no magic in the dollar amount. It’s a substantial amount because the breach in this case is substantial …”

                                Villify these folk however you want but they’re the only thing standing between us and Canada cranking up the climate crisis. I support them 100%>>

                                A 1 Reply Last reply
                                4
                                • driftinglynx@lemmy.caD driftinglynx@lemmy.ca

                                  If they don’t ask for damages the implication is that there’s no damage that needs restitution so no action is necessary from the courts to address the zero harm.

                                  “And so, we simply applied precedent. There’s no magic in the dollar amount. It’s a substantial amount because the breach in this case is substantial …”

                                  Villify these folk however you want but they’re the only thing standing between us and Canada cranking up the climate crisis. I support them 100%>>

                                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                                  A This user is from outside of this forum
                                  arkouda@lemmy.ca
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #16

                                  If they don’t ask for damages the implication is that there’s no damage that needs restitution so no action is necessary from the courts to address the zero harm.

                                  Reasonable people understand that damage must be caused before restitution, and as you pointed out there is currently zero harm done and a small representation of the Indigenous population in Ontario is trying to sue for 100 million for the bills simply being passed.

                                  “how they were passed without respect to First Nations” is answered simply by “That is how our Government works. Your opinion is heard at election time and the Government does not need to consult you on each individual bill and you don’t get to sue over any of it without damage being caused.”

                                  As I said, I support protesting and challenging the bills in higher courts. But suing for damages when no damage has been caused to create “Sort of a penalty, if you will, on the Crown for failure to act honourably,” is absolutely absurd.

                                  There is a reason why only 9 groups signed on.

                                  Villify these folk however you want but they’re the only thing standing between us and Canada cranking up the climate crisis. I support them 100%>>

                                  I am not vilifying anyone. I am pointing out that this is an unsupportable case and gave my reasons why. You are free to challenge my points, and hopefully explain how a case with zero damages shouldn’t be immediately thrown out of court.

                                  driftinglynx@lemmy.caD 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • A arkouda@lemmy.ca

                                    If they don’t ask for damages the implication is that there’s no damage that needs restitution so no action is necessary from the courts to address the zero harm.

                                    Reasonable people understand that damage must be caused before restitution, and as you pointed out there is currently zero harm done and a small representation of the Indigenous population in Ontario is trying to sue for 100 million for the bills simply being passed.

                                    “how they were passed without respect to First Nations” is answered simply by “That is how our Government works. Your opinion is heard at election time and the Government does not need to consult you on each individual bill and you don’t get to sue over any of it without damage being caused.”

                                    As I said, I support protesting and challenging the bills in higher courts. But suing for damages when no damage has been caused to create “Sort of a penalty, if you will, on the Crown for failure to act honourably,” is absolutely absurd.

                                    There is a reason why only 9 groups signed on.

                                    Villify these folk however you want but they’re the only thing standing between us and Canada cranking up the climate crisis. I support them 100%>>

                                    I am not vilifying anyone. I am pointing out that this is an unsupportable case and gave my reasons why. You are free to challenge my points, and hopefully explain how a case with zero damages shouldn’t be immediately thrown out of court.

                                    driftinglynx@lemmy.caD This user is from outside of this forum
                                    driftinglynx@lemmy.caD This user is from outside of this forum
                                    driftinglynx@lemmy.ca
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #17

                                    Because what they want is an injunction against a law that has vague limits + goals and a clear path to violating treaty obligations. Carney didn’t run with this in the platform, no Canadians were consulted on this.

                                    The harm of failing to consult on such a rushed piece of legislation is the harm. Just think what PP would do with these powers? Even if we believe Carney will act honouably, this legislation opens the door to all sorts of damage in the name of “projects of national interest” for all federal gov’t’s to come.

                                    A 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • driftinglynx@lemmy.caD driftinglynx@lemmy.ca

                                      Because what they want is an injunction against a law that has vague limits + goals and a clear path to violating treaty obligations. Carney didn’t run with this in the platform, no Canadians were consulted on this.

                                      The harm of failing to consult on such a rushed piece of legislation is the harm. Just think what PP would do with these powers? Even if we believe Carney will act honouably, this legislation opens the door to all sorts of damage in the name of “projects of national interest” for all federal gov’t’s to come.

                                      A This user is from outside of this forum
                                      A This user is from outside of this forum
                                      arkouda@lemmy.ca
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #18

                                      Carney didn’t run with this in the platform, no Canadians were consulted on this.

                                      Carney absolutely ran on a platform of Canadian industry independence, and building infrastructure to that end as quickly as possible. If anyone didn’t see a bill like C-5 coming as a means to that end, one was not paying attention.

                                      The harm of failing to consult on such a rushed piece of legislation is the harm.

                                      Then I would argue that no harm was caused because bills pass regularly without further consultation from the public. This happens because we elect people to draft, vote on, and pass legislation.

                                      Just think what PP would do with these powers?

                                      Even if we believe Carney will act honouably, this legislation opens the door to all sorts of damage in the name of “projects of national interest” for all federal gov’t’s to come.

                                      Fear mongering helps no one, and is not a valid argument against the legislation.

                                      The Tribes bringing this ridiculous lawsuit to the courts is a waste of time and resources as no damage has been caused by the passing of this bill, and it is absolutely insulting to the idea of truth and reconciliation that they demand $100 million for not asking to pass the bill first to “set an example”.

                                      If they do not like how the Canadian Government is doing things they have a legal right to self determination and Governance.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0

                                      Reply
                                      • Reply as topic
                                      Log in to reply
                                      • Oldest to Newest
                                      • Newest to Oldest
                                      • Most Votes


                                      • Login

                                      • Login or register to search.
                                      Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                      • First post
                                        Last post