How about when that cash is needed to provide First Nations with drinking water, provide First Nations seniors with OAS, GIS and health care, provide First Nations with infrastructure and access, provide First Nations communities with funding to build capacity, to pay claims and restitution, etc.? - ThreadSky

hobbitlover.bsky.social • 7 days ago

How about when that cash is needed to provide First Nations with drinking water, provide First Nations seniors with OAS, GIS and health care, provide First Nations with infrastructure and access, provide First Nations communities with funding to build capacity, to pay claims and restitution, etc.?

Comments

erathis-matt.bsky.social•7 days ago

The money for clean drinking water is owed to them because we shoved them off the land we put cities on. The lack of drinking water was because we broke that promise and half-assed that.

hobbitlover.bsky.social•7 days ago

First Nations often approve projects when its in their interest, and will have the same legal rights as they did before to negotiate benefits. Just read the bill.

erathis-matt.bsky.social•7 days ago

Except the bill says if Carney declares it in the national interest, they don't get a say, and lose any leverage they would have to get a good deal.

erathis-matt.bsky.social•7 days ago

You are arguing that because unions aren't banned, the government isn't interfering in contract talks by legislating strikers back to work. They have the right to say no, hold out for a better deal.

erathis-matt.bsky.social•7 days ago

Unless you have a fast and easy way to reverse climate change, pollution, and bring back extinct species. You can't just say 'we can repeal it if it turns out to be a mistake.' Go play God with another planet.

erathis-matt.bsky.social•7 days ago

But I feel this is pointless, when you said if we elected Pierre, we would have gotten the same bill tabled, and apparently you would support it then too. This isn't a partisan thing, the bill is horrible law. We need rights and enviro protections to be protected, not thrown out when inconvenient.

hobbitlover.bsky.social•7 days ago

I'm saying there's a consensus that it takes too long, costs too much and is too hard to get large projects through these days. As much as I'd love to evolve past the need for economic development, it's critical.

erathis-matt.bsky.social•6 days ago

It "takes too long" because:
1. Evaluations take time.
2. The parties involved exercise all their legal rights to appeal decisions - both those whose lands will be affected AND the company proposing the project.
3. Recommendations are appealed rather than incorporated.

hobbitlover.bsky.social•7 days ago

Nobody talks about it, but Canada is fucked. We are entering a time when we'll have 10 million seniors drawing OAS, GIS, using 4x the average of health care, etc. There will be one retired person for ever 2.4 workers. We knew it was coming but didn't prepare for it at all.

hobbitlover.bsky.social•7 days ago

That's not true, read the bill.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply