Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Criticism of treaty referendum grows

As criticism over the native treaty referendum snowballs throughout the province, the Mount Currie band is again urging neighbouring community members to disregard their ballots. "No civil disobedience is required," said Mount Currie CEO, Lyle Leo.

As criticism over the native treaty referendum snowballs throughout the province, the Mount Currie band is again urging neighbouring community members to disregard their ballots.

"No civil disobedience is required," said Mount Currie CEO, Lyle Leo.

"Just ignore it."

He said there will be a collection box in the Mount Currie band office for anyone choosing to hand it in there rather than send in back to Elections B.C.

Failing that option, Leo said voters should simply put the ballots aside without answering the questions.

This strategy is somewhat in line with the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs who are calling on ballot holders to participate in an active boycott.

Their idea is to send unsigned ballots to local band offices, labour councils or churches instead of to Elections B.C. to be counted.

The UBCIC maintains that sending a spoiled ballot back to the government will give the referendum process more credibility than it deserves.

Over the past week, as the ballots arrived in mailboxes throughout the province, a number of different organizations have spoken out against the eight-question referendum.

Joining in the protest are organizations like the David Suzuki Foundation, the B.C. Federation of Labour, the Muslim Canadian Foundation, and the B.C. Government and Services Employees' Union, among many others.

In an unprecedented move B.C.'s Anglican bishops also joined in on the protest, calling on their roughly 300,000 members to also boycott the ballots.

"I think it's a great show of true democracy that people will step forward and voice their concerns when the government of the day goes out of bounds," said Leo.

At best, referendum critics call the yes/no questions are misleading and confusing.

For example, the first question states:

• Private property should not be expropriated for treaty settlements.

In the April 5 edition of the Vancouver Sun, renowned pollster Angus Reid wrote:

"This is confusing because the framers of this survey have stated the issue in the negative... the referendum uses the more controversial negative wording so that their side can have the advantage of being on the "Yes" side."

Then there is the issue of Aboriginal rights.

Some of the questions refer to rights, which are already enshrined in the Canadian constitution.

"The moral and legal rights of a minority should not be determined by the majority and that's especially true when we're talking about constitutional rights," said Angela Schira, secretary treasurer of the B.C. Federation of Labour.

The B.C. Federation of Labour represents 460,000 members from different unions. The Federation will continue to inform its members of the reasons for boycotting the referendum.

Schira said she will be tearing up her own ballot and handing it in to the First Nations Summit office in Vancouver.

"I think it's insane that this government is moving forward (with this)," she said.

The David Suzuki Foundation is also boycotting the ballot. As an environmental organization, it is primarily concerned with some of the environmental ramifications of the referendum.

The executive director Jim Fulton specifically points to questions five and seven which state:

• Province-wide standards of resource management and environmental protection should continue to apply.

• Treaties should include mechanisms for harmonizing land use planning between aboriginal governments and neighbouring local governments.

Fulton said these questions are worded in such a way that they could potentially prevent higher environmental standards from being established.

Most First Nations communities in B.C. have a high level of biodiversity with fish, plants and wildlife, he said.

"If you don't set high standards of protection for those areas with biodiversity, you lose the biodiversity.

"We think on the environmental side, the referendum fails."

The Foundation also supports the calls from First Nations people that the questions contradict the constitution as well as being misleading and confusing.

The controversial ballots were mailed out last week and registered B.C. voters have about six weeks to send the ballots back. They are due back at Elections B.C. by May 15.

The referendum is part of a campaign promise by Premier Gordon Campbell to hold a provincial vote on the treaty process within a year of taking office.

"What Campbell is trying to do is drive a giant nail into the treaty process and certainly for our foundation we say the people should not encourage this kind of anti-democratic activity," said Fulton.

Like the other groups, the David Suzuki Foundation is asking voters to boycott the referendum by ignoring the questions or by sending the ballots to their local First Nations band offices.

"Certainly something the people in Whistler should consider is delivering up those ballots to Mount Currie and say, 'look we're with you,'" said Fulton.

Attorney General Geoff Plant said the referendum will be binding if more than 50 per cent of ballots received vote yes to the questions. But if more than half vote no, the vote will not be binding.

Plant also said that sheer numbers are irrelevant. It only matters if there is a majority vote.

Spoiled ballots will also be considered as part of the referendum count if they are sent back to Elections B.C.

The UBCIC said the spoiled ballots that are sent into their office will also be counted. They will be presented to the government in protest or disposed of at a public ceremony.

But the Mount Currie CEO is taking a softer approach.

"I think we're going to leave it to the decision of the general public to express their feelings to the government," said Leo.

"When they do a summary of the results, then (people should) voice their concerns for the very silly expenditure of public dollars just to deliver the easiest election promise."

Early estimates point to a cost of $7.5 million for the referendum.