I had a conversation last weekend with a friend who owns property in the Interior, and he was all up in arms about, among other things, the loss of private ownership within Treaty lands and the ceding of control of all mining in the province to the First Nations. That’s right. Complete control. And according to his sources, since that power was handed over, not one new mine has been approved.
After listening to his rant for a while, I had to remind him gently that if I read on social media what he had been telling me, my propaganda radar would be screaming.
That calmed him down somewhat, but it got me thinking. So I did a bit of digging, starting with the mining approval situation.
The MCCF
I can only assume my friend was talking about the Mineral Claims Consultation Framework which was enacted in March 2025. My digging revealed that very few mines finish the laborious approval process every year, only two being approved so far in 2026. Also, the provincial government is trying to fast-track the procedure. Which hardly jibes with my friend’s assumptions.
As far as I know, there has always been consultation required for mining and other projects on First Nations claims. I assume this new legislation cleans up what that entails. Also missing from that night’s discussion was the provision that the Chief Gold Commissioner is empowered to determine when the duty to consult has been met. So, mining approvals aren’t in the hands of the First Nations; they’re in the hands of the bureaucrats. Not sure which I’d prefer.
Private Land
This is a grey area that needs to be clarified. Private property is granted by the government. If private property falls into Treaty land, it is up to the government to fix it. No private landowner should be required to defend his right to ownership.
Keep in mind, however, that while the provincial government is in charge of private land ownership, the federal government has the right to requisition property deemed in the national interest. They do have to ensure a fair price for it.
First Nations have stated over and over again that they have not targeted private properties in their treaty negotiations. An article in the Vancouver Sun this week gives concrete evidence; the T’silhqot’in treaty of 2014 followed this principle. So, it is possible to have a land claim settled with no damage to present property owners.
The Law in General
Under Canadian law you can’t sell what you don’t own. The mistaken buyer must return the sold item to the legal owner. The illegal seller must return the payment to the buyer.
In practice, since the sellers of stolen goods aren’t usually pillars of the community, the whole situation usually ends up in a legal mess where only the lawyers win. For example:
What if it’s the Bank?
It’s a common scam for people to take out a mortgage on a house that isn’t theirs, walking away with the money and leaving the poor homeowner with a huge debt to the bank. It’s common practice, I gather, for the bank to insist on being repaid. Often the homeowners don’t have the knowledge or resources to fight the bank and end up losing a great deal.
This is a pretty cut-and-dried example. The bank allowed itself to be scammed. The bank is responsible for the results, and the homeowner shouldn’t be out one cent.
The Bottom Line(s)
Where mining is concerned, it doesn’t seem like much has changed, and the fearsome NDP have not given control of all our mining operations to the First Nations.
As far as private ownership, it seems to be a good thing that the First Nations peoples have standards, and they would rather hold their heads high than infringe on the properties of their neighbors. Think of the mayhem if they should start acting like capitalists.
Legally, the government may have sold land that wasn’t theirs to give. It’s their duty to provide recompense to the owners. And to do it quickly, because the uncertainty reduces the value of the properties.
The ultimate lesson here is to beware propaganda that seems to be telling you what you want to hear; it’s probably telling you what you want to hear.