Dear Editor.

I have read many comments regarding the National Park over the years, both here and other places. I keep wondering why each side continues to say the other is wrong and attack each others opinions and polls. Both sides (and the media) seem to be missing the answer to a key question. Think about this.

Why would the provincial government enter discussions to create a national park and then abandon them without clear explanation? Why?

The provincial gov’t didn’t walk away because our MLA Linda Larson said she was against it and didn’t trust the polls. The gov’t doesn’t make decisions based on the opinion of one MLA. Decisions of this type are made in caucus with all MLA’s. The gov’t doesn’t ignore polls or public opinion. If they do, they risk not being re-elected. That is not a risk any gov’t of any party would take. So we can safely say it was not Linda who made the decision for the gov’t to walk away from the discussion and say they would try other solutions.

So what else could have been the cause? What happened two years ago to make the province walk away?

The Supreme Court happened.

In Haida vs. British Columbia and Taku River Tlingit vs. British Columbia it was determined that Aboriginal title to B.C. has never been extinguished. Google “ B.C. aboriginal title “ and become informed.

Basically, the province would be obligated to transfer title of much of the park area to the Osoyoos Indian Band and the Upper and Lower Similkameen Bands instead of the Federal gov’t. Federal title is required for a national park. As a result the province has chosen not to transfer the land and title to anyone else and abandoned the discussion over a national park. They are opting for provincial protection which does not require a transfer of title.

The Provincial and Federal gov’ts don’t talk about this “elephant in the room” for fear of harming treaty negotiations or relationships with native bands throughout B.C. and Canada.

So if the “Yes” side wants to get a park, do the following: Convince the Chiefs, Councilors and members of the three bands to abandon any land claims over the park area. Then the province can transfer title to the federal gov’t and a park can be created.

If the “No” side wants to keep things as they are, do the following: Convince the Chiefs, Councilors and members of the three bands to stick to their principles and demand the transfer of traditional territories located in the proposed park area.

But either way, stop attacking each other and arguing about who is telling the truth. Recognize that there are bigger issues involved here that cannot be resolved by referendums.

Sincerely,

David Mattes