Jeff Kibble

Mr. Speaker, today Liberals repeatedly failed to answer my question on extinguishment and their failure to use that argument in the B.C. appeals court and, therefore, legally not being able to use it in the Supreme Court. They mislead Canadians, give a false impression and say every “viable argument” because they know they cannot say every argument. Is this just another Liberal illusion?

Mr. Speaker, in my comments, I said “secretly negotiated”. The Musqueam agreement was negotiated behind closed doors. Even the Premier of British Columbia claimed he did not know about it until the actual signing. That is secrecy, not transparency, and it is how the government is failing our country. As far as the comments are concerned, I have not heard those comments and I am not in a position [more]

Mr Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's excellent intervention. You mentioned secret agreements. Could you tell me the risks and explore some of the risks of secret agreements done behind closed doors and their effect on transparency, as opposed to a treaty process that is established through the courts and that is open and transparent?

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is spending more time blaming Conservatives for the Liberals' own failures than proposing realistic solutions in his address today, which is a typical desperate Liberal tactic. The member stated that they would vigorously defend private property with every viable argument. Members may have noticed, however, that he could not say “every argument” because he knows [more]

Prime Minister Mr. Speaker, speaking of disinformation, the member opposite claims that thehas defended this, but he continually fails to disclose that he has already tied the hands of the government lawyers with the extinguishment article. He speaks of it being filed immediately when, in fact, the Supreme Court filing was done on the last day, at the very last minute. That is more [more]

Mr. Speaker, I am feeling frustration from across my riding. We keep hearing the words “all viable arguments”, but we are not hearing all arguments. Will the Liberals acknowledge what the Supreme Court knows, which was established in the B.C. appeals court, which is that the federal government lawyers will not be able to use the main argument, the extinguishment of land title argument, because [more]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the great people of Vancouver Island, and especially all of the seniors, families, workers, businesses and, perhaps most importantly, the youth of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford. Our communities stretch from Langford to Crofton, Thetis Island to Lake Cowichan to Port Renfrew and across the beautiful Cowichan Valley. It is home to numerous first nations, [more]

Mr. Speaker, I really agree with my colleague's statement about empty promises and empty words. People are worried about the value of their property. They are worried about getting mortgages. In fact, it is so bad that the provincial NDP government is now having to back mortgages in affected areas, and it can do that only for a small area. It is going to need to do that for the entire province. [more]

Mr. Speaker, the Cowichan land decision and the Liberal-Musqueam agreements signed secretly and outside the treaty process have resulted in economic uncertainty, falling property values and unsettling division among British Columbians, especially on Vancouver Island. Prime Minister We need truth and reconciliation. Theis failing to deliver either. He is clearly unaware that by handcuffing the [more]