Brian Lee
Pender Harbour learned last month that a 15-year fight over how docks are to be managed is over. But I haven’t heard cheering.
That’s because the meaningful consultation that the Penner report confirmed was lacking, still is. As proof, this dock management plan differs little from the draft that shocked residents three years ago. Predictably, science has confirmed that Pender Harbour’s environmental and archeological health are affected by the people living here. Many might even agree that curtailing the construction of docks is a laudable goal. But not like this.
Interpretations of how Aboriginal title should be applied is so complicated that our top courts continue to stumble over it. Certainly our politicians are no better equipped to interpret the legal landscape with respect to First Nations in Canada. They should be forgiven for their inability to find a solution — but they shouldn’t be forgiven for being lazy.
The concept of reconciliation is threatened by mistrust and turmoil if property owners can no longer count on a clear definition of their rights. Folks rightly fear a transfer of power on matters as important as who governs freehold and Crown property. Perhaps even more so when that power is transferred to an organization that lacks the transparency we expect from decision-makers. But if we as a nation have decided that outcomes like the DMP are an acceptable cost of reconciliation, then governments have a responsibility to step up and shoulder the burden on behalf of all taxpayers. Instead, this plan and policies like it — such as increasingly common requirements for expensive archeological assessments — foist costs on property owners in an arbitrary scatter according to whims of a local government we didn’t elect.
That isn’t reconciliation. It’s hopeful politicking by bewildered bureacrats who have identified that the path of least resistance is to accommodate First Nations demands over the rest of us. If there was an honest attempt to listen to the Pender Harbour community in this process, those empowered to dictate policy like the DMP might understand that the unwavering resistance of the past 15 years comes from a perceived attack on our maritime culture.
Many are sympathetic to the concept of limiting docks in Pender Harbour but many also know the tag "Venice of the North" wasn’t applied to Pender Harbour by accident. Our community developed from the water, and it fostered a culture of moving around it by boat. That wouldn’t have been possible without a network of docks.
Should the culture that evolved in Pender Harbour over many generations be any less meaningful than claims of cultural value from an Indigenous person? It seems it is, and that’s the crux of the problem.
Comments