Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505
Lol, I can see I've struck a nerve with you. It's not my goal to change the treaty, I have been saying all along that I think it should be updated, meaning amended to modern society.
I realize they are for both sides, I wanted to know if you feel they are reasonable the way they are written? I think they are not, no where near in fact. By the way you've felt the need to explain what you meant by MP leads me to believe this is some new knowledge for you that you'd like to share with us. Be careful what you wish for, people in parliament might figure out it only takes one moose, one elk and one deer to feed a family for a year.
|
Bad news Kurt, they already have been.
That isn't the job of government though, the courts have interpreted them and applied them to modern society very recently. I don't know why you think Parliament can dictate a change like that, the courts do, not Parliament. Parliament can't do that any more than you can decide to change the details on a car you sold 10 years ago. A treaty is a contract.
MBR made a good point, you treat the treaties like they are something Canada granted natives, and that is wrong. That is how they are seen and treated today by many, but that is not what they are. They are nation to nation agreements, like it or lump it, that's what they are. That is how the courts treat them too.
Canada can't dictate.