Squamish Nation members have soundly rejected a proposal that would have seen the First Nation's elected chiefs and council assume authority over land use on reserve lands from the federal government.
In two days of voting last Thursday and Friday (April 7 and 8), members voted 808 to 547 against the Squamish Land Code, a measure put forward by the chiefs and council that would have seen local leaders gain authority over land use and environmental protection over the 849 hectares of on-reserve land on the North Shore, in Gibsons and in the Squamish area.
The turnout was just over half of the 2,528 eligible voters.
In the days leading up to vote, leaders had urged the measure's passage, saying they felt it offered the nation a chance to cast away at least a portion of the "paternal structure" imposed under the Indian Act. Some members, though, expressed concern about provisions in the land code surrounding expropriation of land and about the potential for authority to be concentrated in the hands of a few leaders.
Xayiltenaat (Shirley Lewis), who led a small "no" demonstration outside Totem Hall on Thursday (April 7), said one problem is the document, written in legal language, was presented to the people only about a month before the vote. She added that, in general, she and others feel there hasn't been enough consultation with the membership on a variety of issues.
"They have to answer to the people, but they're doing things on their own and we're not happy with it," she said.
Chief Ian Campbell on Tuesday (April 12) acknowledged that the timing issue was a big one raised by members.
"The feedback that we've received so far has indicated that the membership didn't have enough time to really process the information about what would stem from the land code and because of that, they weren't prepared to endorse it," Campbell said.
A man who asked that he be identified by his hereditary name, Gausedis, said some who did read the document felt it left the door open to abuses by those in positions of authority.
"There's no checks and balances and there's no protection from exploitation," he said while seated outside Totem Hall on Thursday.
Another man, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said, "I've read most of it and I've seem some good points, but I've also seen the door left open for some bad, bad decisions for our nation. There's too many holes in this document, and it's been pushed through too fast."
Gausedis said some don't feel the current chiefs and council adequately represent them and would like to see the nation go back to the hereditary representation system that existed before 1981.
"We want to see the hereditary system back in place - our laws, the way it used to be, with families looking after each other, not the people in power looking after their own," he said.
Said Campbell, one of four hereditary chiefs under the current system of representation, "The land code process has certainly triggered a lot of great dialogue among our membership. From that, there was a lot of discussion of issues surrounding our system, including land use and governance.
"If they'd like to change that [system], there's an opportunity to have that discussion and consider changing it."
In a letter that followed the 59.6 per cent no vote, Band Manager Glen Newman, Chief Gibby Jacob and council co-chairs Byron Joseph and Krisandra Jacobs congratulated the membership on making a "decisive and clear" vote "mandating that there will be no changes to the existing management of our Indian Reserve Lands.
"We will not pursue the proposed Land Code without further consent of the membership. Our Nation will remain under the supervision of the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs for management of our Indian Reserve Lands."
The letter added, "Chiefs and Council look forward to hearing from membership about ways to improve the system of land management on our Indian Reserves."
