‘It’s reconciliation’: Green Leader May endorses feds’ agreement with Musqueam Nation as minister clarifies private property concerns

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May says the recent string of agreements signed between the federal government and British Columbia’s Musqueam Indian Band “don’t pose any threat” to private property rights, but that there's been “a recent uptick” in negative reactions to First Nations’ rights in B.C. in the wake of last year’s landmark Cowichan judgement.

“It’s reconciliation. It’s not subtracting from colonial people’s rights. It’s improving the ways in which we work together,” May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, B.C.) said of the agreements in a March 6 interview with The Hill Times.

“What needs to be really stressed—because people are so quick, particularly right-wing populists, very quick, to ignore the evidence and say this is somehow going to take away people’s private ownership rights—… this does not pose any threat whatsoever to that.”

May’s comments follow concerns that the three agreements signed on Feb. 20—one of which grants the Musqueam Nation Aboriginal title over their traditional territory encompassing much of Vancouver’s Lower Mainland—could impact British Columbians’ private property rights. 

The Conservative-leaning Fraser Institute published a commentary piece on March 7 entitled “Ottawa’s agreement with B.C. First Nation threatens private property rights.” “Don’t trust Ottawa on Musqueam agreement,” reads a March 4 op-ed from the National Post. 

Thomas Isaac, a lawyer with Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP, also told The Globe and Mail that the agreement doesn't explicitly say private property isn't affected.

The backlash prompted Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs (CIRNAC) Minister Rebecca Alty (Northwest Territories), as well as the Musqueam Nation, to clarify the scopes of the agreements. 

“These agreements do not impact private property,” Alty wrote in a March 3 statement on X. “This is preferred to the more uncertain alternative of determining Musqueam’s Aboriginal title through the courts. By negotiating we are able to uphold existing property rights and advance reconciliation.” 

“These agreements do not relate to land ownership and there are absolutely no impacts to fee simple lands/private property,” echoes a March 2 statement from the Musqueam Nation. 

Former NDP MP and B.C. MLA Nathan Cullen said the feds’ communication of the terms of agreement could have been clearer, as those opposed to reconciliation are “comfortable stoking fears.”

“There has to be as much attention—almost as much attention—paid to how things are communicated and when, as much as what’s in the agreement itself,” Cullen told The Hill Times. 

The minister's clarification also comes as B.C. MLA Dallas Brodie—who was ousted from the B.C. Conservative caucus—said in the province’s legislature that the agreement means "we find ourselves being pulled toward land collectivization and communism. We must fight this trend with all we’ve got.”

Brodie also claimed the Musqueam Indian Band’s chief now has ownership over properties falling within the nation’s traditional territory in a video posted to her social media on the agreement.

“This is a 911, an SOS, a mayday announcement to my riding of Vancouver Quoshenna, and all the other ridings that are located within the Lower Mainland,” she said in the video. 

None of the three agreements signed between Ottawa and the over-1,300 member First Nation reference private property.

The first pact is the rights recognition agreement, and it recognizes the Musqueam have Aboriginal rights and title within their traditional territory, which spans approximately 533,000 hectares of modern-day Vancouver, Burnaby, Richmond, New Westminster, Delta, and more. 

The other two agreements address marine management and fisheries in those territories. The fisheries agreement establishes shared decision-making between Ottawa and the nation for managing fisheries within Musqueam territory, and the second sets out a pathway to implementing collaborative agreements for managing waters and resources in the nation’s territory. 

The agreements were not initially made public, but the full documents have since been published to on CIRNAC's website. 

There are 'signs of racism that I never thought I'd see': May

May attributed some of the backlash to last year’s Cowichan decision, which she said has resulted in “more nervousness from settler culture people” and an “uptick in negative reactions around First Nations’ rights” in B.C.

Last August, the B.C. Supreme Court ruled that the provinces Cowichan tribes have Aboriginal title to a portion of the land on the Fraser River. The decision initially sparked confusion amongst property owners in the affected area, despite the tribes insistence they don’t intend to come for private property rights and the justice’s ruling affirming that Aboriginal title does not “displace” private owners within the affected land, existing alongside fee simple property titles. 

“There’s also been signs of racism that I never thought I’d see … on Vancouver Island, in terms of how people are reacting after the Cowichan decision,” May said.

It’s something the Musqueam Nation acknowledged, too, writing in its statement that the ruling has been “impactful” for “everyone,” including the nation, which is appealing the judgement. 

But, said May, “I don’t know of any First Nation anywhere—and I don’t think there is one that has ever proposed that—having had 500 years of colonization since Columbus that First Nations were going to throw settler culture people off their lands and seize their lands.”

The agreement has also caused tensions between Liberal MP Wade Grant (Vancouver Quadra, B.C.), who is a member of the Musqueam Nation, and Brodie, whose provincial and federal ridings overlap.

Brodie accused Grant of having a "gross conflict of interest," and claimed that Grant's staffers participated in a "violent mob" that "assaulted" her and her team at the University of British Columbia.

Grant, who did not respond to The Hill Times' request for interview by deadline, wrote on X that one of Brodie's staffers came into his constituency office on March 6 "trying to agitate people for a reaction."

Today a staffer for @Dallas_Brodie entered my constituency office unannounced and began recording my staff and an innocent constituent without their consent. They walked through my office filming and trying to agitate people for a reaction. pic.twitter.com/le52VrwZVH

— Wade Grant (@WadeGrant) March 7, 2026

Grant also wrote in a March 3 statement that claims that the Musqueam agreements affect private property ownership are "misinformation."

First Nations trying to 'stay out of court,' says leadership council

Robert Phillips, political executive with the British Columbia’s First Nations Summit and First Nations Leadership Council, also attributed the “fearmongering” and “fear-based reactions” to the Musqueam decision to the “political climate.”  

He pointed to the Cowichan case and B.C. Premier David Eby’s pledge to amend B.C.’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, which mandates the government to align provincial legislation with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 

“Again, First Nations are forced to defend our rights and interests,” Phillips said in a March 5 interview with The Hill Times. “What I’m hoping is that there isn’t going to be an increase in litigation, that it doesn’t slow the progress, that we get to the point now where we see these agreements and projects continue.”

First Nations "drive the provincial economy," he said, and "I do believe that we should be partners."

He added that agreements between Indigenous groups and federal governments, which “bring certainty on the ground” are preferable to First Nations, rather than fighting for land rights through the court system. 

“That’s what we’re trying to do, is stay out of court. We’re trying to negotiate.”

Culture and Identity Minister Marc Miller (Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, Que.), who also holds the file for official languages, and who was formerly Indigenous Services minister, told reporters on March 9 that litigation can take "a heck of a lot of time," and that with reconciliation, "you have to get ahead of things."

"If we truly believe in reconciliation, it certainly isn't free and it can't be something that you're strong-armed into," he said, when asked about the agreement.

Cullen, who held a number of different files as a B.C. cabinet minister from 2020 to 2024, agreed it's preferable for Ottawa to negotiate agreements directly with First Nations, rather than fighting it out through court.

It’s “like a boxing match: you’d rather decide it in the ring, rather than leave it to the judges,” he said, noting that when cases go to the Supreme Court, the government “loses all ability to influence what happens next.”

Cullen said that, as a minister in B.C., he faced the consequences of narratives overwhelming the content of a legal decision, pointing to his moves to amend the province’s Land Act, in his role as water, land, and resource stewardship minister. 

“I was the victim of one of these things when I was in government, where we had a clear legal understanding of what we were doing, it made sense to everybody involved, but someone was able to torque it, lie about it, and it spread like wildfire,” said Cullen, who was an MP from 2006 to 2015.

The proposed amendments were accused of giving First Nations a veto over the use of Crown Land, which B.C. Assembly of First Nations Regional Chief Terry Teegee called “fear mongering at its worst” at the time.  

But Cullen echoed May and Phillips, saying the concern around private property rights in the Musqueam agreement doesn’t make sense, as it is not in the feds interest to craft an agreement that would expropriate people off their land. 

“This doesn’t create any new rights,” May also stressed. “This is saying the rights and title, understood to be Musqueam nation rights and title, are entering into a period of greater collaboration.”

ewand@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times