Jochen Robes über Bildung, Lernen und Trends

Yale Final Agreement

17 (1) With respect to determining the right of individuals to register under the Yale First Nation Final Agreement, the registration of persons in the Yale First Nation Final Agreement and the ratification of this agreement by Yale First Nation, 25.3.1 An applicant who is a beneficiary of another contractual or land agreement in Canada or who has filed an application is not registered at the same time under this agreement. Yale has reached stage 6 of the BC Treaty process,[19] but the current Chief and Council recently announced that they had terminated the implementation of their final agreement negotiated by the former leaders and that they did not intend to implement it in full. Compared to other modern contractual agreements, the supply of land was 1.92% of their traditional land base per area, well below the 5% reference value set in other agreements. In addition to land concerns, there have been many other factors that have been the subject of much controversy as to the ability of the final agreement to achieve its objectives. For example, the agreement refers to the Puchil dialect of the Nlaka`pamux nation, but many members of the Community speak halq`emeylem, a coastal Salish language. First, Canada wants to focus its resources on tables with the greatest potential for success and adapt its participation to tables that have valuable resources with little chance of reaching an agreement. This may include alternative measures to the management of Aboriginal rights for tables that must address certain obstacles, as well as the cessation of negotiations with some non-productive and inactive tables. The failure of a final agreement has brought down not only those who wanted to protect the rights of Aboriginal people through treaties, but also those who hoped that a contract would reach part of B.C with land security. However, studies have shown that modern agreements can indeed give uncertainty to regions.

For example, research by the Fraser Institute in Yukon has shown that uncertainty increases when courts open contracts and “impose additional and unforeseen obligations on governments” instead of meeting the terms of the agreement.