Nuanced. - 241. Spencer Chandra Herbert: Minister of Reconciliation on DRIPA & Private Property Rights

Episode Date: June 1, 2026

Spencer Chandra Herbert, Minister of Indigenous Rights and Reconciliation for British Columbia, discusses DRIPA, the Cowichan decision, private property rights, Indigenous title, economic development, democracy, and whether reconciliation ever comes to an end with Aaron Pete.Send us Fan MailSupport the shownuancedmedia.ca

One of the first flashpoints was the Cowichin decision. How do you digest that decision? Should people be worried about private property rights? What are your reflections? By and large, the truth is that people whose homes are on that land right now, they're still going to be their homes. Nobody needs to worry about the loss of their private property. Do you disagree with the Cowichin decision then?

I think there's a fundamental issue that impacts our private property system in BC that we have to sort through. I think clearly there's the homeowners, the business owners, they were not allowed to represent themselves or be in the process, yet there are impacts on them. Taking it over to DRIPA, what was your reaction to the kind of journey you were just on in terms of amendments, no amendments, confidence vote, not confidence vote? But this is not an NDP problem, as much as the conservatives might want to paint it this way.

This is a B-C problem. This is a Canada problem. But, Minister, with great respect, if the conservatives end up taking office and say, a year and a half, two years, and they repeal the whole thing. What was the journey, if it ends up, you don't proceed down that path anyways? When does reconciliation come to a close? Minister, thank you so much for being willing to join us today. Would you mind briefly introducing yourself for people who might not be acquainted? Thank you. Well, my name is Spencer Chandra Herbert. I am the Minister for Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation, joining you today from the

legislature. My background, I've been a member of the legislature from a young age, probably sort of similar to you, Chief, in terms of when you took on elected life, I was first elected at 24 to the Vancouver Park Board and then decided there was not enough I could solve there. And people suggested I want to be in MLA and I've been doing that work for the good people in the West End of Vancouver ever since. I'm a artist. I worked in the arts, producing theater, dance, helping young people get their stories told, worked in film, TV, a bunch of different creative industries prior to politics, but I've always wanted to volunteer to help serve my community from a young age. I was told if you see a problem,

lend a hand and try to fix it. And that's really what's been driving me ever since. I'd be fascinated just to start with how you think about democracy, because I see you set up these spots in community where people can come ask questions. And from everything I've heard, you're a very kind soul, you're a very thoughtful person. And I just wonder how you think about how to derive a mandate from your constituents, but also when you're a minister from British Colombians on different issues. It's a great question. It's challenging. I guess one of the best lessons I ever learned about politics is don't ever be too big to clean up for yourself. You know, Don't be the guy that expects people to take your plate away at the end of the night.

Get in there into the dish pit if you need to. I've really been hands-on. I set up in my community on the street corner quite literally with my mobile office to say, you know, anyone has a story to tell or a point of view to share, and I can learn from them all. And so to me, it both keeps me humble,

but it gives me access to, you know, what's working and what's not right away from the voices of my community. community. As a minister, it's a little harder to do that on the street corner of every single community, but the principle remains the same. Get in out there, talk to people, diverse backgrounds, something that I know you try to do in your show. Really hear the perspective, because there's no monopoly on good ideas. And democracy thrives when we realize that, you know, we all basically want the same things. We just sometimes have different approaches to getting to

them. Absolutely. Sorry, I can go on. So I don't want to talk about. I don't want to talk about fill up the whole space because this is a conversation. Absolutely. You're handling one of the most challenging files, I think, in British Columbia right now, just in terms of the disputes, the disagreements. Like, I've never seen so many people fascinated by the Cowichin decision, the Katsala decision. People are really engaged on what's taking place. But I think there's a lot of fear. And I'd like to just get your understanding of some of these issues. I think one of the first flashpoints was the Cowichin decision. How do you digest that decision? Should people be worried about private property rights? What are your reflections?

It's a great question. I was out at that big town hall in Richmond meeting with residents. Of course, I met with the couch in nations, different chiefs and councils met with residents across this province who have concerns or ideas about this. I guess by and by and large, the truth is that people whose homes are on that land right now, they're still going to be their homes. Nobody needs to worry about. the loss of their private property. Chiefs and councils have been very clear. They don't want to do to folks that look like me what was done to them. You know, nobody wants to see people lose their home or their ability to have a good life because it's very painful when you see the reality of what that's done to communities across the province. You know, the stepping in and saying, sorry, that land, that area fish, that cemetery, the gravesite, that, you know, important place to you is no longer yours had pretty hard conversations. And I think a lot of British Colombians are kind of waking up to, oh, there's an indigenous fact to this province that

goes back thousands of years and that we need to deal with that. And I think in my dream of dreams is we need to embrace that heritage and that history and celebrate it, that this is common history in the sense that we all are here now and we need to value and honor that history, because that's how we go forward seeing each other, truly seeing each other, because a lot of us were raised in ways that either completely blanked out that history, or in other ways we're racist. I think that is an ongoing challenge that we have of either lack of knowledge, or sometimes that lack of knowledge being used in a way to divide because of hate and not always on purpose, but sometimes that ignorance can boil over into people saying things that they probably wouldn't say

if they knew more. And I know I dealt with that myself as a gay person. You know, people coming after me with homophobia and various things. That once you get to meet people, you go, oh, okay, actually, we're just all wanting the same thing. Let's actually hang out. We can get along. We can get a lot more done together, done divided. So, sorry, that's all a long way to say. It's a lot of challenge, but I guess if we remember the human underneath it all, people's need for good housing, good opportunity, taking care of their family. If we hold those values close to our heart, I think we'll all get through this better together. With great respect, you mentioned that you're a gay person. And I just, I want to say very clearly that the posts that were made

about you, I know that was a while ago now, were just horrific. And, deplorable and unacceptable. And I do think a factor in how good people choose not to be involved in the democratic process and run is because of things like those. And I've seen over my lifetime a lot of focus beyond women and rightfully so, how they get mistreated and judged as a consequence. But that is absolutely a factor as well. And just the staff around you, everybody has tremendous things to say about you as a person. And I just, I do want to. just say from the outside that what that was unacceptable, disgusting, inappropriate, and I apologize that that happened. Oh, well, I appreciate your kindness, Aaron. I think one thing I've learned, though, is that, you know, I used to get death threats and those kinds of things around homophobia issues. It's 10 times, 100 times worse around indigenous issues. And so just to reflect on that, that's a lived reality, I don't have to face every day, but it is one that I see a lot more now in my current role for sure.

And yeah, the haters are often anonymous. The hate, though, is not. And that sticks with people, unfortunately, and divides us when really, like, why waste our time on that crap? It makes me mad, but, like, why would we use hate to divide when we could embrace each other?

And, you know, we're going to have more fun if we actually are kind to each other. Agreed. Going back to the Cowichin decision, you're an individual in a larger system, And I'm just wondering if you can reflect for me on the communications process of the decision because there was like an initial reaction, nothing to see here, nothing to worry about. We're going to figure this out. And then, oh, maybe there are some concerns. Then there was, I think, the loan-backed guarantee for some of these homeowners. And then that like reaffirmed people's fears. As you look at kind of how that landed with British Columbians where like right now the conservative party is running on like, we will protect your private property rights. The NDP won't. Like, that messaging is really resonating for people because they don't feel like there's been clear messaging. Can you just reflect on that as an individual for me?

Yeah, I think this is a very challenging communications place to be in, obviously, because you don't want to discount people's fear that they have, they're concerned. You know, the court has said, well, maybe Aboriginal title will rest underneath private property. What does that mean? Various lawyers have different perspectives. And so people, obviously, they hear that and they wonder. They have questions, right? totally legitimate. And I don't think that denying those or saying, oh, that means you're hateful

or anything like that. That's totally not on. But then we also need to, so we have to understand that, not discount that, but at the same time, look at the law and look at the nation and go, well, but they don't want your private property. They're not coming for your home. So, you know, there's a legal issue that we've got to work through. No question. We're taking that to the Supreme Court because another judge decided a very different result when it came to very similar issues. where they didn't feel that private property should be impacted in that way. So we've got to work that through. But I think what I'm hoping to do is to turn the temperature down a little bit.

In politics, that's not always easy because people like an enemy, and they'll choose an enemy, and they'll choose fear, and they'll choose things to try and divide. But this is not an NDP problem, as much as the conservatives might want to paint it this way. This is a B-C problem. This is a Canada problem. You know, anyone leadership candidate, whatever, comes in and says, oh well, if we just repeal Dripa, it'll all be good. They're not telling you the truth. Like, you know, we have Section 35 rights under our charter. We have going all the way back to

the King, the Royal Proclamation of 1763, which again said that if the British were coming to take land, they had to deal fairly for it. They started doing that in BC under James Douglas and then stopped and didn't follow through, even though they told Canada they did. And, you know, there's a whole lot of history we can get into, but fundamentally, we've got to be fair dealers. Like, if you want to protect private property, and that's your argument, great. Well, indigenous people have property rights, too. And so let's recognize that, you know, we've got to sort that through together. And I'd say it's better to do it in a relationship of respect, rather than one built on fear and finger-pointing. And so that's how I'm trying to lead. Do you disagree with the Cowichin decision then?

I think there's a fundamental issue that impacts our private property system in BC that we have to sort through. I think clearly there's the homeowners, the business owners, they were not allowed to represent themselves or be in the process. Yet there are impacts on them. There are issues that they worry about so far. There have been no issues in terms of mortgage financing or those kinds of issues that the people were worried about. but it took some time for them to have that security, to have that feeling that so far, so good. You know, I know Richmond continues to raise concerns,

and so, of course, people are going to have questions. But I just go, okay, let's work through the legal issues because we have legal issues that we've got to work through across the province. You know, any honest person would acknowledge that. And that means you could go the court route, some route some nations want to take, and they're going to go that way.

or you can do the negotiation route where you sit down together and you try and resolve things like we've tried to do with the Comox Nation, for example, with the Comox Treaty that we're trying to do with reconciliation agreements and pathways with other nations, resolving work with the Haida, for example, where there was protection of that private property, continued commitment around how we work together, the system can continue to work the way it always has, as well, acknowledging Haida title as well. So there are pathways to do it that I think bring us all further together. And when you actually get on the ground with people in community that are involved in them, they'll say, yeah, absolutely, we're doing the right thing. And it's take some work, but we solve it. I think it's the armchair academics that sit back and just get to point and say, there's all these problems, but don't actually enter into any sort of practical. How many health care facilities did they build?

How many people did they help get employment? How many homes did they get built? easy to point at the theory. But meanwhile, we got to live in the practical. Picking it over to DRIPA, the Ghisattala decision really sparked concerns around DRIPA and its impact. And I just spoke with Thomas Isaac, a lawyer from Castles, who just reflected with me on the statement that the court made that must means must and how the reaction from your government was a bit surprised in reaction. that it was more symbolic and not necessarily factual. And his complaint was like more empty promises to indigenous people.

That was kind of what he said in that last episode. And I'm wondering, this has been on a journey where the reaction was we need to make some changes, immediate changes. We need to do some amendments. And then that has since we're not proceeding with immediate changes and we're going forward with discussions with UBCIC and BCAFN. And I'm just wondering, that communications process as minister for this file, what was your reaction to the kind of journey you were just on in terms of amendments, no amendments, confidence vote, not confidence vote? Well, I think back to when we introduced the UN Declaration of Rights of Indigenous People's Act.

You know, we had the business council, we had the Federation of Labor, we had the mining industry, we had, I think, the cattle industry, agriculture, real estate, all the nations, all the political parties. saying yes, this is the right thing to do. This is the path we need to take. And so there was unanimity at that time. And I still think there's a broad consensus out there that we have to do this work. The challenge becomes in the doing, as you pointed out. I think there's obviously work the Attorney General is doing now with that broad cross-section of people to get us back on the right track. We've had some bumps, absolutely, no question, never fun to realize that, you you made some errors or some challenges that need to be fixed. You know, politicians are rarely humble. Humility is not a skill that they give out to too many politicians. But, you know, I think the public

understands it when we agreed that, okay, this is how we thought it was going to go. But we've got to do some revisions. Like, you know, we were in the House. We talked about how this was the guidepost, but this was not the legislation itself. This was how we were going to approach these work over time to bring laws into alignment to respect indigenous rights. But it wasn't all at once. And I think that's, again, how do you work with your partners? And there are many. To take those steps forward, sometimes you get a little ahead of each other, then you have to wait for each other to catch up, or maybe you need to redirect based on what you're hearing from your partners. And that's all British Columbia in my mind. It's not just indigenous leaders.

you know, if we're all here to stay, then we've got to listen to each other. This came up. I interviewed the Premier a couple of weeks ago, and this did come up, and I think I may have poorly phrased the question, but from my perspective, one of the biggest risks of choosing not to proceed with the amendments is that I think British Columbians do feel shortchanged as a consequence of that, that their perspective and their fears aren't carrying the day, and perhaps UBCIC and BCFN is. is, and if I zoom out, I'm nonpartisan. If I zoom out and look at it, I see you guys are, I think, 10 points behind in the polls right now. If an election was called on which poll you read.

Yes, whatever, whatever poll you want to choose, say it's three points, say it's five points. You're not leading in the polls today. And British Columbians are worried about this issue. I just view it as potentially a huge miscalculation that British Columbians just don't feel represented and if an election is called in the near future, the party is in a very vulnerable state come the next election with this looming over and a lot of questions about what the future of DRIPA is. And from my critique of BCAFN and UBCIC would be small amendments that you might not love today to show British Columbians goodwill is a huge benefit right now when the temperature is so high, but saying no, when the temperature is the highest, when there's a risk of a

conservative government at the doorstep ready to take office, is they want to repeal the whole thing. And so accepting a few amendments just seemed like it made sense, even if it was an ideal. And I just wonder how you look at the politics of the amendments to drip up. Again, I guess I'm a pretty practical guy. I just go well if we can find a path that brings more people together to get a longer term solution that more people buy into, then I'm happy with that. You know, I think obviously I wish that we'd found that path earlier. But sometimes good conversations take a little bit longer. I reflect, I was told a story about some folks. They were saying, okay, we're finished hunting. We've got to get to the hunting cabin. Okay, well, we can cut across

the slew here. It's frozen over. Looks good. It'll take it. It'll be a short cut. Of course, they start going across the slew. They fall in the water. Then they have to defrost themselves, warm themselves up, et cetera, et cetera. That shortcut was actually longer than if they'd taken the long way. So sometimes to get there quicker, you need to take the long way, I guess, is what I'm trying to say here. Not easy. But again, better to bring more people with you than not. But, Minister, with great respect, if the conservatives end up taking office since a year and a half, two years, and they repeal the whole thing. What was the journey, if it ends up, you don't proceed down that path anyways? Like, what are your reflections on that

real risk for First Nations and British Columbia's relations? Well, I think, yeah, it goes beyond just the relations with First Nations people, of course. I think this argument, let's just repeal DRIPA, knee jerk, is going to lead to more problems and more economic challenge than it's going to resolve in that sense. Like you look at the economic development projects and just one northwest of BC an agreement with the Taltan First Nation. You repeal Dripa, you repeal that agreement. And that agreement is unlocking Eskate Creek mine, billions of dollars of opportunity there. They're now working on red crisp mine. Like, you know, and I get it. Like nations are saying, wait a second, we want to make sure that our environment, the water that we rely on the air, the land,

is taken care of. We also want the economic opportunity of mining. Let's do this together in a good way. And the company said yes. BC said yes. The nation said yes. And we're way farther ahead than if we had been stuck in this kind of partisan fight of saying tear up agreements with nations. We don't have to work with them. We can just go it alone. Well, you can't go it alone when you're working in someone's backyard. You've got to work with that person. You ought to work with that nation. So, you know, or child welfare agreements. Like we've made a whole bunch of agreements where nations have taken back the authority to make sure that their children are doing well. That's in DRIPA. So just tearing it up is not going to lead to better outcomes.

And some of the leadership candidates on the opposition side have acknowledged that. And they've said, oh, well, yeah, we would just have to create our own version of DRIPA, would just change the name. Well, okay, so then this is a political ban fight, not actually serious in some cases. So clearly work has to be done. I think that the court issue, there is real issues. But let's not pretend that this is the only reason why there's uncertainty in the province or the only issue. We've got deeper seated issues. We've got to work through with nations.

The Premier also mentioned that perhaps not a lot of focus has been done on celebrating the wins that the provincial government has had to date and that news would be coming in the near future in regards to celebrating those wins sharing with British Columbians, explaining what's been taking place behind closed doors and how far the provincial government has come in reconciling. Are you able to shed more light on this? You know, I think the proof comes in the doing. If you look at the economy over the last eight years, you know, we've led Canada or come second to the P.E.I. on a pretty consistent basis. And that's through actually actively working with indigenous partners.

So for those that seem to suggest that, you know, DRIPA and everything is a drag on economic growth, well, you look at the evidence that it seems to suggest the otherwise that actually when you work with nations to deliver clean energy projects, you get a big boost, you know, instead of working against nations or without them. and that nations are actually leading up and down this province in economic development as well. So, you know, working with as opposed to ignoring or opposing, I think is a better answer. Like, look up the Fraser Canyon, who's opening the tourism businesses. Indigenous tourism, one of the biggest growth industries BC is seeing, the clean energy projects I mentioned, technology. There's just so many things, I think, to get excited about and that speak to solution.

Namgeese First Nations, Northern Vancouver Island, agreement through DRIPA, unlocking new forestry potential there, new opportunities for forestry done in a good way, good jobs for the nation, but not just the nation. I think people sometimes think this is just about special treatment. When a nation's succeeding, they're hiring people, they're building. And that's not just First Nations folks. That's everybody in the region. And so I think sometimes we've had success in regions and nations have been locked out. Bringing them in actually unlocks even greater success for the region and everyone benefits. I guess I hope that there is a communications plan for some of this, whether it's town halls, whether it's events, whether it's something.

Because to me, the temperature is high. Anytime I cover DRIPA or property rights or interview someone, everybody's very interested and concerned and worried and has questions. And I'm just wondering, is there any plan to do some town halls for you and me to share the stage and talk about these things with British Columbians? To your point, I don't think it's a lot of hate. I think it's a lot of fear, uncertainty. When does reconciliation come to a close as a question I get a lot? How would you respond to that question? Is there an end date to reconciliation?

You want me to come out and visit you? I would set up on a stage or something. That would be fun together. I think these are good questions and good conversations to be had. I've been out meeting with people in smaller groups. kind of settings and certainly yeah good questions some fear but largely just people wanting to do the right things together I think the the next path of and your question was a good one so good that I've forgotten it but no I think you wanted to know when does reconciliation come to a close

reconciliation I think is such an interesting term like when I first heard it I was going okay so the reconciliation what are we trying to do trying to come back to some sort of evenness. This idea that, you know, when Fraser tried to come down the Stalo River or the Cowichard River or there have been many different names, depending on which nation you talk to along the river,

he wouldn't have made it if the nations along the way didn't help him out unless there was some sort of reciprocity of finding a path together. And to me, that's what reconciliation is about. It's like, we got so far apart as the colony grew, as the province grew as what became known as British Columbia grew. And nations were locked out,

quite literally, through the law. And so what we're trying to do is find that better way of living together that maybe people initially did find. Maybe they did find in that of, you can share, I can share, we'll share together. And I think that's really what the spirit for me of reconciliation is. Will I be able to declare reconciliation is done? I don't think that's for me to say, because it is a personal issue for many folks. I think it's personal, it's political, but really it is about finding a way to come back together in a way of respect for what are sometimes very different ways of being

and different ways of knowing. But we're still all here. So we have to find that way of being to live in good ways together. That to me is what reconciliation is all about. If you say something rude to somebody and you offend them, I was always taught find a way to make good when you make a mistake. And really, I think there's been some serious mistakes in how we grew as a province. Serious opportunity and great things, too.

Like, don't get me wrong. I love BC. I love Canada. But I think it's okay to acknowledge that we got some ways to go to make things better. Beautiful. Is there one last message you'd like to close to say to British Columbians who are listening? Just to say, thank you for engaging on these issues. I think we're better when we ask questions

and when we try to learn from each other. That's how we build the province that I think we all want to live in, one of love and understanding, where you don't have the depths of poverty we see sometimes and where everyone has an opportunity to build that good life. So I just really thank you for engaging in these conversations. Thank you, Minister. I will say this very loudly and very proudly.

We have, Chihuahawawawthal First Nation has experienced the benefits of your government, government's leadership on issues like housing. We just announced 31 new BC housing units. We just did our groundbreaking ceremony. And we're so proud that we're bringing members home. We're bringing them off of the streets. We're housing them. We have a childcare center coming online in the next couple of years

as a consequence of your government's willingness to do things on reserve. There's no other province that has chosen to build housing on reserve other than the NDP's government that started under John Horgan and has continued. to today and we are grateful for that. I think those are signs of real reconciliation where, to your point, we're improving the poverty rates, we're improving the education rates, the addiction rates, the health care rates. That's how I measure reconciliation is, are we substantially in a healthier, better place? Because, and again, to your point, we miss out on the human capital, the capabilities of First Nations people when they're so

unwell because of their housing conditions that they can't go and succeed when they're so stuck in the reserve that they can't go off to university because they don't know anybody there. We miss out on their potential, their gifts, their artistry, their creativity, all of those things when we don't try and address these issues. So I'm so grateful. I don't think you do a ton of interviews. Correct me if I'm mistaken. So I'm incredibly grateful that you were willing to spend this time with me. I've been looking forward to this. We met at one of the events, last September, the hour gathering. And so I'm just grateful to have had the opportunity to speak with you today. Well, looking forward to talking more. I think these are conversations that need to be

had. And, you know, I do a lot of interviews, although they might, maybe not on the news waves, more person to person community group by community group. But, but yeah, we've got some work to do. That's for sure. And I really appreciate the work you're doing for your nation as well, because not easy being an elected person, because there's a lot of high expectations, and you have a family in life as well. So trying to balance all those out can't be easy, but it's sure rewarding when we get it right.

Absolutely. Thank you again, Minister. Thank you. Looking forward to chatting again. Much appreciate, Chief. Talked again.