First Nations leaders call for pause on B.C. treaty legislation
- Emilee Gilpin
- Apr 28
- 5 min read
VICTORIA, BC | April 28, 2026
Story by Emilee Gilpin
First Nations leaders are calling on the provincial government to pause treaty legislation they say advanced without meaningful consultation, raising concerns about impacts on their rights, title and governing systems.
Hereditary and elected leaders have expressed serious concern with the territorial lines drawn into the agreements and the implications the Treaties would have on their rights, usage, decision-making abilities and relationship to their traditional territories.
Lax Kw'alaams leaders say the Kitselas Treaty Act claims more than 90 per cent of their territory and Wei Wai Kum leaders say the K'ómoks Treaty would impact roughly 80 per cent of Liǧʷiłdax̌ʷ territory.
“Our territories are unceded. We have not given up anything—we have not signed away any of our lands,” says Stan Dennis Jr., Galdamalgyax, hereditary chief and representative of the Nine Allied Tribes of Lax Kw’alaams.
Leaders say the proposed treaty could also create economic uncertainty along the North Coast, including around development tied to the Port of Prince Rupert and broader trade corridors.
The K’ómoks Treaty and the proposed Kitselas Treaty Act were introduced in the B.C. legislature in April and are moving through the provincial ratification process. Both require approval by the legislature before finalization.
The provincial government says the agreements are the result of decades of negotiations and are intended to advance reconciliation.
“Together with K’ómoks, this treaty will create opportunity, jobs, prosperity and certainty,” Premier David Eby said on April 14.
Chief Councillor Nicole Rempel of K’ómoks First Nation said the treaty is about "building a stronger future for our people and creating certainty for generations to come." Kitselas First Nation leadership has described the treaty as the result of more than three decades of negotiations and a path toward long-term self-governance.
But Lax Kw'alaams and Wei Wai Kum leaders say the legislation advanced despite unresolved territorial disputes.
“We have been told this is reconciliation — but what we are seeing is something very different," says Mayor Gary Reece of Lax Kw’alaams Band.
Mayor Gary Reece and Stan Dennis Jr. Joint press conference held in Victoria on April 28, 2026.
'No such thing as overlap'
Lax Kw’alaams leadership says the territorial boundaries reflected in the treaty maps do not align with their oral histories or systems of governance.
“Our boundaries have been established for generations, and they have never changed,” Dennis says.
He says the Nation has provided documentation, including historical records, maps and archival materials, showing that governments had previously recognized their territorial boundaries.
“There was no such thing as overlap,” Dennis says. “If you wanted to come into our territory, you had to ask permission.”
Leaders say those systems pre-date provincial and federal governments and remain central to how decisions are made.
“We’ve had one meeting—one. That is not proper consultation,” Dennis says. “What this government is doing is driving a permanent wedge between First Nations,” he says.
Lax Kw’alaams leadership and community also held a demonstration in Prince Rupert on April 28, drawing a large turnout in opposition to the proposed treaty.
Wei Wai Kum calls for 180-day pause
At a separate gathering in Victoria on April 12, Kwakwa̱ka̱ʼwakw leaders raised similar concerns about the K’ómoks Treaty and called for a defined pause in the process.
“We support reconciliation. We support modern treaties—but they have to be done properly,” says Wei Wai Kum Elected Chief Councillor Chris Roberts.
Wei Wai Kum has called for a 180-day pause in the ratification process.
“Our goal is for a pause and a reset so that Nations can do the work together and resolve these issues with integrity," he says.
Roberts says the Nation is working within its own governance systems, including hereditary leadership, to resolve territorial issues with neighbouring Nations.
“We are not finished this work...We’re not looking for a veto—we’re asking for a fair process that reflects Indigenous law and history,” he says.
Press conference for elected and hereditary Chiefs held at the Royal BC Museum on April 12, 2026.
Broader opposition across Nations
“Treaty negotiations must have the consent of all impacted Nations before proceeding,” says Linda Innes, vice-president of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs. “The Crown continues a destructive and divisive process by advancing treaties without that consent."
Gitxaala Nation has also formally opposed the proposed Kitselas Treaty Act. In a letter dated April 27, signed by hereditary and elected leadership, the Nation says British Columbia has not received its free, prior and informed consent.
“This unilateral process BC has chosen can only be interpreted as an infringement of our rights,” the letter states.
Lasting Implications
Leaders say they are seeking a pause in the process to allow Nations to resolve territorial issues directly, but warn legal action remains an option if the legislation proceeds.
“If our request for a pause isn’t acknowledged, we will have no option but to pursue litigation,” Roberts says.
“When you create uncertainty there, you don’t just affect our Nation—you affect workers, investment, and the Canadian economy,” Reece says.
Leaders say the outcome of the treaty process will have lasting implications for how Indigenous law and governance are recognized in the province.
Women held in high esteem showing support during a press conference with Kwakwa̱ka̱'wakw and Nuu-chah-nulth leadership.
Different paradigms at play
Leaders say the core issue is how the treaty process intersects with their own systems of governance, which they say are not reflected in the current approach.
“What government needs to recognize is that there are different paradigms,” says Hereditary Chief Mike Willie during the April 12 conference. “There’s the Western way to view things—laws written in black and white—and then there’s our way, which is oral and visual.”
Willie says those differences extend to how authority, responsibility and territory are understood.
“Section 35 may get you to the door of the Big House, but it does not allow you to understand what is inside,” he says.
“All our clans are connected to territories. They don’t go one without the other. You have to have these territories to have these positions amongst our people,” says Hereditary Chief William Wasden Jr. “It was very intact. We have to unify to start looking at these histories together.”
Speakers say those systems — which pre-date provincial and federal governments — continue to guide how decisions are made and how disputes are resolved between Nations.
“The potlatch was our form of government. It was more than just a redistribution of wealth—it was where laws were created and modified, where disputes were resolved, and decisions were made,” says Hereditary Chief Wedlidi Speck. “This is how we validate ourselves—by having chiefs of other tribes validate what is being spoken about.”
“We were drawn into lines 150 years ago under the Indian Act, but long before that, we had our own laws and boundaries,” says Hereditary Chief Yakawidi Shawn Lewis. “It’s up to us to govern ourselves, our lands and our waterways.”
He says the treaty process, as currently structured, conflicts with those systems.
“That treaty overlaps not just the Wei Wai Kum. It is breaking our own laws and forcing the Indian Act over our true hereditary rights. That is not our way.”
-30-
Comments