canada has a valid treaty in new brunswick, but is illegally occupying british columbia. canada has no right to be in bc at all. i repeat: the canadian presence in bc is an illegal occupation. straight up.
further, european concepts of "property rights" are not "fundamental" in canada, but in fact do not exist at all. it is extremely concerning to hear a member of the government make such misinformed and overwhelmingly ignorant comments about "property rights" in canada and i would call for that person's immediate resignation and self-deportation to the united states. get out of this country. you're not welcome here with your yankee property rights. canada is a country that does not have any enforceable legal concept of property rights, whatsoever, and that is a very, very good thing. canada's historical rejection of the idea of property rights is one of the primary reasons that we are a more just society than the united states, with it's horrible use of private property at the foundation of it's deplorable constitutional framework. we fought a revolution against property rights - that was the point of our rejection of america in the revolutionary war, it was a war against property rights. that is our history, and i am proud of that history. i am proud that canada fought a war to reject property rights and subsequently built a society on their negation, a society that is better than the one built on property rights next door to it. the concept of property does not exist anywhere in canada's constitutional framework, which is something i am proud of as a canadian, and i want to ensure it stays that way. it is foundationally, fundamentally, starkly different than the constitutional or legal framework in the united states.
in canada, all land (with the exception of a small amount of allodial property owned by indigenous groups) is the exclusive property of the crown, which since patriation refers to the federal government. there is no private property in canada. at all. deal with it.