Protect your home and your property

[00:00:00]more tax, more cost, more chaos, more of the same. This prime minister is just another liberal. Take for example the threat to property rights of British Columbombians. This Liberal government instructed its lawyers not to defend the property rights of British Columbombians in the Kawichin case. In fact, they're forbidden to this day based on guideline 14, which is still on the government's website, from putting property rights first. That case is coming up for appeal. People who paid for their homes and paid down their mortgages are worried about losing their most treasured asset. Will they reverse themselves, vote for the Conservative motion, and defend property rights in court?

[00:00:39]>> At trial, Canada defended the validity of fe simple title granted by the crown and we will continue to do so on appeal.

[00:00:47]That's why as far back as 2017, Canada argued before the court that private land owners should be notified of the litigation. This is why we supported Montrose's application to present evidence that was not before the court during the trial which is occurring today. We will continue to pursue this matter where it belongs in the courts, not on the floor of the House of Commons.

[00:01:09]>> The ragging that back in 2017 they agreed that they would inform British Columbia homeowners that they might lose their property. Mr. Speaker, British Columbombians don't want to be informed they're losing their homes. They want to be informed that their government is fighting to defend their property.

[00:01:27]She says they'll debate it on the in the courts. They're not debating in the courts. They have a guideline. The prime minister has a guideline on the government's website banning federal lawyers from arguing that private property becomes before every other claim. Will the Liberals vote for our motion, reverse those instructions, and defend property rights in court?

[00:01:49]>> Mr. Speaker, as the honorable member knows, the federal government has appealed the decision of the superior courts because we believe it was incorrect. In addition to making that appeal, we have been advocating for the court to notify private property owners since 2017. In addition, Mr. Speaker, we are supporting the application of Montrose, a private property uh owner in the area, uh to ensure that the arguments that they are making will be heard by the court in full. We believe in private property rights. We believe in reconciliation. we can manage this issue appropriately by continuing forward with the appeal. I look forward to having the opportunity to make that case.

[00:02:23]>> Mr. Speaker, that is exactly the problem. There will be an appeal and we want to ensure that federal lawyers are this time able to make the arguments that the Liberal government banned them from making last time, which is that when somebody has fe simple homeownership property or a small business owns a patch of land that there is no other claim that can supersede that one. Mr. Speaker, these are seniors who made down payments and worked for 30 years of their lives paying property taxes that toss and turn at night because they don't know if they own their homes. Will the government reverse its disastrous direction, reverse its liberal instruction? Vote for our motion to protect property.