In November, The Campus Resident published the first article in a two-part series about a Freedom of Information (FOI) request I made to the provincial government for documents relating to the government’s approval of UBC’s new Land Use Plan. This article describes what the documents revealed regarding the plan and First Nations who engaged with UBC on it.
The FOI documents provide a fascinating behind-the-scenes view of the role that engagement with First Nations, principally Musqueam, played in the government’s approval process for UBC’s new Land Use Plan (LUP).
By ministerial order, before UBC submits a new land use plan for approval, UBC’s Board of Governors “must engage the Musqueam First Nation regarding” those aspects of the plan that “affect Musqueam interests”. One might wonder what Musqueam interests may be affected by a UBC land use plan. The FOI documents do not provide an answer.
Although the ministerial order requires engagement just with Musqueam, the government interpreted the order as requiring engagement with other First Nations as well. The engagement was required to meet “the case-law standards for the Crown’s duty to consult, and the policy standards set by the province’s principles that guide the province’s relationship with Indigenous Peoples”. When considering approval of the LUP, the Minister of Municipal Affairs must understand the impacts stated by First Nations and consider the accommodations and mitigations offered by UBC in response.
Fourteen First Nations were identified as “potentially affected by decisions or activities on the campus lands, with the Musqueam Indian Band, the Squamish Nation and Tsleil-Waututh Nation having the strongest Aboriginal Interest”. Only Musqueam and Squamish participated in engagement with UBC. The others declined invitations to engage or did not respond.
UBC’s engagement with Musqueam was extensive. It took place over a two-year period, commencing with the development of Campus Vision 2050 — a high-level, long-range plan for the Vancouver campus — and continuing during the development of the LUP.
Little in the documents sheds light on the matters discussed during the engagement. Numerous documents had portions redacted, with redaction code 16 (Disclosure harmful to intergovernmental relations or negotiations), code 18.1 (Disclosure harmful to interests of an Indigenous people), or both codes. From the redaction codes and the headings preceding the redactions, it is evident that many of the excluded portions concern Musqueam’s position with respect to Campus Vision 2050 and the LUP.
One revealing statement made by a UBC representative in a meeting with government officials is that Musqueam “wanted to talk a lot about the decision 150 years ago to give the land to the university”. UBC’s response was that it had no mandate to engage in discussion of title to land. An internal government document states: “rights and title interests affected by Crown grants to UBC are the responsibility of the province (and are not within UBC’s purview to address)”.
Another issue raised by Musqueam was economic possibilities through revenue sharing from land development.
In early December 2023, a few days before the UBC Board of Governors approved the LUP for submission to the province, Musqueam Indian Band (MIB) sent a letter to that board. That letter states bluntly that “the MIB Council has not approved the UBC Plan [the new LUP]”. It points out that UBC is proceeding with the plan “despite multiple statements of disagreement from Musqueam”.
The letter includes these assertions:
“Musqueam people have the legal rights to make decisions about these unceded lands [the UBC campus] and is entitled to benefit from whatever is obtained from our lands, now and for future generations, as part of the collective rights.”
“Our lands’ resources and status as neighbours are jeopardized by the proposed significant growth within UBC Vancouver campus. There will be substantial impacts on our community that have not been discussed in detail by experts or within the community to assure Musqueam the necessary mitigation measures will be carried out.”
Musqueam considered it a legal requirement that their consent be obtained to UBC’s land use decisions. UBC was advised by the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation that UBC could move forward with the LUP without Musqueam’s consent.
The Chair of UBC’s Board of Governors responded to the Musqueam letter in February 2024. Among other things, the three-page response reiterated UBC’s commitment to a Relationship Agreement with Musqueam.
Most notably, one aspect of this agreement is a Land Use Relationship Framework, which sets out an engagement process to ensure that Musqueam have a “specific and ongoing role in the implementation” of the new LUP. This will enable UBC “to understand Musqueam interests and respond to any unforeseen impacts as the Land Use Plan is implemented”.
The letter points out that UBC developed a comprehensive list of potential impacts of the LUP on Musqueam’s existing Aboriginal rights and interests, and developed strategies to attempt to mitigate those impacts. The potential impacts and the mitigation strategies are described in the First Nations Consultation Record, a 30-page document that was included in the LUP package submitted to the government but excluded from the FOI material.
Within the provincial government, the December Musqueam letter did not receive attention until late January 2024. Musqueam’s position became a major issue in the government’s approval process for the LUP. An FOI document states: “resolution of the concerns raised by the Musqueam Indian Band is required in order to proceed” with the approval of the new LUP.
The Musqueam concerns brought the Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation into the approval process. That Ministry’s response included a process to develop a government-to-government relationship agreement between the province and Musqueam. A letter from the Minister to Musqueam said that he looked forward to “the opportunity for our government-to-government table to … provide an opportunity to work together on longer-term issues regarding reconciliation, rights, title, territory, and culture”.
In mid-June, about six months after UBC submitted the LUP for approval, Premier David Eby became involved in the process. An email states that he asked that his support for approval of the new LUP be passed on to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and said that he will call the Musqueam Chief “to advise”.
Shortly thereafter, the Premier and others met with Musqueam. The meeting was followed in mid-July by a letter from the Minister of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation to Musqueam addressing several matters, most of which were not directly related to the LUP. These included UBC’s commitment to explore further partnership opportunities with Musqueam, such as partnering on student housing operations on Musqueam lands and growing the relationship between Musqueam Capital Corporation and UBC Properties Trust. In addition, the letter signalled the province’s commitment to working towards reconciliation with Musqueam, including the recognition of rights and title.
Nothing in the FOI documents indicates whether Musqueam ultimately consented to the new LUP, which was approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs on July 22, 2024.
In addition to engaging with Musqueam regarding Campus Vision 2050 and the new LUP, UBC engaged with Squamish First Nation. This engagement appears to have been contentious with Musqueam. Their December 2023 letter included the statement: “Additionally, it should be emphasized that since UBC is on Musqueam lands, Musqueam must be consulted exclusively.”
The FOI documents contain little information about UBC’s engagement with Squamish. The engagement began in October 2022 and initially involved information sharing. In November 2023, Squamish leaders met with UBC to discuss the LUP and the development of a relationship agreement.
In a subsequent letter to UBC’s President, Squamish leaders emphasized the importance of cultural representation and their interest in academic, research, and learning opportunities at UBC. The letter did not express concerns regarding the land use aspects of the LUP.
Shortly before the UBC Board of Governors approved the new LUP, “Squamish informed UBC that without action from UBC to address their comments, Squamish may not be able to provide consent for the amended LUP”. Nothing I have found in the FOI documents sheds light on whether the Squamish ultimately consented or whether their refusal to consent was not considered an obstacle to approval of the LUP.
As is evident from this account of the province’s response to Musqueam’s concerns and their refusal to consent to UBC’s new LUP, the provincial government takes very seriously its obligations to First Nations. On the other hand, there is nothing in the FOI documents showing that the government also felt an obligation to consider the concerns of those who reside on the UBC campus.
BILL HOLMES IS A CAMPUS RESIDENT AND FORMER UNA DIRECTOR.