Since the Cowichan Decision was made public in August, elected officials at every level of government have spoken out about its impacts.While wording has differed slightly from person to person, nearly everyone has made it clear that they believe the judge erred in her ruling, and that private property rights must be protected not just in Richmond, but across British Columbia and beyond.Let's start at the federal level.During an event in Kelowna on Thursday, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre was asked about the landmark court ruling, and what should be done going forward.."The federal government needs to make a clear and decisive argument in the courts in favour of fee simple property rights," Poilievre said, arguing that if such rights are even perceived as being under threat, Canada's entire economy will "collapse."He went on to assure homeowners that "your land is your land," making it clear that "when you buy a house, you own the land ... No one can take it away.""The judges better realize the massive, irreparable damage that they will do not only to our economy, but to the future of this country if they undermine the very basic notion of private property rights."He vowed to "fight for home owners and property rights now and forever.".At the provincial level, the two people most responsible for protecting BC homeowners against legal challenges to their rights are Premier David Eby and Attorney General Niki Sharma. During a public engagement event in Richmond, the latter assured attendees they would do everything in their power to ensure the judge's decision does not impact them.."We argued that fee simple ownership and our land title system in BC was a paramount legal structure," Sharma said. "We both lost on those arguments, the city of Richmond and the province, and that's why we're asking for an appeal."She acknowledged that residents are looking for "certainty," and vowed to "vigorously defend" private property rights.Sharma had earlier declared that she and the province "disagree strongly with the decision," noting that it "could have significant unintended consequences for fee simple private property rights.""Our government is committed to protecting and upholding private property rights, while advancing the critical work of reconciliation," she said. "This case is an example of why the Province prefers to resolve land claims through negotiation — where we can protect property rights directly — rather than risk considerable uncertainty through court decisions.".Eby has also repeatedly vowed to uphold private property rights, though the intensity with which he's committed to holding fee simple title paramount over aboriginal title has waxed and waned depending on his audience.During an address alongside indigenous representatives at the BC Cabinet & First Nations Leaders Gathering, for example, he noted the province must strike a balance between protecting such rights and correcting the "injustices" of the past.."For our part as government, we need to ensure that there's clarity about the fee simple ownership of property," Eby said, describing it as "the basis" of economic activity in the province. "But at the same time we also need to recognize that our forbearers politically displaced the Cowichan people from a plot of land unfairly and unjustly.".WATCH: Eby calls on landowners to provide evidence Cowichan Decision impacting ability to renew mortgages.He has since called on property owners to provide evidence that the ruling is impacting them, adding that the information gathered will be used in court..Across the aisle, BC Conservative leader John Rustad has called on the ruling party to ensure private property rights are protected, and questioned whether the province did all it could in court to do so."The premier keeps saying he wants to protect homeowners, yet his own government chose not to raise private property rights in court," he said. "This government had a duty to ensure legal clarity and protect the public interest, not gamble with people's property rights.".BC gov't prepping response to Cowichan Decision by 'speaking directly' to impacted residents.Rustad went on to argue that the government's handling of the case has "shaken confidence in BC's land title system," and called on Eby to "release all legal advice and opinions provided to the province regarding whether to raise private property rights in the Cowichan Tribes v. Canada court case."Many have pointed out that when the claim was first filed, Rustad was himself the minister of aboriginal relations and reconciliation, though it's not clear what his office provided the government at the time..At the municipal level, Richmond mayor Malcolm Brodie has also been vehement in his opposition to the ruling, vowing that the city will do everything in its power to ensure private property rights remain paramount..WATCH: Richmond mayor says city not to blame as landowners decry lack of warning over Cowichan title case.He has, like the province, faced mounting criticism for failing to inform impacted residents that their properties were at the centre of the legal battle. It was only after the ruling had been handed down that they found out.."You're quite entitled to be angry — if that’s what you want, sure," Brodie said when asked whether residents were right to be upset. He nonetheless remained steadfast in his belief that it was the responsibility of the Cowichan to inform people..A lawyer for the city explained why he and his team were of the opinion that the judge got the decision wrong."Aboriginal title cannot coexist with fee simple ownership," he said. "There cannot be two competing rights of exclusive ownership and possession of the same land."
