comment: >
  
  Ontario just does not want to pay.  Simple as that.
context: "The province has argued that it is the federal government, not Ontario, that owes any compensation money." >
  
  "Despite the immense revenues generated by industry, remote First Nations communities live in abysmal conditions, sometimes lacking access to clean drinking water." >
  
  That sort of thing should really be the first port of call as far as reparations go. You take some of the profit from that industry stuff and use it to, you know, make sure they have basic quality of life.
  But that's just a start and I'm looking at this from the south of the border, where we have many of the same sort of problems and the same general lack of solutions. People seem to think you can just say "we're sorry" and things are okay -- and then there are some other people who aren't even willing to apologize at all, for whom the concept of genuine reparation is an affront. 
  But really, that shit should be unacceptable anywhere within one's own nation, regardless of who lives there. The fact that this bullshit compounds with colonial misdeeds and continued bias against those communities makes it shameful. (Again, I know, it's rich coming from a guy from the US....) >
  
  As I don't know enough about the Canadian issues to really comment, as an American I seriously doubt this kind of large scale reparations is possible. I don't see it as politically possible. Aside from issues related tax and sovereignty, I don't think there is anywhere near the kind of support in the American public for something like this.
  I should note I'm referring to Native Americans in the United States for context. >
  
  You're not wrong, but that doesn't make the end result right. Then again, the US is not known for being the least bit apologetic about, uhh, anything, and the process of reparation tends to start with sincere apologies.
  That doesn't mean it wouldn't be the right thing to do though. Politics are designed to obscure such issues; taxes are regularly poured into destructive ends; and no one is talking about doing things to reduce anyone's sovereignty -- if anything the goal would be to build up the affected communities so they could better preserve what they have left. As is, we tend to leave native communities with contaminated aquifers and the bare minimum support.
  And, I mean, it's not like we have just colonialism to apologize for. There's all the post colonial shit we did to them too, like forced integration of children (that could technically meet some definitions of genocide) and the various schooling scandals... >
  
  So, the argument here is that it costs a LOT of $$ ruling over and screwing people so they should not be responsible for paying them for their suffering?
  Interesting argument. >
  
  No, the argument that the ruling over is from the federal government, not the provincial government. >
  
  'Canada' and 'Screwing over First Nations peoples'; name a more iconic duo
  I'll wait >
  
  I’m not as educated on the Canadian treatment of First Nations peoples, but I have to imagine we’re (USA) right up there with our treatment of Native Americans. >
  
  Canada is shockingly worse. I’m a native here but have many native friends from up there.