Ken Masse's childhood house is the last obstacle standing in the way of a multibillion-dollar mining project in the town of Malartic. But he has refused to budge.
Masse, 35, balked at lucrative offers for his mother's home and stared down an expropriation order, even after the neighbourhood was transformed from residential area to wasteland.
But Masse's stance buckled Tuesday under a Superior Court judge's order that awarded Osisko Mining Corp. possession of the property.
Man ordered from home on Quebec gold mine - Yahoo! Canada News
It's because of acts like these that I could never really support big industries. They find ways to take people from their homes in poor countries and can now do it in countries where a man and his property are supposed to be protected by laws. I do not doubt that the people who justify companies moving into the Amazon and uprooting thousands of people will find a way to justify this blatant abuse of the law but at the very least consider the possibility that if your land is ever found to be standing on a piece of land a company wants, they probably will get it from you one way or another.
This wasn't really about money for this guy. It was about principle. I wouldn't have moved out either. The environment is more valuable to me than the false and superficial value humans put on metals like gold. Hopefully he'll sue both the Canadian government AND this company for conspiring against him.
Man ordered from home on Quebec gold mine - Yahoo! Canada News
It's because of acts like these that I could never really support big industries. They find ways to take people from their homes in poor countries and can now do it in countries where a man and his property are supposed to be protected by laws. I do not doubt that the people who justify companies moving into the Amazon and uprooting thousands of people will find a way to justify this blatant abuse of the law but at the very least consider the possibility that if your land is ever found to be standing on a piece of land a company wants, they probably will get it from you one way or another.
This wasn't really about money for this guy. It was about principle. I wouldn't have moved out either. The environment is more valuable to me than the false and superficial value humans put on metals like gold. Hopefully he'll sue both the Canadian government AND this company for conspiring against him.
Rights are being eroded in Canada just as they are in most of the western world right now. Our governments are slowly becoming a big corporatocracy.
This man's private property rights were essentially tossed out by the judge. He can try to appeal it, but by the time he does his house will already be torn down.
The politics in central Canada (Ontario and Quebec) are getting worse and worse each year because of industry. He can't sue the Federal government. With the conservatives in power he will be quickly overruled.
Just one of the many rights violations we are now starting to see. I mean, very few people balked at what happened at the G20 summit in Toronto. It was just business as usual as freedom of movement was restricted, and police demanded two pieces of ID for you to walk the streets or be arrested on sight.
Canadians deserve everything they're getting, because no one will stand up for their rights anymore. They just sit down and take it.
Yeah, it's horrible. This has been going on here in the U.S. too for at least this past decade I think. I know Wal-Mart has used eminent domain here in the U.S. before to take property for their store.
Aren't you a big government guy?
In fact, most of the people that posted on this thread, saying this is bad, are supporters of the government doing what it wants, "for the public good".
Aren't you a big government guy?
In fact, most of the people that posted on this thread, saying this is bad, are supporters of the government doing what it wants, "for the public good".
Did a company order him out, or did the government order him out?
Healthcare for all = GOOD!
Gold mine = BAD.
Can you find a link, or some proof, or something for that one?
I know towns have used I.D. (thanks to the supreme court) to steal land, but Wally-world?
Local government should not be allowed to abuse their power by keeping out stores that consumers want to shop in. Nor, of course, should Wal-Mart be allowed to use eminent domain laws, as it is trying to do in several states, to force property owners to sell their land. But given that it refrains from using eminent domain, we should welcome every store that Wal-Mart builds. We should thank this great company for being so good at giving customers what they want that they make huge profits, which enables them to build more stores, hire more employees, give more profit opportunities to suppliers and make even more customers happy.
Wal-Mart should not be feared but should be admired as an American ideal--a classic rags to riches story. It is the quintessential example of an innovator left free to function. Only in a country where individual rights--at least what's left of them--including the right to earn a profit, are recognized, could a company like Wal-Mart arise and prosper. Trying to stop Wal-Mart is not only morally wrong, it is un-American.
But an e-mail exchange obtained by Wal-Mart Watch and reported in the Orlando Sentinel, shows that Wal-Mart is playing both sides of the eminent domain fence by criticizing the practice in California and employing the practice in Florida. The exchange between the developer and local landowners details Wal-Mart’s threat to use eminent domain to seize local homeowners’ land for an 800,000 square-foot distribution center:
Our firm, which is the representative for Wal-Mart on this project, has talked with several local agencies relative to the projected market value for these aforementioned property parcels… In the event any of these property parcel owners are not willing to either sell, or to provide the needed r.o.w. (or) easement, our firm will ask the County to proceed with the necessary legal actions to secure those properties from the property owners to accommodate the public purpose needs to serve the planned project’s utility and road requirements.
City Officials in Alabaster, Alabama have slammed into a "Wal" of opposition to a Wal-Mart supercenter--especially over the potential use of eminent domain to force homeowners to sell out to the giant retailer. According to the Brimingham News, the city's lawyer claims Alabaster is not trying to condemn residential homes to make way for a Wal-Mart. The city is trying to convince a judge to dismiss a federal lawsuit that seeks to prevent the city from declaring the 10 acres in question as being blighted.
Both. The company made him an offer. When he refused it. The company took him to court and got the government to kick him out. Thus why I stated that both the government and the company conspired against him.
There's more to this story than that though. If Masse had hired a lawyer and worked through the court instead of listening to this Aucoin character he probably could have kept his land. Walking out of court because some guy who had been interrupting the judge tells you to is a bad way to get the court on your side.
I find it ridiculous that this even went to court. Heads should roll when a man is forced out of his land through tripartism.
Both. The company made him an offer. When he refused it. The company took him to court and got the government to kick him out. Thus why I stated that both the government and the company conspired against him.
I find it ridiculous that this even went to court. Heads should roll when a man is forced out of his land through tripartism.
Man ordered from home on Quebec gold mine - Yahoo! Canada News
It's because of acts like these that I could never really support big industries. They find ways to take people from their homes in poor countries and can now do it in countries where a man and his property are supposed to be protected by laws. I do not doubt that the people who justify companies moving into the Amazon and uprooting thousands of people will find a way to justify this blatant abuse of the law but at the very least consider the possibility that if your land is ever found to be standing on a piece of land a company wants, they probably will get it from you one way or another.
This wasn't really about money for this guy. It was about principle. I wouldn't have moved out either. The environment is more valuable to me than the false and superficial value humans put on metals like gold. Hopefully he'll sue both the Canadian government AND this company for conspiring against him.
Hey, when someone's right they're right.I thanked a post by Hatuey in a thread on property rights. I feel dirty.
A while back the Canadian government decided that land owners didn't own the mineral rights to their land anymore and sold them off at $25 an acre.
Screwy **** happens.
A version of British law that gave the king dominion over the resources of the earth still exists in Canadian provincial law. The mineral resources that lie under the privately owned property in Canada are regarded as the property of the crown. That is spelled out in the Mineral Resources Act of every province and denies private property owners the right to the resources that lie under their land. The crown asserts a right to sell those mineral rights to persons other than the landowner and without advising private landowners of its intentions in this regard.
Both. The company made him an offer. When he refused it. The company took him to court and got the government to kick him out. Thus why I stated that both the government and the company conspired against him.
You know what I would love to see? The discovery of the biggest oil well in the history of mankind, right underneath the house of the CEO of Goldman-Sachs. At the same time, I would love to see The CEO of Chevron-Texaco work so hard condemning the home of the CEO of Goldman-Sachs that he forgets to make a payment on his credit card.
I could become a billionaire selling tickets to the fight that would come out of that. :mrgreen:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?