The Icelandic Canadian - 01.03.1974, Qupperneq 32

3D
THE ICELANDIC CANADIAN
SPRING 1974
These Islanders (and there were
many) who left during the difficult
times, sacrificed or abandoned their
homes to leave. Those who remain,
did not want to sell at market prices
which have become deflated as a result
of the absence of demand.
It is true that under Section 26 (2)
of the Expropriation Act, an owner
who is expropriated is entitled to get,
in addition to market value, an amount
necessary to enable him to acquire
other land that will afford him resi-
dential accommodation at least equiv-
alent to that offered by the land ex-
propriated. First of all, it must be
noted that this section is limited to an
owner who occupies land for his res-
idence. It does not apply to summer
cototages, or to persons who have
farms. This is a result of the wording
of the section.
Furthermore, the standard of hous-
ing is quite adequate to the needs
of the Hecla Islanders. But equivalent
would hardly be appropriate to en-
able the dispossessed freeholder to
feel as comfortable in those new sur-
roundings as he is now.
Section 26 (3) of the Expropriation
Act introduces the concept of com-
pensating an owner who intends, in
good faith, to re-locate in some other
place, on the basis of the reasonable
cost of equivalent reinstatement, but
only where the owner can prove that
“there is no general demand or marekt
for their land before they can qualify
under Section 26 (3). There is, and
has been, a general demand or market
at Hecla Island, although a depressed
one.
Counsel for the Crown at the hear-
ing suggested that the objections as
to value should be raised before the
Queen’s Bench Judge when the time
for valuation comes. That, in my
opinion would be futile. A Judge can
only apply the law as it is enacted,
and make his decision accordingly.
A Judge would be bound to apply the
formulas laid down in the statutes.
The Act unfortunately does not
provide an equitable formula for com-
pensating owners in a peculiar market
such as that which has existed on
Hecla Island.
I conclude, therefore that the in-
tended expropriation of these peoples’
properties in the absence of a more
equitable formula is not fair.
I came to the same conclusion in
the cases of the cottagers. The formula
to be applied under the Expropriation
Act, as it now stands, would not be
a fair one, in my opinion.
Over twenty pages of Mr. Walker’s
Report that follow are being entirely
omitted in this presentation. The
basic question as to the fairness of the
expropriation has been answered and
space permits no more.
Several pertinent matters are dealt
with in these pages and recommend-
ations made.
The report concludes:
“It is hoped that if these recom-
mendations are carried out the sup-
port of many of those who were affect-
ed by the expropriation could be re-
gained”. —Ed.