Every Conservative Leadership Candidate Wants DRIPA Gone

If there was one thing all five BC Conservative leadership candidates could agree on at Friday night's debate in Vancouver, it was this: DRIPA has to go.

The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act — the NDP's landmark 2019 legislation implementing UNDRIP into BC law — has become the central flashpoint of BC politics. This week alone, the Conservatives tried to repeal it by legislative motion (defeated 47–44), Premier Eby abandoned his own plan to amend it, and now every candidate competing to lead the official opposition has made its full repeal a cornerstone campaign promise.

The debate, hosted by the Canada Strong and Free Network conference, featured the five remaining candidates vying to replace John Rustad, who resigned in December after a caucus revolt.

The Policy Consensus

Five candidates. Five different political backgrounds, temperaments, and pitches to voters. One unanimous position: DRIPA must be repealed.

That unanimity is itself significant. It means whoever leads the BC Conservatives into the next election will campaign on repealing a law that the NDP passed unanimously, that courts have begun interpreting as creating real legal obligations, and that BC's most powerful Indigenous lobby — the Union of BC Indian Chiefs — treats as foundational to reconciliation.

The next provincial election is expected in 2028. The NDP currently holds a one-seat majority (47 of 93 seats), a margin so thin it was nearly toppled this week by Joan Phillip's remote refusal to support DRIPA amendments. If that majority holds, DRIPA stays. If it falls, every candidate on Friday's stage is committed to scrapping it on day one.

The Fireworks: Fulmer vs. Elliott

If the DRIPA consensus was the policy story, the Fulmer-Elliott clash was the political theatre. The two candidates — placed side by side on stage, apparently by organizer design — went after each other repeatedly throughout the evening.

Elliott went straight for Fulmer's past record on Indigenous issues, pointing out that as Chancellor of Capilano University, he had endorsed DEI and decolonization initiatives and described himself and students as "guilty settlers on stolen land."

Fulmer, for his part, attacked Elliott for skipping a previous debate hosted by a news outlet that Premier Eby later criticized for promoting white supremacy — and accused her of being endorsed by the NDP.

"(Eby) has both endorsed you and commended you for backing out of the last debate," Fulmer said. "How do you feel about being David Eby's choice?"

Elliott brushed it off: "You should really stop getting your information from NDP press releases."

The exchanges were sharp enough that Iain Black felt compelled to intervene and refocus the room. "I really think we have to remind ourselves that the real enemy is the NDP," he said — a line that got applause but also underscored the risk that the leadership race could hand the NDP attack-ad material for years.

What This Means for DRIPA

The Conservative debate crystallises what has become BC's defining political fault line. On one side: the NDP and its Indigenous policy allies, who view DRIPA as essential to reconciliation and are now locked into defending it even as courts begin giving it real legal teeth. On the other: a Conservative opposition that is unified — despite its internal differences — in viewing DRIPA as a threat to resource development, property rights, and democratic governance.

The 47–44 vote this week showed how close the balance is. Fulmer's pledge to "cease the voluntary transfer of land and money to Indigenous communities" is the most aggressive position staked out by any major BC politician in years. Elliott's framing — rejecting the idea that BC is "illegitimate" or that non-Indigenous residents are "settlers" — speaks directly to a growing sentiment among voters who feel the NDP's reconciliation framework has gone too far.

The NDP's Problem

The NDP should be nervous. Their signature reconciliation law is now under attack from both directions simultaneously: courts are making it more powerful than the government intended, while the political opposition is more unified against it than at any point since its passage.

Eby's retreat this week — abandoning his own amendment plan because one MLA objected — left the government looking rudderless. It satisfied nobody: First Nations leaders who wanted the law left alone didn't trust the reversal, and business and resource communities who wanted clarity got none.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives spent Friday evening auditioning to be the party that tears the whole thing down.

DRIPA passed unanimously in 2019. Seven years later, it is the most divisive law in BC politics. That trajectory — from consensus to crisis — is the story of the NDP's second term. And it isn't over.