While You Were Watching DRIPA: The NDP Quietly Moved to Gut BC's Freedom of Information Law

The story running on every front page this week is DRIPA — David Eby's failed attempt to amend the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, the Conservative push to repeal it, the Wet'suwet'en court ruling, the UBCIC threats. It is loud, dramatic, and all-consuming.

That appears to be working out well for the NDP government, which has been quietly advancing a piece of legislation that critics say represents the most significant rollback of government transparency in British Columbia in decades.

Bill-9, the so-called "modernization" of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, is currently in active debate in the BC legislature. It was introduced two months ago and, after a period of relative quiet, is now moving forward — with almost no public attention, and with the NDP majority treating opposition criticism as an inconvenience to be waited out.

What Bill-9 Actually Does

The government's framing of Bill-9 is anodyne: improving efficiency, clarity, and accountability in how the province handles information requests. The reality, as spelled out by critics across party lines, is rather different.

Under Bill-9, the power to narrow, delay, and reject information requests would be significantly expanded for government administrators, agency heads, and senior bureaucrats. The standard for doing so would become largely subjective — dependent on the official's own assessment of the request's merit.

The most contentious single provision allows officials to reject FOI applications simply because "responding to the request would unreasonably interfere with the operations of the government of B.C." That is an extraordinary standard. It is not defined. It is not independently reviewable in any meaningful sense. And it is entirely up to the government official to determine what "unreasonably interfere" means in any given case.

Read together, the new provisions shift the burden in every direction from public to government. The question used to be: does the government have a legitimate reason to withhold this information? Under Bill-9, the question becomes: does the requester have a strong enough reason to make the government answer?

The Man Who Wrote BC's FOI Law Calls It Out

Green MLA Rob Botterell has been one of the most devastating critics of Bill-9, and not merely because he is an opposition politician. In the 1990s, under the previous NDP government, Botterell headed the public service team that drafted BC's original Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act — a law that earned accolades as the best access-to-information legislation in the country.

He has now accused the Eby government of using Bill-9 to move BC from "freedom of information to freedom FROM information."

That is not a throwaway line. It comes from someone who understands the architecture of the law at a technical level that few in the legislature can match. When the person who built the original system says the renovation will destroy it, that matters.

What the NDP Doesn't Want You to See

Surrey-Panorama MLA Bryan Tepper, a Conservative, laid out the political logic of Bill-9 in terms that deserve to be quoted at length:

"They don't want you to see the internal memos on why the decriminalization of hard drugs failed so spectacularly. They don't want you to see the correspondence regarding the cost overruns on the Surrey-Langley SkyTrain or the North Shore wastewater treatment plant. They don't want you to see the deals regarding Indigenous land claims that are being cut without public consultation."

That last point is particularly sharp given the current political moment. DRIPA has generated enormous public concern about secret land deals, consent-industry payoffs, and undisclosed agreements between the NDP government and select Indigenous organizations. The question of what the government is agreeing to behind closed doors — and who is benefiting — is the central political controversy in BC right now.

And the NDP is moving, right now, to make it harder to find out.

The Practical Reality: Requests Already Going Nowhere

Skeena MLA Claire Rattee offered some of the most concrete testimony about what the current FOI system actually produces — and what making it worse will mean.

Rattee has spent months trying to obtain reports submitted by Dr. Daniel Vigo, the government's own advisor on the toxic drug crisis, mental health and addictions. These are not sensitive national-security documents. They are government-commissioned policy reports by a government-appointed expert on a crisis that has killed tens of thousands of British Columbians.

She has received nothing. Not a partial disclosure. Not heavily redacted records. Not even a timeline. She has also been waiting on any documentation related to the work of Downtown Eastside czar Larry Campbell — work the government itself has publicly described as critical to understanding one of BC's most vulnerable communities.

"I've been waiting almost a year now for any of these reports," said Rattee. "So if we make this system even worse, if we make it even less accessible, then what?"

Installing Thicker Curtains

Chilliwack North MLA Heather Maahs offered what may be the most precise description of what Bill-9 is actually doing beneath the technical language:

"This bill changes who carries the burden, who gets the benefit of ambiguity, who controls the pace. It changes who can call scrutiny unreasonable. It changes who decides whether a request is acceptable. And in every one of those changes, the balance tilts the same way, toward government and away from the public."

Maahs put it plainly: "Those are not words of a government opening windows. Those are words of a government installing thicker curtains."

The Watchdog Who Won't Bark

When critics raised these concerns, NDP MLA Stephanie Higginson pointed to what she called a decisive endorsement: Information and Privacy Commissioner Michael Harvey had praised Bill-9 after the government consulted him during drafting.

"I mean, that's a pretty great endorsement," gushed Higginson. "It actually takes up an entire page."

The problem is obvious. A watchdog who is consulted in advance on legislation that expands the power of the officials he oversees — and then praises it — is not acting as an independent check. He is providing political cover. The NDP can now deflect every criticism of Bill-9 by pointing to Harvey's endorsement, while the fundamental question — does this legislation serve the public interest? — goes unanswered.

Whether Harvey will maintain meaningful oversight after Bill-9 passes is a question that critics in the legislature are now openly asking. So far, there are no reassuring answers.

The Minister Eby Demoted Is Steering This Through

The job of carrying Bill-9 through the legislature falls to Citizens' Services Minister Diana Gibson. Last year, Eby demoted Gibson to this junior portfolio after what was widely described as a faltering performance as Minister of Jobs and Economic Development. One more stumble, observers say, and she's warming a backbench seat.

The irony is not subtle: a minister whose own record might benefit from less public scrutiny is now the face of legislation that makes public scrutiny harder. The NDP, for its part, hasn't bothered to counter most of the opposition's specific arguments. They have a majority. They are waiting it out.

That may be the most revealing detail of all. A government confident in its transparency record would defend this bill on the merits. This one is running out the clock — and counting on you to keep watching DRIPA while they pass it.