On Monday, May 4, 2026, B.C. Citizens’ Services Minister Diana Gibson issued a statement. The headline read: “Minister’s statement about amendments to Bill 9.” The text was carefully crafted to sound routine, even housekeeping. But anyone who has been watching the Bill 9 fight knows what actually happened: the NDP blinked.

What Bill 9 Was Supposed to Do

In February 2026, the Eby government tabled Bill 9 — amendments to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA), the law that lets British Columbians request government documents. The NDP advertised the bill as a series of modernizing tweaks. Critics — including Conservative MLAs, civil-liberties advocates, journalists, and even one of the original architects of the 1992 FIPPA — called it something else: a quiet expansion of bureaucratic power to delay or refuse legitimate FOI requests.

Green MLA Rob Botterell, a 1992 lawyer-architect of the original FIPPA, spent 100 minutes in second reading on March 11 explaining why Bill 9 was unnecessary, why the law as it stood was sound, and why the amendments would empower bureaucrats to arbitrarily delay or deny requests. That speech is on the public record in Hansard.

What the Minister Just Admitted

Gibson’s May 4 statement is, on its surface, defensive. She insists Bill 9 is “about keeping B.C.’s access and privacy laws strong, modern and effective.” She accuses the Opposition of making “false claims.” And then, in the middle of the statement, she concedes the actual point:

“Through thoughtful discussions with other members of the legislature about government’s intent on the updates to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, a small number of areas in Bill 9 were identified where minor adjustments would provide additional clarity. Today, I am introducing targeted amendments to Bill 9 to bring further clarity to the legislation…”

— Diana Gibson, Minister of Citizens’ Services, May 4, 2026

Translation: the bill, as drafted, was problematic enough that the government is changing it before passage. That is a climbdown — whatever euphemism the press release uses.

Why This Matters

The Bill 9 Pattern

  • 2021: NDP imposed a non-refundable $10 application fee on every FOI request — the only province in Canada to charge for filing.
  • 2022–2025: Opposition MLAs report waiting months — in some cases, nearly a year — for routine FOI responses on the drug crisis, SkyTrain cost overruns, and Indigenous deals.
  • Late 2025: The NDP stopped publishing the Premier’s calendar and no-bid contract lists, citing a “system migration.” Latest published items remained from December 2025.
  • February 2026: Bill 9 is tabled, expanding bureaucratic discretion to delay/deny requests.
  • March 11, 2026: Green MLA Rob Botterell delivers a 100-minute speech in the legislature warning the bill is unnecessary and harmful.
  • May 4, 2026: Minister announces “targeted amendments” to Bill 9 — without admitting the original draft was flawed.

Notice the rhetorical move in Gibson’s statement: she insists the bill and the new amendments “do not change FOI response timelines, allow public bodies to refuse legitimate requests or introduce any new fees.” If that were true — if the original bill was already perfect — why amend it at all?

What the Government Won’t Tell You

Gibson’s statement does not specify which sections are being amended, what the substantive changes are, or what concerns prompted them. The legislature is being asked to receive a vague, self-congratulatory press release in lieu of an honest explanation of what the government got wrong.

Conservative MLA Gavin Dew (Kelowna-Mission) had already noted in March, in an interview with theBreaker.news, that the government’s broader transparency conduct was “inconsistent with how virtually any consumer-facing web project is done by anybody else.” The Premier’s office had stopped publishing his calendar and no-bid contract lists, claiming it was “not technically feasible” during a system migration. Bob Mackin’s investigation found that excuse contradicted standard web-development practice everywhere else.

Now, with Bill 9 amendments — and a system migration that conveniently kept the Premier’s calendar offline for months — British Columbians are being asked to take the government’s word that everything is fine.

The Real Test

The amendments will be tabled in the days ahead. The questions journalists, Opposition MLAs, and citizens should be asking are these:

1. Which clauses are changing, and what was wrong with the originals?

2. Will the $10 application fee be removed?

3. Will statutory response deadlines be enforceable, with consequences for breaches?

4. When will the Premier’s calendar and no-bid contract list resume monthly publication?

5. Will the Information and Privacy Commissioner be granted the order-making power necessary to compel compliance?

Until those questions are answered, the May 4 climbdown is exactly what it looks like: a government that tried to weaken B.C.’s freedom-of-information law, got caught, and is now amending the bill in hopes nobody will look too closely.

The original FIPPA was passed by Mike Harcourt’s NDP government in 1992. It was a landmark in transparency. Thirty-four years later, a different NDP government — Eby’s — has spent eight years steadily walking it back. Application fees. Hidden calendars. Year-long FOI delays. And now Bill 9.

British Columbia’s right to know what its government is doing is not a partisan issue. It is a democratic minimum. The NDP just admitted, in writing, that they crossed the line. They should be required to say where, and why, in plain language — not in a Monday afternoon press release.