Like an arsonist giving a heartfelt speech about the importance of fire safety while the building he torched burns behind him, Premier David Eby told business leaders this week that the legal reconciliation framework his government implemented, is threatening to “undo” British Columbia as a place to invest.
Eby now readily admits that recent court decisions tied directly to Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA), are “overreaching,” “unhelpful,” “toxic,” and could destabilize the investment climate and erode public support for reconciliation.
Where was this advice when he was the attorney general guiding DRIPA along the path to becoming law?
You cannot fundamentally rewire the legal foundation of the province, bolt a vague United Nations resolution onto every statute, hand judges a new interpretive super-tool, and then act shocked when courts use it and do so in ways you didn’t anticipate. Yet that is exactly what has happened. The core purpose of DRIPA commits the B.C. government to bring all B.C. laws in compliance with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
B.C. stands alone as the only jurisdiction on the planet that has decided to subordinate its entire legal system to a UN declaration.
The Court of Appeal’s recent Gitxaala v. British Columbia decision made this crystal clear: DRIPA is not symbolic; it’s the law.
Thanks to the NDP’s own legislation, UNDRIP is now the legal measuring stick. Eby’s approach to reconciliation has turned into a reckless constitutional experiment with the livelihoods of millions of British Columbians hanging in the balance.
And the verdict from B.C.’s courts is in – the experiment is failing in plain view.
Eby government is responsible for BC’s unfolding
Builders, small business owners, farmers and families can follow every rule on the books today, secure approvals and permits, invest, and buy homes, only to later learn that a court has decided the rules no longer apply.
This is not reconciliation; it’s regulatory roulette.
Only after two disastrous court rulings does Eby concede how damaging this uncertainty has become. He describes the Cowichan Tribes v. Canada Aboriginal title ruling and the Gitxaala Court of Appeal decision as overreaching and toxic to the very reconciliation work he claims to have been championing for the past five years. He says he worries about endless litigation, confusion over private property, and uncertainty that could be the “undoing” of British Columbia as a place to do business.
Yet he and his advisors are the very ones responsible for the disaster now unfolding in B.C.
The fundamental problem is not rogue courts acting in isolation; it’s the framework the NDP government designed and pushed through the legislature without safeguards.
British Columbians were told DRIPA was about symbolism and a political commitment to reconciliation. The courts have ruled otherwise, saying in no uncertain terms that DRIPA is a legally enforceable law. And according to a majority of judges in the Gitxaala decision, the province essentially broke its own law because it was deemed inconsistent with UNDRIP. If you change the rules of the game and then hand the referee a new and untested rulebook, you can’t complain when the calls go against you.
Premier Eby now insists that “any reconciliation has to respect private property, period,” and promises to “go to the wall” for fee-simple homes and industrial lands.
His words ring hallow.
if Eby was really committed to protecting and preserving private property rights, why didn’t he make that crystal clear when DRIPA was put in place on his advice when he was attorney general?
Instead, he has left homeowners, farmers, ranchers, investors, and business owners wondering who actually owns their property. In the Cowichan Tribes case, the court not only ruled the fee simple interests of the federal government and the City of Richmond were “defective and invalid,” it also found the Land Title Act protections don’t apply to private property when Aboriginal title is declared, anywhere across the province.
Four months after this momentous decision, the provincial government hasn’t so much as filed a stay of proceedings, let alone introduced legal protections for private land owners.
Listen to critics and repeal DRIPA
There is a better path.
First, immediately recall the legislature and repeal DRIPA.
Repeal section 8.1 of the Interpretation Act, which says that “every Act and regulation must be construed as being consistent with the Declaration.” This provision fuels uncertainty by allowing courts to read UNDRIP into every statute and regulation.
Third, reinvigorate a modern treaty process and negotiate treaties that provide certainty and finality.
And finally, put robust protections in place for fee-simple private property – one of the cornerstones of our economy.
Rather than admit mistakes were made and course correct, the Premier points fingers and suggests judges have misunderstood the intent of the law. Instead of having the humility and leadership to consider constructive feedback, he criticizes critics of DRIPA as wanting to “shut the door” on First Nations.
The challenge facing all British Columbians can be summed up this way – who owns the land and who has the right to make decisions about the use of the land?
David Eby and his government are now facing a large fire of their own making – their actions show they have no good answer to this question.