Eby Abandons DRIPA Amendments, Pledges First Nations Co-Development Plan by Fall

British Columbia Premier David Eby has walked back plans to amend the province's Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act this spring, pledging instead to work with First Nations leaders on a co-developed implementation plan to be presented before the fall legislative session. The decision, announced Tuesday, ends weeks of escalating tension between the premier's office and Indigenous leadership across the province.

Eby told reporters in Victoria that he had hoped to be right the first time on how to proceed with reconciliation legislation, but acknowledged that the initial proposal had failed to build the support it needed. According to a statement from the premier's office, the province will not introduce legislation to suspend or amend DRIPA during the current spring sitting, and a new structure for joint work will be established over the coming weeks.

A leaked document reported by CBC News described a proposed framework involving a steering committee co-chaired by Attorney General Niki Sharma and a First Nations leader. The committee would meet every two months, while a task force chaired by a deputy minister and a smaller industry and stakeholder consultative body would support its work.

What was announced

The premier's announcement represents the third time in recent weeks that the government has adjusted its DRIPA plans in the face of First Nations opposition. An earlier proposal to suspend parts of DRIPA pending review was withdrawn under protest. A subsequent version that promised amendments was also shelved. Tuesday's announcement replaces both with a co-development approach.

Under the new plan, the steering committee will identify priority areas where the province and First Nations need to align on DRIPA's implementation. Those could include consent thresholds for major projects, the treatment of Section 35 rights under the Canadian constitution, and the procedural obligations of provincial ministries when dealing with Indigenous governments.

Eby has said the goal is to present a concrete implementation package to cabinet and the legislature before the fall session begins in October. The timeline gives his government just under six months to turn the commitment into workable legislation.

How we got here

DRIPA, passed unanimously in 2019 under John Horgan's government, committed British Columbia to bring provincial laws into harmony with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It has been held up internationally as a pioneering piece of Indigenous rights legislation and widely cited in court cases involving Indigenous consultation obligations.

Tensions emerged this year when a British Columbia court decision referenced DRIPA in a way that the Eby government argued was creating legal consequences beyond what legislators had anticipated. The premier initially said DRIPA's application needed to be clarified, and floated amendments that would have narrowed the Act's scope.

First Nations across the province reacted strongly. The Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, the First Nations Summit and the BC Assembly of First Nations all opposed the initial direction, as did a number of New Democrat backbenchers. International human rights observers and Indigenous rights advocates in other provinces also raised concerns about the precedent British Columbia might set.

Governor General's UN address

The DRIPA climbdown coincides with Canada's participation in the 25th session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in New York. Governor General Mary Simon, Canada's first Indigenous head of state, addressed the opening of the forum on Monday, telling delegates that Canada is making progress on Indigenous rights while emphasising the importance of self-determination and cultural connection to land.

A coalition of Canadian Indigenous governments and legal organisations used the forum to highlight Canada's mass incarceration of Indigenous peoples. Indigenous people make up about 5 per cent of the Canadian population but represent roughly 33 per cent of people in federal prisons, with Indigenous women accounting for about half of all women in federal custody.

The Assembly of First Nations and the National Congress of American Indians used the forum to advance a renewed Declaration of Kinship and Cooperation, committing the two organisations to continued joint advocacy on cross-border rights and self-determination.

Reaction from First Nations leadership

First Nations leaders in British Columbia welcomed the premier's decision to abandon this spring's amendments but stressed that co-development must mean genuine shared authority rather than consultation about predetermined outcomes. Representatives from several Nations have said that the steering committee structure will only work if both chairs have real decision-making influence.

Cheryl Casimer of the First Nations Summit and Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs have been vocal critics of the earlier amendment proposals. Both organisations have said they will participate in good faith in the new process but will walk away if it becomes a vehicle to weaken DRIPA rather than strengthen it.

Some Indigenous leaders outside British Columbia have urged the province to treat the process as a national test case. Whatever model British Columbia settles on, they argue, will influence expectations in other provinces that have made commitments to implement the UN Declaration at the provincial level.

The legal landscape around DRIPA

British Columbia courts have addressed DRIPA in several recent decisions, including cases touching on administrative law, resource project assessments and Crown consultation obligations. Legal commentators have argued that the Act is still being interpreted and that its full practical implications will emerge over a number of judicial decisions rather than in any single case.

Provincial Attorney General Niki Sharma has emphasised that the co-development process will include attention to the legal context, ensuring that any implementation steps align with both the Act's statutory requirements and ongoing court developments. Indigenous legal scholars and Crown lawyers alike will be among the voices consulted as the process proceeds.

Canadian legal thinking on implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples at the provincial and federal levels has matured significantly over the past five years. British Columbia's experience will contribute to a pan-Canadian body of practice that is influencing discussions in other provinces and in the federal legal community.

Reaction from opposition parties

The BC Conservatives, led by John Rustad, have criticised the entire DRIPA framework, arguing that the Act creates legal uncertainty for resource projects and private property rights. Rustad has said the premier's reversal shows confusion at the top of the NDP government and has called for the Act to be repealed.

The BC Greens have taken the opposite position, welcoming the climbdown as evidence that First Nations advocacy is influencing government policy but warning that the co-development process must be transparent. Green MLAs have pushed for public reporting on the steering committee's work and for legislative scrutiny of any resulting proposals.

Inside the New Democrat caucus, the reversal has been described as a relief by several backbench MLAs who had privately opposed the earlier amendment path. Public unity on DRIPA is a priority for the premier's office heading into the next provincial election cycle.

What it means for British Columbians

For the public, the immediate implication is that DRIPA remains in place as written. Court rulings that have referenced the Act continue to apply, and projects currently in environmental assessment must continue to comply with existing consultation obligations.

For resource industries operating in British Columbia, the continued application of DRIPA has implications for mining, forestry and major infrastructure projects including any proposed bitumen pipeline to the west coast. Companies have generally preferred predictable consultation processes over uncertainty, but they also want clarity about what consent thresholds apply to their projects.

For British Columbians watching the reconciliation debate, the Eby government's shift signals that Indigenous opposition, combined with internal caucus pressure, can change policy direction. Whether the co-development process produces meaningful change or stalls in procedural disputes will be a significant test of the premier's leadership.

A task force with a cross-government remit

Separately, Eby announced earlier this month the creation of a cross-government task force to monitor the impact of the Iran war on British Columbia, with particular attention to global trade, shipping and energy markets. The premier has also requested an urgent first ministers' meeting with Prime Minister Mark Carney and other provincial leaders to coordinate national responses to international volatility.

The task force reflects broader pressures on British Columbia's economy. Port capacity, shipping routes through the Pacific and energy export routes are all sensitive to global conflict. Canadian oil exports from the west coast, for example, could see increased demand if Middle East supplies are disrupted, putting additional weight on the province's infrastructure.

Eby's DRIPA and task force announcements together paint a picture of a government stretched across multiple high-stakes files. Managing both the reconciliation process and international trade shocks will test the political and administrative capacity of his cabinet through the summer.

The policy stakes for resource projects

Several major resource projects in British Columbia, including mining projects in the northwest and natural gas infrastructure in the northeast, have environmental assessments either under review or nearing decision points. The clarity of DRIPA's application has immediate operational consequences for those projects, and continuing legal uncertainty is one of the factors that has elevated the reconciliation debate into a business-as-well-as-rights conversation.

Industry associations including the Mining Association of British Columbia and the BC Business Council have signalled willingness to participate in the co-development process as stakeholders. Their priority is predictability rather than any particular substantive outcome, and they have said that a well-designed DRIPA implementation framework can actually reduce uncertainty rather than add to it.

First Nations with economic development arms and those with active treaty negotiations are watching the process closely. Several have entered into impact-benefit agreements with resource companies in recent years, and the implementation of DRIPA could influence how those agreements are structured and enforced.

What's next

Detailed terms of reference for the DRIPA steering committee are expected to be published in the coming weeks. Appointments of the First Nations co-chair and the initial slate of committee members will follow. The first substantive meetings are expected before the end of May.

The fall legislative session begins in October, which is the deadline Eby has set for tabling a concrete implementation package. That timeline leaves room for multiple committee meetings, public consultations and drafting by provincial lawyers. It also leaves room for further controversy, particularly if resource-industry concerns emerge as a significant counterweight to Indigenous priorities.

Canadians beyond British Columbia will be watching closely. How the province handles DRIPA will influence federal, provincial and territorial conversations about the UN Declaration Act in Ottawa and the ongoing implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's Calls to Action across the country.