
Peter Lister
Lately, I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about how democracy balances the rights of the few against the interests of the majority. This is a particularly complex topic in BC, where the legal standard is higher than other provinces and where we are advancing reconciliation efforts with Indigenous and First Nations peoples. …This higher legal standard helps explain why BC faces challenges implementing policy and managing public lands. The government isn’t simply making a political choice, it’s also responding to a unique legal obligation. …Forest Landscape Plans (FLPs) are a good example of how BC’s higher legal standard is shaping government action. To abide by DRIPA, government has been working closely with First Nations to reach consensus on how to manage public lands. However, in most cases, these discussions have happened behind closed doors, with very little opportunity for the resource sector, communities, or public to provide any meaningful input.
These challenges stem not from DRIPA itself, but from how government is implementing its legal obligations under it. …At present, industry and the public are only being consulted after agreements with First Nations have already been reached. This approach is fueling frustration and eroding public trust; people do not feel that government is acting in their interests, and anger is rising. Reconciliation must remain a shared priority for all British Columbians, but this is not the correct approach. Excluding the public from meaningful engagement will result in a backlash that may harm relationships with First Nations and do irreversible damage toward our shared goal of reconciliation. Our government needs to do better. It must engage the public in genuine dialogue, explaining its goals and involving industry and communities early in the process, instead of cursory box-checking engagement after decisions have already been made.