Minister defends weakening of FOI provisions in B.C. as criticism grows

The B.C. government is being slammed for weakening the province's freedom of information system.

The citizens’ services minister is defending her government’s moves to weaken freedom of information provisions in British Columbia in the face of pushback from opposition parties and the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation.

On Wednesday, the CTF hand-delivered a petition to legislators they say includes 10,000 signatures from citizens opposed to Bill 9, which has been previously criticized as an erosion of the public’s right to know what public bodies are up to.

“Premier David Eby is attacking the public’s right to know,” said the CTF’s B.C. director, Carson Binda on the steps of the legislature. “It gives public bodies more wide reach to block, delay and deny requests that they simply do not want to answer.”

In recent years, CTV News has exposed multiple examples of public bodies in B.C. withholding, delaying, or outrageously redacting documents and health records.

Related stories:

• ‘It’s upsetting’: Finger-pointing, obfuscation as Vancouver Coastal Health fights hospital outbreak disclosure
• Critics slam ‘propagandists’ withholding B.C. pandemic polling data

MLA with special knowledge slams NDP

Journalists, opposition politicians, researchers, and ordinary citizens alike use the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act to request documents from public bodies, typically in the interest of oversight and accountability.

Rob Botterell, who currently holds a seat for the BC Green Party in the legislature, was one of lawyers tasked with crafting the original legislation decades ago.

“There’s nothing that convinces me that there’s a case for these sorts of amendments,” he told reporters. “It’s time to pull the legislation and go back to the drawing board.”

Bill 9 has already passed second reading and as it stands, will pass with the NDP’s slim majority, giving the government significant breathing room when it comes to disclosure demands it might wish to ignore.

“It’s a 30-day time limit (and) you’re supposed to meet it,” Botterell said. “You’re not supposed to say, ‘Oh, I’ve got other priorities.’ This government has a lot of other priorities.”

Minister responds

Minister Diana Gibson faced a slew of questions from the press gallery on the legislation, and answered insisting “this isn’t about making this situation worse, this is about making it better.”

She claimed the changes are in response to the public demanding services be delivered faster and easier, pointing out that some requests can number in the hundreds and even thousands of pages in response. She pointed out even personal records, which citizens have a right to, must be reviewed to redact any information the applicant isn’t legally entitled to.

“There’s nothing in this that changes the oversight of the privacy commissioner,” Gibson said when pressed on what recourse applicants have against public bodies that simply reject requests they don’t want to address.

While that’s true, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner has faced an increase in complaints and requests for review, from 959 in 2020 to 1,463 in 2024, for issues ranging from overdue response to over-redaction. However, the OIPC has no enforcement power if the public agency skirts the rules.

“We continue to be committed to ensuring transparency while we struggle with the volume and the pages that continue to go up for every government across the country,” Gibson said. “We’re doing that in a way that navigates oversight and transparency.”

She’s also promising proactive disclosure to reduce the need to invoke legislation to access government documents, but she can’t compel other public bodies including police departments, health authorities, and municipalities to operate in good faith, rather than delay or outright reject disclosure that respondents may find uncomfortable.