1. What DRIPA Is — And Why It Matters
On November 28, 2019, the BC NDP government under Premier John Horgan passed the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) — making British Columbia the first jurisdiction in Canada, and the first sub-national government in the world, to adopt the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) as a legal framework. (Source: bclaws.gov.bc.ca, directly accessed)
Section 3: Mandates the government to bring all provincial laws into alignment with UNDRIP. No deadline. Mandatory and ongoing.
Section 4: Requires development and implementation of an Action Plan in consultation with Indigenous peoples.
Section 5: Requires annual reporting to the Legislature on progress, tabled by June 30 each year.
Section 7 (most controversial): Allows cabinet to authorize ministers to enter agreements requiring
Indigenous governing body consent before the government can exercise a statutory power of decision.
This is the consent mechanism — functionally a veto in specific negotiated contexts.
🌐 What Makes BC Unique
BC is the only Canadian province with binding UNDRIP legislation. No other province has passed comparable law. At the federal level, Bill C-15 received Royal Assent on June 21, 2021 — following BC's lead. Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec have made statements of support but have not enacted binding legislation.
📋 The DRIPA Action Plan (March 30, 2022)
The Action Plan contains 89 priority actions organized around four themes:
- Self-Determination and Inherent Right of Self-Government — Indigenous peoples exercise full rights to self-determination and self-government, including developing their own institutions and laws
- Title and Rights — Indigenous peoples exercise full enjoyment of inherent rights, including rights to own, use, develop and control lands and resources within their territories in BC
- Ending Indigenous-specific Racism and Discrimination
- Social, Cultural and Economic Well-Being
Theme 2 — "Title and Rights" — is the most consequential for resource industries. It envisions Indigenous peoples having rights to own, use, develop and control resources within territories covering the vast majority of BC.
🏛️ The Declaration Act Secretariat
Budget 2022 established the Declaration Act Secretariat as a permanent central government agency — not housed in a single ministry but cross-governmental — to coordinate DRIPA implementation across all BC ministries. Every ministry is required to review and align their laws, policies, and programs with UNDRIP. Since spring 2025 it holds authority over all sections of the Act. Costs are embedded across all ministry budgets and have not been publicly disaggregated.
2. Section 7 — The Consent Mechanism Explained
DRIPA Section 7 allows the Lieutenant Governor in Council to authorize a minister to enter agreements with Indigenous governing bodies for:
(a) the joint exercise of a statutory power of decision, or
(b) the consent of the Indigenous governing body before the government exercises a statutory power.
Agreements must be published in the BC Gazette to be effective.
The BC government says this doesn't create a "blanket veto." Legal scholars disagree about whether, in practice, it functions as one.
Evidence for a Functional Veto
- Section 7 explicitly creates a formal consent requirement once an agreement is negotiated
- The Mineral Tenure Act court ruling showed provincial laws must accommodate Indigenous consultation — a DRIPA-elevated standard
- The NDP government's political reliance on Indigenous community support creates informal veto dynamics even without formal legal requirements
- The Ajax Mine was jointly rejected partly on FPIC grounds
- Section 3 requires alignment of ALL BC laws — progressively shifting frameworks to require Indigenous consent
- Theme 2 of the Action Plan explicitly envisions rights to "own, use, develop and control" resources
Government's Official Position
- BC government consistently states FPIC "does not mean a veto"
- Section 7 agreements are voluntary, bilateral, and specific
- Trans Mountain Pipeline proceeded despite determined opposition — demonstrating FPIC isn't an absolute veto
- Section 1(3) of DRIPA states nothing in the Act abrogates rights under Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982
- No Canadian court has held FPIC requires absolute Indigenous consent before resource development
"The truth is somewhere in the middle. DRIPA does not on its face create a universal veto. However, it creates a political and legal environment in which proceeding against significant Indigenous opposition is increasingly difficult and costly."
— BC DRIPA research analysis, April 2026
3. The Joan & Stewart Phillip Connection
Grand Chief Stewart Phillip = President of UBCIC (BC's most prominent Indigenous rights lobby) since 1998.
Joan Phillip = Sitting BC NDP Member of the Legislative Assembly (Vancouver-Strathcona); Parliamentary Secretary for Community Development (appointed by Premier Eby, November 2024).
These two people are married. Stewart Phillip's organization is a direct stakeholder in DRIPA — legislation Joan Phillip's government passes and her husband advocates for.
Stewart Phillip — UBCIC Grand Chief
- UBCIC President since 1998 — nearly 28 years
- Formerly Chief of Penticton Indian Band (1994–2008)
- UBCIC represents ~100 First Nations — the province's most prominent Indigenous advocacy organization
- Arrested five times in protests defending Indigenous rights (Trans Mountain pipeline, Kinder Morgan)
- UBCIC receives millions annually in federal and provincial funding
- Opposed Premier Eby's 2026 proposed DRIPA suspension
- Photographed alongside Premier Eby at NDP events
- Honorary Doctor of Laws, UBC (2018)
Source: Wikipedia/Stewart Phillip, directly accessed
Joan Phillip — NDP MLA
- NDP MLA for Vancouver-Strathcona (elected 2023 by-election with 68% of vote; re-elected 2024)
- Parliamentary Secretary for Community Development, appointed by Premier Eby
- NDP supporter since approximately 1972
- Granddaughter of Chief Dan George — the celebrated Tsleil-Waututh actor and activist
- Spent 20 years as land manager for the Penticton Indian Band
- Her election was celebrated by the First Nations Leadership Council — UBCIC's umbrella coalition
- Opposed Trans Mountain pipeline, Ajax mine, Site C dam, and salmon farms
Source: Wikipedia/Joan Phillip, directly accessed
🔗 Why This Matters
The structural situation is unprecedented:
- The governing party (NDP) has a member in caucus whose spouse leads the organization that is the primary stakeholder in the government's central reconciliation legislation
- UBCIC was consulted in the development of DRIPA and has been a key voice in its implementation
- UBCIC receives millions in annual public funding from the same government Joan Phillip serves in
- No formal conflict of interest investigation has been publicly reported
- Critics describe it as the most visible example of the revolving door between the NDP government and Indigenous advocacy networks
4. The Eskay Creek Vote — $10,000 Per Member
In December 2025, Tahltan Nation members voted on whether to approve the
Eskay Creek gold-silver mine restart (Skeena Gold & Silver, northwest BC).
In the days before the vote, eligible Tahltan members each received approximately
$10,000, distributed through Tahltan governance structures as part of the
broader financial agreement connected to the project.
Result: The project was approved.
The Deal Structure
- $40 million upfront payment to the Tahltan Nation
- Long-term financial benefits estimated at hundreds of millions to over $1 billion
- Employment and contracting opportunities
- Ongoing revenue participation tied to production
- $10,000 per eligible member distributed before the vote
The Critical Question
DRIPA's core principle is Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) — consent must be free. If members receive $10,000 per person immediately before a vote on project approval, critics ask:
- Was the consent truly free from financial incentive?
- Does pre-vote cash distribution compromise the integrity of the FPIC process?
- Does this set a template for future mine approvals — where consent has a direct price tag?
- Who bears the cost of consent? The mining company. Who's watching how much is paid?
Why It Sets a Precedent
This was described as a "precedent-setting moment" for BC and Canadian mining. It represents the practical implementation of DRIPA/FPIC in action. Whether you view it as a fair deal for First Nations or a troubling corruption of the consent process depends on your perspective — but the financial mechanics are documented fact.
Source: Internal document: "The Eskay Creek Vote — A Short, Factual Story" (April 2026)
5. Projects Blocked or Delayed
⛏️ Ajax Mine (Kamloops) — Jointly Rejected, November 2021
The KGHM Ajax copper-gold mine went through years of environmental assessment. Secwépemc and Nlaka'pamux First Nations raised FPIC-based objections throughout. In November 2021, the federal and BC governments jointly rejected the project following environmental assessment. Widely seen as a signal that federal and provincial governments would weigh Indigenous opposition heavily — even at the cost of major economic projects.
📋 Mineral Tenure Act — System Shut Down (2023)
The BC Supreme Court ruled that the Mineral Tenure Act's free-entry staking system — which allowed anyone to stake mineral claims online without Indigenous notification — violated the Crown's duty to consult. BC was forced to pause the entire online mineral staking system and redesign it to include Indigenous consultation. This directly impacted hundreds of prospectors and junior mining companies, delaying exploration activity across BC.
🌲 Old-Growth Deferrals — 2.6 Million Hectares (2021)
Following old-growth logging protests at Fairy Creek on Vancouver Island — where First Nations asserted Aboriginal title as grounds to halt harvesting — the BC government implemented old-growth deferral orders in 2021 affecting approximately 2.6 million hectares, partly in response to Indigenous concerns and DRIPA alignment pressures. BC's major forestry companies experienced significant curtailments of harvesting rights.
🏗️ Wet'suwet'en / Coastal GasLink — The Governance Crisis
The NDP government faced a fundamental contradiction: elected Wet'suwet'en band councils (5 of 5) signed benefit agreements with Coastal GasLink and received equity stakes. Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs opposed the pipeline over unceded title. When blockades paralyzed national rail service (Feb 2020), Eby and federal officials flew to Smithers to negotiate directly with the hereditary chiefs — bypassing the elected councils who had supported the project. Critics noted the NDP chose which form of Indigenous authority to recognize based on political expediency, not consistent legal principle. See Land Claims for the full story.
6. Who's Really Making Decisions in BC?
The question isn't whether Indigenous consent matters — it clearly does under the law. The question is whether the NDP has created a system where a small number of Indigenous advocacy organizations — organizations deeply aligned with the NDP politically — effectively exercise veto power over resource decisions that affect all 5 million British Columbians.
🕸️ The Network
- The First Nations Leadership Council (FNLC) — composed of UBCIC, BCAFN, and First Nations Summit — co-drafted DRIPA with the NDP government
- FNLC organizations receive millions in annual public funding from the government they help design legislation for
- Grand Chief Stewart Phillip (UBCIC) is married to NDP MLA Joan Phillip
- Terry Teegee (BCAFN Regional Chief) was described as "instrumental" in DRIPA's passage
- Minister of Indigenous Relations Murray Rankin, a former federal NDP MP, oversaw the DRIPA Action Plan release
- Multiple former NDP staffers have joined Indigenous consulting firms following the NDP taking office
The Pattern
What exists is a symbiotic political relationship: The NDP significantly expanded Indigenous organizational funding and formal power through DRIPA. Indigenous leadership — particularly the FNLC — returned consistent political support and public legitimacy to NDP governance. In every election from 2017 to 2024, Indigenous leaders aligned with the FNLC publicly supported the NDP.
This is not necessarily improper. But it raises legitimate questions about whether BC's Indigenous relations policy reflects the interests of all British Columbians or primarily the interests of a specific network of organizations.
"There is a symbiotic political relationship where the NDP government has significantly expanded Indigenous organizational funding and power through DRIPA and increased consultation requirements. The FNLC organizations — UBCIC, BCAFN, FNS — have benefited substantially from NDP governance."
— BC Indigenous Funding Research, April 2026
BC Laws (bclaws.gov.bc.ca) — full text of DRIPA (SBC 2019, c. 44); BC Government — Declaration Act Action Plan (March 30, 2022); Wikipedia — Stewart Phillip, Joan Phillip; BCAFN official website — Terry Teegee profile; Background knowledge on: Ajax Mine, Mineral Tenure Act reform, Fairy Creek, Coastal GasLink; Internal document: "The Eskay Creek Vote" (April 2026). Research compiled April 2026.