Vaughn Palmer: NDP steamrollers oppose ‘grotesque assault on the public’s right to know’

Article content

VICTORIA – The new Democrats gathered their legislative majority on Tuesday and passed on second reading the amendments that weaken the BC Freedom of Information and Privacy Act.

Article content

Fast pace has been in the cards since Prime Minister John Horgan last week brushed aside opposition objections to his own blacking of information requests with a blunt: “Who cares?”

Still, it was notable how little effort the new Democrats made to justify the changes that have drawn well-founded criticism from journalism schools, a wide range of interest groups, and independent watchdogs on freedom of information and privacy.

Citizen Services Lisa Beare closed the government debate on second reading with a vague promise to “outline what this means for the people of British Columbia” in a clause-by-clause debate later this month.

He didn’t bother to acknowledge, regardless of address, the myriad objections raised by Information and Privacy Commissioner Michael McEvoy in a seven-page letter to Beare last week.

Article content

Nor did he offer a word of explanation for voting against a motion by the Opposition to suspend the amendments pending review by the committee that the legislature itself unanimously appointed to review the Act and recommend changes.

McEvoy called the decision to short-circuit the committee “puzzling.”

Green House leader Adam Olsen summed up the NDP’s move as follows: “If you respect this house, this democracy, then you don’t throw that kind of curve ball, you don’t put a law in the legislature that substantially amends a legislative text that you have already referred to a committee. It is a lack of respect “.

Beare, ignoring those concerns Tuesday, complained that “there seems to be a lot of misinformation about what this bill is.”

Article content

One of the most revealing pieces of misinformation emerged from Beare’s own office last week, regarding an amendment allowing the cabinet for the first time to charge a fee for information requests.

He had written that “the cabinet minister in charge of the bill, Citizen Services Minister Lisa Beare has already said that she will recommend a fee in the $ 25 range.”

Article content

That prompted a denial from Beare’s office, claiming it was “technically incorrect” for Beare to have recommended a fee in the $ 25 range.

Beare’s actual quote, released to the media last week and kept on tape, was: “Other jurisdictions have a fee between $ 5 and $ 50. I recommend a number right in the middle.”

By my calculations, a “right in the middle” rate of $ 5 and $ 50 would be “in the $ 25 range.”

On Tuesday, Beare expressed disappointment that the Opposition was unwilling to “really have a conversation about what this bill is,” which took a bit of cheek. The only conversation about the legislation was on the opposition side of the house.

During 14 hours of debate, all but one of those hours were occupied by members of BC Liberal and BC Green who addressed the content of the legislation and the deficiencies as they saw it.

Article content

Only three NDP MPs had anything to say during the debate, and it was very little.

Besides Beare, only one other cabinet member, Nathan Cullen, spoke about the bill.

Comments like the following made me wonder if Cullen had even read the bill or the objections to it:

“I fully agree with the Opposition on the vital nature of freedom of information, particularly for the media in terms of its efforts to do its work on behalf of the public.

“They have an incredibly important role to play in public discourse, by holding government to account and making sure that the extraordinary powers that the government has in its hands are handled responsibly.”

Among the new Democrats who voted Tuesday without bothering to explain their support for the bill, Indian Relations Minister Murray Rankin stood out. Rankin, as a federal deputy for the NDP, had denounced Ottawa’s $ 5 application fee as a “toll road for the public’s right to know.”

Article content

“Access to information seems like a good idea when one is in the Opposition and can use it as a tool,” he observed. “But when you’re in government, it’s expensive and it’s a hassle.”

Rankin’s quiet acquiescence this week is particularly embarrassing because he is one of the fathers of freedom of information in BC.

He was a special advisor to the NDP government in the 1990s on the drafting of British Columbia’s landmark Freedom of Information and Privacy Protection Act, which he has now voted to undermine.

He also wrote the introduction to the first edition of Fallen Behind, Stanley Tromp’s definitive account of the flaws in access to information legislation in this country.

Rankin on Tromp: “Mr. Tromp is a watchdog and fierce at that, a citizen defender of open government at both the federal and provincial levels. In a sense, it has become our conscience in this crucial political field. “

Here’s Tromp on the legislation Rankin passed Tuesday: “This bill is by far the most audacious and grotesque assault on the public’s right to know and their privacy rights ever seen in this province, cynically destroying the fine legacy. from NDP Prime Minister Mike Harcourt, who passed the Act in 1992. “

It is noted that the proper name for the second reading is “approval in principle”.

From which it could be deduced that Murray Rankin is one of those politicians who, finding that his principles are at odds with his interests, discards them and votes on his interests.

[email protected]