ROBINSON: Our democracy demands opposition

I watched a bit of the legislative process around Bill 9 proposing to bring about some significant changes to BC’s Freedom of Information Act.

I am not going to debate the merits of the bill, that’s a job for the MLAs, but I have some reflections on the process of the debate that ensued.

I understand some of the reasons for the government taking action to address the volume of the Freedom of Information requests. I remember receiving reports identifying the number and scope of these requests and the amount of staff time — read this as costs to government — it would take to review and respond to these requests, especially in a timely manner. 

Freedom of Information requests amount to millions and millions of dollars every year that are spent to identify which staff/minister’s office needs to recover emails, reports and other information. These items need to be gathered and then reviewed by specially-trained staff who work with specific guidelines to assess the information and ensure that it is appropriate for the request and doesn’t compromise privacy laws. 

Many requests result in hundreds and hundreds of pages that need to be reviewed. While most requests likely have merit, there are many that could be seen as frivolous. That’s not to say we shouldn’t have this act. It is a critical part of our democracy. The challenge is how to have a functional, sufficient, timely and affordable process that meets the needs of the public and doesn’t grind the operations of government to a halt.

I thought the process of the debate was an interesting one. I thought of how His Majesty’s Official Opposition and the Third Party responded to the bill. They argued about the government being less transparent, they carried on about the government being more secretive, and they debated into the wee hours of the night on a hoist motion — a debate to “hoist” or delay the bill until the next sitting of the House, likely in the Fall.

I had the privilege to be in Her Majesty’s Official Opposition for four years, from 2013-2017. I remember the strategies we used to challenge government on their agenda and the legislative tools we used to push government to address our concerns. The goal of the opposition is to get as much airtime as possible and as much media attention as possible to inform the electorate of this “outrageous” decision by government and the “terrible” impact it will have in the future.

When I saw that the current opposition used a hoist motion to carry the debate through the night before the government decided to use their majority to shut down the discussion and move the bill along, I had a chuckle to myself. It struck me that if the roles were reversed, the BC NDP would be doing the exact same thing as the BC Conservatives and BC Greens. 

I am certain that in my time sitting on the opposition benches, if the then-BC Liberals under the leadership of Christy Clark had proposed this bill, the BC NDP would have done the exact same thing that the Conservatives and Greens are doing now, and we would have used the exact same arguments.

Here’s what the BC NDP critic Doug Routley had to say about the BC Liberals when they proposed changes to the Freedom of Information Act in October 2011 with Bill 3:

“The record of the government, looking back to the reports of Mr. David Loukidelis, the former commissioner, the submissions of Mr. Fraser, the current reports of the new commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, who has referred to the continuing decline in response times when it comes to political parties' requests, all point to a record of failure when it comes to really delivering on that label — ‘open governance.’ These are all failures. In fact, the Canadian newspapers just two weeks ago ranked BC last in the country when it comes to performance under freedom-of-information.”

Jaded folks might read Doug’s comments and suggest that plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose, nothing really changes. I don’t think that’s the right take. I think the more appropriate assessment is to appreciate the role of the opposition.

This is not so much about whether or not these proposed changes in Bill 9 are logical, thoughtful, and helpful. Perhaps they are. Perhaps they aren’t. I haven’t really assessed the proposal of Bill 9 — that’s the job for the 93 MLAs who represent us in the People’s House.

It is, however, the job of the opposition to point out the weaknesses and the risks of the proposed changes. Our system of democracy is set up so that government gets tested on its choices and decisions. The fact that the BC Conservatives chose to use the tools in the democracy toolbox, to spend all night highlighting the risks and concerns of the bill, is what opposition is supposed to do. 

I remember being in opposition; it’s not a pleasant place to be. You spend all your time looking for flaws and risks on behalf of the public. Your job is to challenge government and hold them to account. The benefit of spending time in opposition before getting to be on the government side of the House is the development of empathy for those whose job it is to continually challenge and oppose. 

With it should come a bit of humility knowing that you could, one day, be back on the other side.

Selina Robinson MA was a family therapist for over 25 years before entering politics in 2008, first as a city counsellor, then as an MLA. She held several cabinet portfolios in the BC government, including municipal affairs & housing, post-secondary education, and finance. Amid rising antisemitism following the October 7 terrorist attacks, Robinson, a Jew, found herself targeted by anti-Israel activists and was fired from cabinet by Premier Eby. She wrote about her experience as a progressive Jew in government in her memoir Truth Be Told.