Marking 20 years
of bold journalism,
reader supported.

What Libs Don't Want Us to Know

Bill 23 would limit truth-finding public inquiries.

Stanley Tromp 10 May

image atom

[Editor's note: Two sweeping pieces of BC legislation shielding government from public scrutiny are headed for vote any day. Yesterday, Freedom of Information expert Stanley Tromp analyzed Bill 30. This is the second of two parts.]

When Gordon Campbell's BC Liberal government came into office in 2001, it forecast a deep deficit and pledged to avoid it. The BC Liberals cut most ministries' budgets by an average of 25 percent, and in 2002, the government eliminated the offices of the Children's Commissioner and the Advocate for Children, Youth and Families.

That year, Port Alberni, B.C., toddler Sherry Charlie was tragically beaten to death by her uncle, Ryan George, after being placed in a kith-and-kith arrangement by the government-delegated aboriginal agency Usma.

The social workers did not complete their background checks on George until after the 19-month-old girl was in the home. His criminal record check wasn't finished, and his violent history discovered, until after her death. George first claimed that Sherry's older brother had pushed her down the stairs. But he later confessed to kicking the little girl to death because she wouldn't stop crying. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter in 2004 and received a 10-year prison sentence.

Sherry Charlie's tragic case placed intense focus on the Ministry of Children and Family Development. The government hired a respected former judge, the Honourable Ted Hughes, to study the child protection issue and issue an independent report which took almost three years to be made public.

Upon its release, Hughes said that children got caught in the crossfire. "I don't think there's any doubt that the core review of 2001 and 2002 took the knife too far," he said. "I just think they were wrong." Hughes's investigation also uncovered 249 additional child death files that have not been properly handled by the B.C. Coroners Service, bringing the total to 955.

Usually, any government given such a scathing report would insist it needed time to study it, but not here.

Instead, about an hour after the report was made public, Children and Family Development Minister Stan Hagen meekly submitted to the rebukes, while accepting without question Hughes' criticisms and 62 recommendations for changes. This year, the government agreed to restore the position of children's commissioner. It had been a humbling and harrowing experience for the administration and it was shamed into reversing its course.

Last week, the Campbell government found a simple way to cope with painful truths: bury them.

Bill 23's troubling measures

Although Ted Hughes' review was not technically set up under the Inquiry Act, its result was most likely the catalyst for Bill 23.

Under this bill - which is triple the length of the old act - a commission of inquiry will not be able to issue its report to any person other than the minister and cabinet will have the power to decide if a report from a public inquiry will be released.

Using Orwellian Newspeak, this secrecy statute alters the name "Inquiry Act" to read the "Public Inquiry Act." "This act takes both the 'public' and the 'inquiry' out of public inquiry," said B.C. Civil Liberties Association President Jason Gratl. "It's nothing more than a scheme to thwart independent oversight and government accountability."

"I can't help but question why the government wants to limit the scope and role of public inquiries" said NDP MLA Leonard Krog. "When you review the changes, you can't help but ask yourself why these amendments are necessary now or ever."

These are amongst the most troubling features of Bill 23:

To be fair, however, there are three sections of Bill 23 that some could view positively. A commission may receive information whether or not it would be admissible in a court; a commission order is final and not reviewable by any court; a commission can apply to a court for a warrant to conduct an inspection of a private place, including copying any records found there.

What could have been secret under Bill 23

If they had been set up under the new Public Inquiry Act, these are some inquiries whose final reports could have been kept secret. Consider if the public interest would have been served.

1) The 1955 report released on the Tupper public inquiry into police corruption (prompted by reporter Ray Munro, who revealed the bribery schemes of Vancouver Police Chief Walter Mulligan). This new Bill 23 transports us backward to the Dark Ages of public accountability, to some era before the 1950s. In fact, says NDP MLA Leonard Krog "Since 1897, public inquiries in BC have been compelled to report to the Legislative Assembly."

2) The Coquihalla Highway construction cost overrun public inquiry, 1987. The report found that the highway cost two-thirds more than the budgeted $250 million.

3) Conflict of Interest Commissioner Ted Hughes' report on Premier Bill Vander Zalm's conflict of interest in the Fantasy Garden theme park, 1991 - which led to the premier's resignation.

4) B.C. Court of Appeal Justice Wally Oppal headed a public inquiry into policing and issued his report entitled "Closing the Gap: Policing and the Community" in 1994. Ironically, the same Wally Oppal as attorney general is now pressing Bill 23 through the house, which could have been used to bury his own policing report.

5) Report of the Justice Thomas Gove Inquiry into Child Protection in British Columbia, 1995. This report, prompted by the tragic death of child Matthew Vaudreuil, found serious gaps in the B.C. child protection system, as today.

6) The report of the Dave Barrett public inquiry on leaky condos, 2000. This was set up to find out why the builder-owned New Home Warranty Program failed, leaving hundreds of owners of leaky condos with worthless warranties worth $130 million.

7) In June 2001, Liberal Attorney General Geoff Plant halted the Murray Smith Commission into the so-called Bingogate scandal (that involved allegations of charity skimming by the New Democratic Party during the 1970s and 1980s under David Stupich), claiming the public inquiry was growing too long and costly.

The inquiry was killed days before Smith was due in court to see if he had the authority to make adverse comments about individuals. He had issued notices of adverse findings to 22 people; eight of them had challenged his right to do that, saying it could destroy their reputations. Smith was shocked by the termination, called for public protest, and said the Campbell government "sounded the death knell" for public inquiries in B.C. (Bill 23 might have some roots in this event.)

Smith had not completed his report by then, and a B.C. Supreme Court justice ruled the incomplete findings of Smith's government-ordered probe must remain exempt from FOI requests and sealed from the public (which it still is - disgracefully - to this day). The information commissioner advised its release, but the government appealed and won. Yet, if the report HAD been completed, something like Bill 23 could have been used to seal that one also.

8) Upcoming reviews: last week, Premier Campbell touted plans for lengthy and ambitious public consultations on two issues: health and education. Although it's unlikely they would operate under the Public Inquiry Act (this route being usually reserved for scandals), they could be, and if they were, their final reports could be kept secret.

If federal law were this extreme

In preparing this story, I discussed Bill 23's meaning with six lawyers and most were shocked at the brazenness of it. Imagine the equivalent of the federal government daring to pass a law to keep secret or rewrite the final reports of these federal inquiries:

Stanley Tromp is FOI caucus coordinator of the Canadian Association of Journalists (CAJ)  [Tyee]

  • Share:

Get The Tyee's Daily Catch, our free daily newsletter.

Tyee Commenting Guidelines

Comments that violate guidelines risk being deleted, and violations may result in a temporary or permanent user ban. Maintain the spirit of good conversation to stay in the discussion.
*Please note The Tyee is not a forum for spreading misinformation about COVID-19, denying its existence or minimizing its risk to public health.


  • Be thoughtful about how your words may affect the communities you are addressing. Language matters
  • Challenge arguments, not commenters
  • Flag trolls and guideline violations
  • Treat all with respect and curiosity, learn from differences of opinion
  • Verify facts, debunk rumours, point out logical fallacies
  • Add context and background
  • Note typos and reporting blind spots
  • Stay on topic

Do not:

  • Use sexist, classist, racist, homophobic or transphobic language
  • Ridicule, misgender, bully, threaten, name call, troll or wish harm on others
  • Personally attack authors or contributors
  • Spread misinformation or perpetuate conspiracies
  • Libel, defame or publish falsehoods
  • Attempt to guess other commenters’ real-life identities
  • Post links without providing context

Most Popular

Most Commented

Most Emailed


The Barometer

Are You Concerned about Your Municipality’s Water Security?

Take this week's poll