B.C. forest industry bristles at proposal to reduce compensation in First Nation land transfers

B.C.’s key forest industry group is critical of a pre-election government effort to limit compensation to forest tenure holders when land is transferred to First Nations as part of reconciliation efforts.

A confidential government briefing document and presentation leaked this week refer to a commitment to transfer 400 parcels of Crown land to First Nations.

However, due to “continuing fiscal constraints,” the documents outline proposals to limit, through changes to the Forest Act, the amount of compensation owed to companies or entities that hold timber rights on those parcels.

Timber companies support reconciliation efforts, understanding that “those need to happen,” but any effort to curb compensation for cutting rights is unfair to an industry struggling with so many other issues, said Kim Haakstad, CEO of the Council of Forest Industries.

“Our position has been, and we were pretty open with government about this before the election, that we think this proposal should not go forward,” Haakstad said. “We think it is not acceptable to have us pay for these costs, especially at this time when the sector is in a deepening crisis.”

Haakstad said she first learned of the proposal in early August, when parties signed non-disclosure agreements regarding the proposal.

She said she is only talking about the matter now because contents of the documents have been made public by Victoria legislative reporter Rob Shaw, first on the Northern Beat news website.

Haakstad added that the only information that COFI and some of its members have is in the briefing document and presentation, the latter of which was dated Sept. 10, less than two weeks before Premier David Eby called a snap election.

This week, speaking as NDP Leader, Eby didn’t release details about what parcels of Crown land are included in the list of 400, how much land is involved or what compensation might be.

Answering questions from reporters, Eby said the list comes from “very public, discussed agreements with treaty First Nations,” with some that have been signed more than a decade ago under previous governments.

The documents, Eby said, are about proposals to reduce the cost of making those transfers.

“Look, even (B.C. Conservative Leader Lorne Doerkson) agrees, and there’s not a lot we agree on, but we agree that agreements with First Nations are part of the path forward for the province,” Eby said.

“When we enter these agreements, sometimes there are transfers of Crown land, and to drive down the cost of that, so that taxpayers aren’t bearing the cost of that, is absolutely crucial,” Eby added.

B.C. Conservative Candidate Scott McInnis, however, called the behind-closed-doors proposal unethical and a shocking betrayal of a struggling forest industry “that has been begging this government for some action and some support.”

Instead, “they basically say, ‘well, sorry, we don’t have any money to compensate you for these land transfers,” McInnis said. “I just find that absolutely abhorrent.

“We support partnerships in advancing the quality of life for Indigenous people in this province,” McInnis said. “The public agrees with that, but the public is not willing to accept agreements and things made behind closed doors.”

Eby argued that there are instances where land transfers will clear the way for forestry operations to proceed, particularly for First Nations entities.

“Court challenges to forest tenures, to cutting permits and other things mean that the industry totally stalled out,” Eby said. “So that’s why agreements were struck under the previous government, under our government, to enable forestry activities to take place.”

In those instances, Vancouver lawyer Wes Mussio said government would open itself up to “quite a few legal disputes.”

Mussio, whose practice includes a specialization in forestry matters, characterized the proposed measure under the legal term “constructive taking,” or expropriation, which calls for compensation.

“Government can’t just go and take it,” Mussio said. He also argued that it “is unheard of in law,” outside of countries such as Indonesia or Papua New Guinea.

“To characterize it as something that obstructs forestry is actually the complete opposite of what’s happening here,” Eby said. “It’s about minimizing the impact on taxpayers.”

NDP campaign officials, in an unattributed background document, said the proposal contemplates forgoing compensation when less than five per cent of a licence holders’ timber harvesting rights were impacted by a transfer. They added that only about half of the parcels have any potential forestry impacts.

Haakstad said the industry understands the need for reconciliation, but would like to see government apply the same principles it used in 2003 when the province took back 20 per cent of its Crown timber tenures over 10 years to create the crown agency B.C. Timber Sales.

“They compensated not just us but also our contractors,” Haakstad said. “So we would like to see something similar applied here.”

“When we’re making reconciliation agreements with Nations, the budget should include the compensation for people that have lost opportunity on the land base,” Haakstad said.

With files from Alec Lazenby