B.C.’s Eby says proposed Indigenous land transfer legislation is about saving money

A forest industry leader would like to cut down a plan by the previous government to limit the compensation of forest companies when land is transferred to First Nations, but British Columbia NDP Leader David Eby has defended the proposal. 

Kim Haakstad, president of the Council of Forest Industries, said it was unfair for government to ask businesses to absorb the costs. 

“But particularly right now, this is one more way that the government is making it hard for forest products manufacturing companies to continue to operate in British Columbia,” Haakstad said. 

The province compensated companies in 2003, when it took about 20 per cent of tenures to create BC Timber Sales. “I believe the same principle should apply,” she said. 

Confidential documents published in the Northern Beat, an online publication, said Eby’s government had previously committed to transferring about 400 parcels of Crown land to First Nations, while limiting compensation for companies with timber rights on the land.

Eby said the transfers reflected existing treaties and other commitments under the process of reconciliation, some of them dating back decades, and the proposed legislation was about reducing costs for taxpayers.

The documents said the current law requires the government to compensate forestry firms, but “given ongoing fiscal constraints,” that would create substantial barriers to completing land returns.

A spokesperson for the Eby campaign said the draft legislation would limit compensation, and if a land transfer affected less than five per cent of the annual allowable cut for a license, the holders would not receive any compensation at all. 

The briefing notes, dated Sept. 10, were revealed just days before the provincial election on Oct. 24. 

The New Democrat platform doesn’t mention the plans, while forest companies had to sign non-disclosure agreements if they wanted to see them.

Eby said such agreements are standard, and he rejected suggestions of secrecy.

“It’s not a new thing, and what it does, it provides a little bit of relief in terms of cost for taxpayers for these agreements, some of which are historic with First Nations,” he said during an unrelated campaign announcement in Surrey, B.C. 

Asked how the proposed legislation would help forest companies avoid job losses during a time of economic difficulties, Eby said transfers of tenure to local groups and First Nations help the industry by keeping logs and jobs in communities.

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

A spokesperson for the campaign said cabinet approved engagement with stakeholders in July, but the proposal was draft, not final legislation. The engagement was considering adjustments to how compensation works in a limited number of cases where transfers affect land on which there are forest licenses.

The B.C. Conservatives issued a statement Thursday saying the plans constituted “more secret dealings” by Eby’s NDP. 

“As is usually the case, David Eby is refusing to be upfront and honest with British Columbians,” the party said.

Haakstad, meanwhile, said more than 20 mills have closed in B.C. since 2023 and others continue to operate below full capacity. 

“It’s not just the duty and tariff environment all the time,” but also the “homegrown challenges that we have created,” she said.

Haakstad said she hopes the New Democrats will reconsider the proposal if they are re-elected to form government.

“They need to have a budget for how they fund the agreements that they make with (First Nations) and I support many of the agreements,” she added.

Forest companies support the work of reconciliation, she said, and have many significant partnerships with First Nations. 

But if government commits to costs, it needs to pay for those costs, she said. “Asking forest companies to absorb that is generally unfair.”

Companies haven’t been at the table for the proposal, she said. “We know there are 400 parcels of land, but we have no idea where those parcels are. We have little information about what the likely impacts, and I think that is a troubling pattern.” 

Haakstad said she was not convinced that non-disclosure agreements were needed in the situation, but her organization nonetheless signed one.

She could not say how many other industry groups or companies did the same.

“We had concerns at COFI about NDAs, but when we sign them, we respect, and we work with legal counsel … because I don’t want to break an NDA.

“Somebody has done that,” she added. “I wouldn’t have. I would have respected it. But elections make for interesting times, right?” 

Conservatives said in their 2024 election platform that returning land to First Nations was critical for achieving economic self-sufficiency.

The party said at the time it was “committed to the strategic and collaborative return of land to First Nations, enabling bands to forge their own economic future.” 

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 15, 2026.