Indigenous leaders from across British Columbia are challenging the provincial government’s approach to development on traditional territories, warning that the current system perpetuates colonial patterns despite reconciliation promises.
At a gathering in Prince George last week, representatives from over 20 First Nations voiced growing frustration with what they describe as a “consultation process that consults but rarely listens.” The meeting came as several major resource and infrastructure projects move forward across the province.
“We’re not opposed to development,” explained Chief Margaret Williams of the Lake Babine Nation. “But we’re opposed to being treated as an afterthought when decisions about our traditional lands are made in Victoria offices without meaningful Indigenous input.”
The controversy centers on the province’s environmental assessment process, which Indigenous leaders argue fails to incorporate traditional knowledge and territorial rights guaranteed under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA), passed by the BC legislature in 2019.
Recent data from the First Nations Leadership Council shows applications for resource development on First Nations traditional territories have increased by 23% since 2022, while meaningful accommodation of Indigenous concerns remains inconsistent across regions.
“The province talks about DRIPA implementation with fancy words, but on the ground, it’s still a box-checking exercise for many ministries,” said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs. “When our communities raise concerns about impacts on watersheds or cultural sites, those concerns often disappear into bureaucratic black holes.”
The Ministry of Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation defends its approach, pointing to several successful shared decision-making agreements established with First Nations across BC. “We’ve made significant progress toward a new model of partnership,” said Ministry spokesperson Christopher Reynolds. “The path to true reconciliation requires patience and ongoing dialogue.”
However, University of British Columbia indigenous governance expert Dr. Sheryl Lightfoot sees systemic problems. “The province wants economic certainty without addressing underlying questions about title and jurisdiction,” she explained. “You can’t have meaningful consent-based processes while maintaining ultimate veto power over decisions.”
This tension was evident last month when the Tŝilhqot’in National Government raised alarms about a proposed mining exploration that would affect sacred sites near Fish Lake (Teztan Biny). Despite their objections based on documented cultural significance, preliminary permits were issued after what the nation called “superficial consultation.”
Chief Joe Alphonse of the Tŝilhqot’in National Government didn’t mince words: “We won the most significant Aboriginal title case in Canadian history, yet we’re still fighting bureaucrats over basic respect for our decision-making authority. This isn’t reconciliation – it’s the same colonial pattern with nicer paperwork.”
The federal government has largely stayed on the sidelines of these provincial disputes, though Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Patty Hajdu acknowledged the challenges during a recent Vancouver visit. “We recognize that implementing UNDRIP principles requires systemic change at all levels of government,” she said, without offering specific federal interventions.
Meanwhile, industry representatives argue the current system creates uncertainty that hampers economic development. “Companies need clear, consistent processes,” said Michael Goehring of the Mining Association of BC. “When consultation requirements shift unpredictably, it becomes difficult to secure investment.”
Some First Nations are developing their own solutions. The Tahltan Nation in northwestern BC established a resource development consent process through their central government, requiring companies to meet specific standards before receiving community support.
“We’re exercising our inherent rights to determine what happens on our territory,” explained Chad Norman Day, President of the Tahltan Central Government. “Companies that respect our process find we can be excellent partners in responsible development.”
Polling suggests British Columbians broadly support Indigenous consent requirements for major projects. A recent Angus Reid survey found 68% of BC residents believe First Nations should have final say over resource development on their traditional territories, though that support varies significantly by region and age group.
For communities caught in the middle, like the
