B.C.’s New Mining Consultation Framework Falls Short on Clarity, Confidentiality, and Respect for First Nations
“The government claims to support reconciliation and economic development, but this framework does neither. It leaves Indigenous Nations without support to participate, and industry without the stability to move forward.”
-Scott McInnis, Conservative MLA for Columbia River-Revelstoke and Opposition Critic for Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation
Revelstoke, BC – The Conservative Official Opposition is calling out the NDP government’s rushed and flawed rollout of the Mineral Claims Consultation Framework (MCCF), saying it ignores industry requirements and fails to deliver the meaningful consultation with First Nations that is constitutionally required.
“This framework falls far short of the respect these communities deserve,” said Scott McInnis, MLA for Columbia River-Revelstoke and Critic for Indigenous Relations and Reconciliation. “The NDP have prioritized checking a legal box over building a process rooted in trust and transparency.”
McInnis said the entire framework looks like it was rushed through to meet the March 26 implementation deadline. The framework appears only to satisfy the minimum requirements of the Gitxaała ruling.
“This is not reconciliation,” said McInnis, “it’s regulatory theatre.”
McInnis acknowledged that “consultation may be the legal requirement,” but questioned whether the voices of First Nations and industry were truly heard during the creation of the framework.
Introduced in response to the Gitxaała decision, the MCCF now requires consultation before mineral claims are registered. However, final decisions rest with the Chief Gold Commissioner, without independent oversight, a clear appeal process, or public standards for what qualifies as consultation or accommodation.
“The government hasn’t explained what supports are available, how to access them, or whether they’re even adequate,” said McInnis. “Real consultation means real resources, not just downloading responsibilities without clear support. It remains unclear how any potential backlog of claims will be managed under this new framework.”
Another major concern is the breach of confidentiality. For the first time, applicants’ names will be published, potentially exposing intellectual property and undermining objectivity.
The Association for Mineral Exploration (AME) raised concerns about both confidentiality and the lack of binding timelines, warning that publishing names risks compromising fairness, and that timelines remain vague despite Premier Eby’s public commitments.
“The government claims to support reconciliation and economic development, but this framework does neither,” McInnis said. “It leaves Indigenous Nations without support to participate, and industry without the stability to move forward.”
Pete Davis, MLA for Kootenay-Rockies and Critic for Mining, Critical Minerals, and the Columbia Treaty, said the framework offers no firm timelines, no protection for applicant confidentiality, and no assurance that consultation will be meaningful.
“This should have brought certainty to both Indigenous communities and the mining sector,” said Davis. “Instead, the NDP had 18 months and failed to deliver.”
McInnis also emphasized the importance of supporting prospectors, who are being left without clarity under the new framework. “There’s still no guidance for how claims will be handled when traditional territories overlap, a gap that could create conflict between Nations,” he said. “The government hasn’t addressed the issue of title, which is critical.”
He added that the framework should strike a balance between respecting the interests of First Nations and prospectors. “Failure to consult industry meaningfully will lead to additional confusion and friction.”
The government has also signaled plans to align the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (DRIPA) with the Mineral Tenure Act by 2026, before this framework has even proven it can work. “You don’t build trust or certainty by moving ahead with major structural changes before your foundation is even tested,” said McInnis.
“True, lasting frameworks in reconciliation efforts have to work for everyone who sits at the table. This MCCF only satisfies the NDP and essentially ignores everyone else,” said McInnis.
“This framework misses the mark, and we will keep standing up for First Nations and responsible resource development until it’s fixed.”
-30-
Media Contact: [email protected]
Do you like this page?
