Murray Wood: The most charming words kids say are usually the wrong ones
Kids mispronounce the funniest things. And Murray Wood thinks that sometimes, parents shouldn't rush to fix them.
OTTAWA — British Columbia’s Attorney General said her government may still bring forward legislation to amend key parts of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, even as the Supreme Court of Canada will hear the province’s appeal of a landmark ruling.
Niki Sharma, who is also B.C.’s deputy premier, says her government is very pleased that Canada’s highest court will hear British Columbia’s appeal of a ruling that found the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the provincial mineral claims regime are “inconsistent.”
The B.C. Court of Appeal ruled in December that the provincial Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act should be “properly interpreted” to incorporate UNDRIP into the laws of B.C. with immediate legal effect.
That ruling prompted several unsuccessful attempts by Premier David Eby’s government to directly amend or pause key sections of DRIPA to avoid what he called legal exposure — attempts that nearly threatened his government’s survival.
Eby said last month that his government won’t be introducing legislation to amend or suspend DRIPA this session, saying that government will instead work with First Nations to find solutions as soon as possible before the fall session.
Sharma told reporters Thursday that these conversations will continue, but did not rule out bringing forward changes to DRIPA, even before Canada’s highest court has ruled on her government’s appeal.
“We can find a solution together through legislation, and we can seek clarity from the Supreme Court of Canada on these particular issues,” she said.
“I think it’s important to keep all options of resolutions open,” she said.
Such a solution could be reached at the table through the discussions that are happening right now, she added.
“It does make sense to continue our discussions with First Nations, and we are having discussions on solutions that have a range of possible outcomes,” Sharma said. “I won’t prejudge how those conversations are going, but I’m hopeful that if we can find something at that table that resolves it, that will be part of the solution.”
At the time, a statement from the Gitxaala Nation, one of two nations challenging the law, called the decision precedent-setting.
The nation, along with the Ehattesaht First Nation, argued the operation of an automated online registry permitting “free miners” to register claims to mineral rights on Crown land before consulting affected First Nations was inconsistent with the Crown’s duty to consult.
Lawyer Jessica Clogg, a member of the Gitxaala Nation’s legal team, said on Thursday that the nation would have preferred for the B.C. government to respect the Court of Appeal’s decision.
But “the case raises issues of national importance, and we were unsurprised that the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear the appeal,” she said.
Clogg said the High Court will determine whether the province’s commitments made in the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act are legally enforceable in court or “merely political promises.”
“From the start, B.C. has attempted to deny accountability for its commitment to align laws with Indigenous human rights standards, even going so far as we saw recently to threaten amendments to the declaration act to deny nations access to the courts,” Clogg said.
She said the Gitxaala Nation welcomes the change to make its case before the Supreme Court of Canada.
“I think what we’ve seen over time is the guidance from the courts has been instrumental in establishing the foundations of Crown-Indigenous relations and really setting the stage for meaningful negotiated outcomes,” she said.
The provincial government passed the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act into law in November 2019.
The government said the act establishes the UN declaration as B.C.’s “framework for reconciliation.”
B.C. Premier David Eby said in December that the Court of Appeal decision “potentially puts courts in the driver’s seat instead of British Columbians.”
Eby said it was “absolutely crucial” that residents of the province, through their elected representatives, remain in control of the process.
“Too much rides on it in terms of our province’s prosperity and certainty going forward,” he said.
Following its usual practice, the Supreme Court gave no reasons Thursday for agreeing to review the case. No date for a hearing has been set.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 21, 2026.
The Canadian Press
