B.C. Premier David Eby announced Friday (March 28) that his government would revise its tariff-response bill by pulling the section that gives cabinet the power to bypass the legislature to revise almost every law and regulation in the province. 

Part IV of Bill 7 鈥� also also known as the Economic Stabilization (Tariff Response) Act 鈥� includes what constitutional scholars call a  'Henry VIII' clause that gives cabinet the power to revise almost every provincial law and regulation through orders-in-council for at least two years, possibly longer. 

Eby said earlier this month that government needed this "emergency response authority" to move quickly in the face of executive orders from U.S. President Donald Trump. But this soon-to-be withdrawn part of Bill 7 has also earned growing criticism from provincial Conservatives, former B.C. Liberals, current B.C. Greens, business groups and civil libertarians among others.

Eby acknowledged that his government did not get the balance right when it comes to legislative oversight and accountability. The legislation as currently written requires cabinet to report out to the legislature, but only after it has taken any actions. 

"I believe very strongly that we need the ability to move quickly," Eby said. "But we have also heard from a number of people, a number of key stakeholders, including our tariff and economic response committee, Indigenous leaders, trade organizations (that) we didn't get the balance right, that I didn't get the balance right in terms of the ability to move quickly and (with) necessary safeguards." 

Eby said his government will try to pass the rest of Bill 7 as quickly as possible this spring session with Part IV being tabled as separate legislation following revisions. Eby did not specify what those revisions might look like, but pointed to the section of the bill that would have extended Part IV until May 28, 2027.

"I understand the objection that the 24-month-horizon was too long for people and it's one that we are looking at addressing in terms of other safeguards we can put in place," he said.

He also promised additional transparency around cabinet decisions and raised the possibility of creating a legislative committee that would oversee orders-in-council between sitting sessions.

"That is a suggestion that has been advanced to us and it is something that we are willing to consider," he said. 

But if Eby pointed to potential revisions, he broadly insisted on cabinet having authority, which it otherwise would not have.

"We do need the ability to respond quickly and we will work with those key stakeholders that we committed to work with at the beginning of this process to get it right and ensure that they are comfortable with these provisions going forward."  

But Eby later added it is "unlikely" that government would be able to introduce separate legislation before the end of the current spring session. This means that government would not introduce such legislation until the fall session, so several months from now. 

When Eby was asked whether this delay does not undermine his argument that B.C. needs to move quickly, he said it is not any secret that he thinks government needs this authority. 

"I think we need this urgently, but I also recognize my own vulnerability to want to move very quickly to protect B.C. families and our economy with the need to balance that we legitimate concerns that have been raised by stakeholders of ours," he said. "So I want to move as quickly as possible to get this in place, but I also made a commitment to British Columbians and to these key stakeholders that we would do that together." 

Reporters asked Eby on several occasions to identify whose concerns ultimately swayed his government. While Eby did not mention any specific groups, he said it "was very persuasive that were was considerable anxiety" among the committee that includes business, labour and Indigenous leaders. 

Reaction to Friday's announcement has been swift. "No amount of backpedalling changes the fact that Premier David Eby tried to grab unprecedented and unaccountable power," Conservative Gavin Dew, MLA for Kelowna-Mission, wrote on social media.

Observers consider Dew, who is the shadow minister for jobs, innovation and economic development, instrumental in helping to marshal business opposition to the bill. 

"British Columbia voters will remember that in the next election," he added. "This is the beginning of the end for David Eby." 

Conservative Party of B.C. John Rustad later interpreted Friday's announcement by Eby as a  "partial victory" for his party. "David Eby鈥檚 initial attempt to grant himself sweeping, unchecked powers was an affront to our democratic principles,鈥� Rustad said. 鈥淲hile his recent concession is a step in the right direction, it only scratches the surface."

He added that government must scrap the rest of Bill 7.

B.C. Greens, meanwhile, welcomed the changes but broadly argued that they were insufficient, while necessary. 

"While we鈥檝e pushed for and seen meaningful progress with Bill 7 鈥� such as the repeal of Part 4 鈥� it remains a work in progress,鈥� said Rob Botterell, MLA for Saanich North and the Islands, said. 

Botterell added that B.C. Greens have introduced several amendments. "Still, we have serious concerns," he said, adding that the party has proposed additional amendments, including as Eby mentioned, legislative oversight.

"This is in addition to Green amendments underway such as shortening the sunset clause to one year, removal of the exemptions regime and narrowing of delegation powers," Botterell said. "We expect to see these amendments, (among) others, included before we can determine (whether) we will support this bill."