British Columbia to press on with controversial Bill

A new Bill empowering the government to recover public costs, including health care expenses, from compan...

A new Bill empowering the government to recover public costs, including health care expenses, from companies it deems to cause harm, has been roundly criticised by BC’s business community.

Attorney-General of British Columbia (BC) Niki Sharma KC has sought to reassure businesses in the province by reasserting her view that law-abiding organisations have nothing to fear from new legislation that allows government to sue media giants and other companies in the name of consumer protection. Critics of the Public Health Accountability and Cost Recovery Act – also known as Bill 12 and which is still being debated in the legislature – argue that the Bill is too broad and will hand too much power to the government.

Tabled last month and aimed primarily at tobacco, alcohol and social media companies, the Bill, if passed, will allow government to recover public costs associated with the promotion, marketing and distribution of products deemed harmful, building on previous legislation that enabled litigation against tobacco and opioid manufacturers, with the goal of holding companies accountable for the public health costs such as doctor visits and hospital care that their products or actions incur. This includes costs related to treatment, prevention and potential future risks. Any company deemed to cause ‘harm’ can be caught in the Bill’s net, and – in addition to tobacco, alcohol and social media firms – could potentially apply to companies producing addictive products such as energy drinks.

BC Premier David Eby first signalled the legislation in January 2024 following the suicide of a 12-year-old boy, Carson Cleland, who had fallen victim to online sextortion after having shared intimate images with someone who had claimed to be a teenage girl. Speaking in March, Eby commented: “Our government previously warned social media giants, tobacco, drug companies and other big faceless corporations that we would be taking action to hold them accountable for the harm they are causing to people, including kids. My message is simple: Here in BC, we expect you to operate in a way that doesn’t hurt people, period.”

Singling out social media companies, Eby added: “Their interest is in keeping kids online, engaged in their apps with ever more extreme content, so that they can serve them ads, so that they can make money for their shareholders.”

A total of 23 business groups have written to Sharma calling on the government to pause the legislation with a view to refining it. The letter, whose signatories include the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade, the BC Chamber of Commerce, the Retail Council of Canada and the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses – in addition to representatives of the restaurant, brewery and wine-making industries – wrote: “As opposed to a targeted approach (aimed at social media), this legislation is written in the broadest possible fashion. The result is that there is a real risk that this legislation could cause some to consider alternatives to investing in BC, raise costs, or, at worst, relocate existing BC-based operations.”

Responding, Attorney-General Sharma said in a statement: “This [legislation] is about companies that have knowingly done something wrong and profited off their behaviour. [If] you are causing harm to British Columbia knowingly and not abiding by the laws, then we will meet you in court.”

Sharma confirmed that she is happy to speak with anyone in the business community. “(I) have been taking their calls and speaking with them.”