I have been a trial lawyer in British Columbia for over 35 years. During this time, I have advocated in the courts of our province for the rights of the most vulnerable.
I have been a member of the BC NDP for even longer. I attended my first BC NDP convention in Penticton as a teenager with my late mother. I was the youth representative for North Vancouver Seymour. Yes, my roots in the BC NDP are deep.
There have been many prominent New Democrats who were also trial lawyers, including BC NDP Premier Ujjal Dosanjh, former BCNDP cabinet member Gary Lauk, and former BCNDP MLA Bernie Simpson, to name just a few. While never holding public office, the late John Laxton was one of Canada’s most trail-blazing trial lawyers and was also a very influential BC New Democrat for decades.
These persons, who were both New Democrats and trial lawyers, have inspired me. Like most trial lawyers, they worked countless unpaid hours for the disadvantaged in our province. Trial lawyers, with their focus on human rights and a concern for the most vulnerable in our society, historically found common cause with the BC NDP, whose values have historically sought to address the needs of the least powerful.
During my lifetime, those of us concerned for our society’s least advantaged have been at home as both trial lawyers and New Democrats. Moreover, trial lawyers have been an essential source of campaign finance and other electoral support to the BCNDP, notably in the 2017 Provincial election.
Their relationship of common cause is no longer appreciated. In recent years, especially under the leadership of Mr Eby, the BCNDP has directed insults at trial lawyers. A recent BCNDP fundraising email from Premier Eby describes how the upcoming election is a contest between the BCNDP, John Rustad, and his allies, “rich trial lawyers and housing speculators.” This language mirrors other statements that consistently demean trial lawyers as an occupation.
After reading Eby’s latest fundraising email railing against Rustad and associating him with my profession, I have to ask if trial lawyers are welcome any longer in the BCNDP. Times change, and political parties change. In recent years, it seems like the BC NDP only smiles at trial lawyers when asking for their money.
If trial lawyers are no longer welcome in the BCNDP, I must face up to this fact. Despite my deep roots and many friends in the party, and despite there being so many exemplary individuals in the BCNDP advocating for essential values of social and economic equity and inclusion, there is no point in me and my family participating if we are members of an occupational group that is not welcome.
Jim Hanson is a lawyer based in North Vancouver and a three-time District of North Vancouver councillor. He also ran as a NDP federal candidate for Burnaby North-Seymour area.
I know trial lawyers who will not work for the vulnerable.
They won’t even talk to a vulnerable.
I share Mr. Hanson’s concern about the NDP’s apparent hostility to trial lawyers. Trial lawyers are sometimes the only protection for private citizens against the power of the state. Who else can speak for citizens in criminal cases, regulatory proceedings, taxation disputes, challenges to constitutionality of legislation, and more? While we like to believe our governments will exercise their authority with perfect fairness and adherence to the principles of our Charter rights and freedoms, we all know that there are times when legislators fail. It is for this reason that lawyers must maintain independence from the government: so that they can act for people and causes without any perception of divided loyalty.
Unfortunately, the BC NDP’s apparent hostility to lawyers has manifested in its recent imposition of Bill 21 – the Legal Professions Act. This new Act, passed and given Royal Assent without any support from the Law Society of BC (our long-standing self-governance professional body), the Trial Lawyers Association, or our bar associations, enables the Provincial government to impose its influence on lawyers (by, for example, giving itself the power to appoint Directors and executive committee members, who in turn will exert control over member conduct). It is an attack on the division of powers, which is essential to keeping the power of the legislative branch in check. Worse still, the Legal Professions Act was passed under the pretence of being aimed towards “access to justice”, which, to the extent that is used as a reason to take away the independence of the Law Society, is absurd. There are myriad better ways of improving our citizens’ access to justice, such as appointing more judges, making more courtrooms available, better (cheaper) access to legal information and representation, and more funding for legal aid (I could go on).
If you need an example of how effective governance of the legal profession can be compromised when a Law Society is marginalized and its power transferred to the government, look up the Post Office Horizon IT scandal in the United Kingdom, described by some as “the worst legal scandal in living memory”.
I supported the NDP in the last election, and was, for a while, a member of the party. For this election, I’ll be hard pressed to give my vote to a party that seems incline to put its thumb on the scales of justice.