When I first saw that the RCMP were taking actions against the Wet’suwet’en people, I thought, “someone must be funding this.” I started making phone calls, assuming it was a local effort. I contacted RCMP Division E headquarters, but they deliberately sent me on a wild goose chase. Directed to call Houston detachment, I spoke with them, and they were defensive—refusing comment, directing me onward to Smithers detachment. There, I was told there was zero involvement: the officers were being sent from Surrey, B.C. That traced the funding source back to the B.C. government.
With experience in Alberta government, I know politicians can’t spend like that without a deputy minister (ADM) or executive’s approval. Politicians don’t have internal budgets for RCMP deployments—this funding comes from bureaucrats. Bureaucrats often bully politicians—who “generally are idiots”—into rubber-stamping these actions. The real question becomes: which bureaucrat signed off on the RCMP operation against the hereditary chiefs? Administrative law places program accountability with ADMs; politicians are largely figureheads. In government, bureaucrats are shielded from removal—even when politicians “go ballistic” they’re told, “HR can’t touch them.” The invasion of Indigenous people, the violation of court orders—bureaucrats don’t blink. Their true crime is exposure: they’re sworn to secrecy, not accountability. This fight isn’t with ministers—it’s with bureaucrats.
A stark example of flawed reportage comes from a recent CBC article—intended to clarify the RCMP’s actions but riddled with inaccuracies. It omitted statements from the Hereditary Chiefs and echoed official lines uncritically, failing to challenge the narrative.
Added context from recent reporting:
- Between 2019 and 2023, RCMP expenditures policing Wet’suwet’en territory exceeded $36–$37 million thetyee.ca+1thetyee.ca+1.
- In December 2024, BC Supreme Court proceedings sharply criticized RCMP practices, describing officers’ language as “grossly offensive, racist, and dehumanizing,” prompting condemnation from the Assembly of First Nations afn.ca+1aptnnews.ca+1.
- Human rights groups such as Amnesty International and the CAJ have documented abusive behavior, including media obstruction, intimidation, and injunction enforcement en.wikipedia.org+4amnesty.ca+4caj.ca+4.
Why it matters:
- Funding for RCMP interventions comes from BC’s public purse—meaning ministers’ budgets and bureaucratic approvals were misused without democratic oversight.
- The SSpri ng budget for such enforcement isn’t transparent; it bypasses legislative scrutiny and is veiled in bureaucratic secrecy.
- The wild-goose chase between detachments reveals a coordinated effort to obscure responsibility.
- Administrative law dictates ADMs hold real authority and accountability—not elected officials. Identifying who signed these funding documents is crucial for legal redress.
- Media silence and official cover-ups further shield bureaucrats from accountability.
