Spike in flawed B.C. government hiring raises concerns as NDP scraps oversight | Daily Hive

Spike in flawed B.C. government hiring raises concerns over favouritism as NDP moves to scrap oversight

B.C. legislature in Victoria. (The Bold Bureau/Shutterstock)

The BC NDP-led provincial government’s new proposal to dissolve the B.C. Office of the Merit Commissioner is drawing sharp warnings from the province’s independent hiring watchdog, which says the move to end its work would remove a key layer of transparency and accountability from public service hiring and dismissal processes.

In a statement released this week after the 2026 provincial budget announcement, Merit Commissioner David McCoy confirmed that Bill 2, the Budget Measures Implementation Act, 2026, would eliminate his office and strip away its core responsibilities, including random audits of hiring competitions and reviews of dismissals for cause.

McCoy said those functions are central to ensuring that jobs in the B.C. Public Service are awarded based on merit — competence and qualifications — rather than favouritism or flawed processes.

This oversight system is designed to prevent provincial government jobs from being filled based on politics, activism, personal connections, and/or internal favouritism rather than qualifications.

By auditing hiring processes and reviewing complaints, the office acts as a check against cronyism, nepotism, and biased decision-making inside the bureaucracy. As well, the presence of independent review is a deterrent that makes it harder to quietly hire friends, acquaintances, or ideologically aligned insiders without proper justification.

You might also like:

“For more than 20 years, the Office of the Merit Commissioner has served British Columbians by providing independent oversight,” said McCoy, noting that the office has audited thousands of appointments, reviewed complaints from employees, and, in some cases, helped reverse hiring outcomes that were found to be unfair or improperly conducted.

Over that time, since its creation in 2001 by the BC Liberals-led provincial government of Premier Gordon Campbell, the office has also produced dozens of reports and guidance documents aimed at improving hiring practices across the provincial government.

The office is one of the smallest independent oversight bodies reporting to the B.C. legislature, but McCoy argued it delivers “excellent value” for taxpayers.

In December 2025, a non-partisan, multi-party committee of the legislature approved a three-year budget for the office, explicitly recognizing its role in upholding merit-based hiring. That committee’s report was officially tabled in the legislature on Feb. 18, 2026 — just one day before the BC NDP-proposed legislative changes were made public, and one day after the controversial 2026 budget announcement.

The timing has raised questions about why an office that recently received a reaffirmation of cross-party backing is now facing elimination.

Importantly, the office’s most recent audit result suggest independent oversight remains necessary.

According to the office’s 2024/2025 fiscal year report, its most recent merit performance audit examined 272 randomly selected appointments from a total population of 11,467 eligible appointments made between April 1, 2023 and March 31, 2024. The office says this sample size is statistically valid and allows for broader conclusions about hiring practices across the public service.

The findings were deeply troubling. The audit showed that 10 per cent of reviewed files resulted in a “Merit Not Applied” finding, up from six per cent the previous year and the highest rate recorded in nearly a decade since the 2016/2017 fiscal year — around the same time the BC NDP formed government for the first time in more than a decade and a half, toppling Christy Clark’s BC Liberals.

In total, the office identified 197 errors in merit across the 272 audited competition files, compared with 146 errors the year before — a significant year-over-year increase.

Most people hired were found to meet basic requirements; the report says 96 per cent of those audited were qualified for their jobs when they were appointed. Still, five people — about 1.8 per cent — were hired even though they were not actually qualified, and another six people, or 2.2 per cent, did not clearly show they had the required qualifications. The audit also found that only about two-thirds of hiring decisions were backed up by good paperwork, raising concerns about poor record-keeping and a lack of transparency in how some hiring decisions are made.

Looking more broadly, the report estimates that across the public service, about 59 per cent of hires fully met the merit standard, 31 per cent had some issues or exceptions, and 10 per cent fell into the category of “Merit Not Applied.”

According to the office, all of this suggests the problems are not just a few one-off mistakes, but signs of deeper, system-wide issues.

Beyond hiring, the Merit Commissioner’s role has expanded in recent years to include oversight of dismissals for cause. This change followed a 2017 Ombudsperson investigation into the wrongful dismissal of B.C. Ministry of Health staff in 2012, which led the provincial government to accept recommendations to strengthen accountability and administrative fairness. As a result, in 2018, the Merit Commissioner was given responsibility for reviewing dismissal processes to ensure they comply with required practices, policies, and standards.

McCoy warned that the proposed legislation would not only eliminate the office’s audit and review functions, but would also remove the requirement for the provincial government to publicly report on these matters. In his view, that would weaken transparency at a time when trust in public institutions depends heavily on independent, objective oversight.

“The trust that comes through independent and transparent oversight of provincial hiring and dismissal processes matters more than ever,” said McCoy, adding that while dissolving the office might produce short-term savings, the long-term costs of losing an independent watchdog could be far greater — both in terms of fairness to employees and public confidence in the provincial government.

The 2026 budget also includes a major human resources change component to help the provincial government address its out-of-control annual operating budget deficits, which are greatly contributing to provincial debt.

The provincial government is planning to reduce its headcount by 15,000 staff over the next three fiscal years, which represents a 3.4 per cent reduction in the total workforce employed. This also specifically includes the elimination of 2,500 jobs in ministries, offices, and other public sectors, including roles in ministries, offices, Crown corporations, health authorities, school districts, community social services, research and teaching universities, and post-secondary colleges and institutions.

This attrition will be accomplished by not filling vacancies following staffing departures, as well as voluntary departures and severance incentives.

Additionally, there will be a reduction in costs from limiting non-essential consulting contracts with private companies and individual contractors, with the budget stating this particular expenditure reduction will be “more than double the per cent reduction in size of the public sector workforce.”

All of these cuts amount to “right-sizing the public sector,” following a staggering 40 per cent increase in the B.C. government’s workforce over the past decade, which led to an increase of over 80,000 full-time jobs. The 15,000 job cuts over the next three fiscal years would amount to a rewind of about 19 per cent on those earlier gains since the BC NDP formed government.

Under Premier John Horgan, soon after being elected in 2017, the BC NDP-led provincial government introduced rules aimed at limiting the “revolving door” between government and lobbying. The reforms included a cooling-off period that prevents certain high-level officials — such as cabinet ministers and deputy ministers — from registering as lobbyists and actively trying to influence government for two years after they leave office.

This was meant to reduce the risk that political insiders could immediately leverage their government connections for private gain. The rules applied only to the most senior positions, leaving many political staff and other insiders able to transition to lobbying with fewer restrictions.

You might also like: