B.C. ordered to hand over documents around mink ban as court fight continues

The courts have ordered the provincial government to hand over documents related to its decision to phase out mink farming in B.C. last year, as breeders' associations continue to fight to have the ban thrown out.

In a ruling posted online Thursday, a B.C. Supreme Court justice said the government has 30 days to produce an affidavit — or sworn written statement — with the information that was "directly or indirectly" considered when cabinet made its decision last year to shut down farming.

"I have concluded that the respondents should be directed to produce, to the extent they have not already done so, the [aforementioned] documents in their possession or control," wrote B.C. Supreme Court Justice Warren Milman.

The B.C. Ministry of Agriculture announced last November live mink would not be allowed on farms in the province by April 2023 and the industry would be phased out in 2025.

Officials cited concerns farms would become a "reservoir'' for COVID-19 infections after a number of outbreaks during the height of the pandemic.

The Canada Mink Breeders Association filed a judicial review in response, arguing the province chose to permanently shut down the industry without clearly understanding the health risks posed by mink farming.

They argued the government's plan infringes on international and interprovincial trade, which are federal jurisdictions, and said the decision to phase out the industry was unreasonable.

Before the petition is heard in court, the association asked the court to order the province to turn over "a number of documents" that informed cabinet discussions on Oct. 18 and Nov. 24, 2021, about the ban.

Some documents have already been released, including a "confidential policy advice" memo outlining Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry's reasons for believing mink farming posed a risk to public health.

But the association argued some information is still being held back, including background policies, briefing notes and ministry memos.

In response, the province said some documents were withheld because they were considered to be "confidential policy advice or information subject to cabinet privilege."

It argued the association needed to prove they weren't "simply embarking on a fishing expedition" and that the information they were after would actually be relevant to their case.

Certain documents, it added, were also subject to "public interest immunity" — meaning their publication would be damaging to the public interest.

Justice Milman rejected the province's arguments. He said he could not properly consider the immunity argument because the documents in question were not released even to him.