In today's newsletter:
• Vancouver Sun columnist Vaughn Palmer reports that B.C.'s new project approval legislation promises faster permits, but hands sweeping discretion to cabinet.
• National Post columnist John Ivison argues that Prime Minister Mark Carney maintained dignity and defended Canada’s autonomy during a surreal Oval Office meeting.
• Dr. Alykhan Abdull, board director of the College of Family Physicians of Canada, warns that burnout, abuse, and unrealistic expectations are driving health-care providers to the brink. |
|
|
Far from cutting red tape, B.C. NDP fast-tracking law hands big overriding powers to cabinet |
VICTORIA — The New Democrats have finally introduced their promised legislation to expedite approval of major projects, with much talk of “streamlining, fast tracking and cutting red tape.”
But, on closer examination, the two bills do not actually repeal any of B.C.’s heavy regulatory burden. Rather they give the cabinet arbitrary powers to override existing rules, regulations and procedures on projects favoured by the NDP.
Bill 14, the Renewable Energy Projects (Streamlined Permitting) Act consolidates oversight under the B.C. Energy Regulator for nine wind projects and a new electrical transmission line serving the Northwest.
It also allows the cabinet to designate any other “renewable energy project” as worthy of expedited regulation.
Bill 15, the Infrastructure Projects Act, allows a minister and the cabinet to designate a broad range of public and private sector projects as worthy of jumping the regulatory queue.
Only one existing piece of legislation is repealed: the Significant Projects Streamlining Act, enacted by Premier Gordon Campbell as a deregulatory gesture in 2003, but seldom, if ever, used.
Otherwise Bill 15 mostly empowers the government to intervene as it sees fit on behalf of “provincially significant projects,” public as well as private.
Factors to be considered in reaching that determination include whether a project contributes to: “Public infrastructure, critical minerals supply, food or water security, health and safety, energy security, disaster recovery, trade diversification, access to new markets, supply chain security, replacing U.S. imports, B.C.’s climate goals, and partnerships with First Nations.”
Those sweeping powers are intended as mere tools, according to Bowinn Ma, cabinet member for the new Ministry of Infrastructure.
“Right now, we don't actually have very many tools to reach in and take greater responsibility for moving projects along when something goes wrong,” Ma told Simi Sara during an interview on CKNW Monday.
Why not just wade in and eliminate the offending regulations altogether?
“Let's make sure we understand what we're referring to when we talk about permitting processes,” said Ma.
“These are literally hundreds, if not thousands, if you include municipal governments across the province, thousands of processes that have been developed not just over years, but over decades and over generations. Although each of them is very well meaning, they end up kind of being spaghetti.”
The government is working to untangle the regulatory mess, says Ma.
In the interim, communities need schools and hospitals, and the economy needs to diversify and meet the challenge of the Trump tariffs from the U.S.
“When I talk about environmental assessment process, I'm talking about those full blown environmental certificates which take three, four, five, six years for major projects to get through, or even more — lots of uncertainty, really rigorous reviews that basically look at every rock, stick, and stream, and tree in the area and assess its impact on the environment.”
How will the province determine whether to “reach in” to the regulatory process?
“A proponent, which could be a local government, a Crown corporation, First Nation, or a private proponent can flag their project as critical and ask for help,” said Ma.
“Projects would need to create significant economic, social or environmental benefits for people. They would have to significantly contribute to priorities like public infrastructure, critical mineral supply, food and water security, post disaster recovery, or trade diversification.”
All of which requires Ma and her ministry to decide whether a project does or does not qualify for a regulatory helping hand.
“If everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. You still end up with your big pile of permits to go through. So it's actually required of me as minister, of my ministry, to use these tools wisely so they're actually effective when we need them.”
The NDP is departing from a regulatory regime where the same sets of rules and procedures apply to every project.
“Every single project is different and every project uses a different combination or has to obtain a different combination of the hundreds and potentially thousands of different permitting processes that exist,” says Ma.
“Permitting processes are really important, right? They protect environment, protect human health and safety, they ensure that whatever is being built is being built correctly.
“But over time, these processes, because of the way they've been developed over so many years, sometimes they get intertangled, sometimes they interact with each other in ways that were never intended, and yet because of the way the law is written, things get stuck.”
So the New Democrats will assess applications for regulatory relief on a case-by-case basis, moving favoured ones to the front of the line and relegating others to the back of the regulatory pack.
Which also invites speculation about inside deals, crafted by lobbyists and party insiders, and advanced for political purposes.
The old way was the slow way. But at least project proponents could read the legislation and the guidelines and know what they had to navigate with the independent regulator.
With the NDP’s new way of doing things, proponents could wonder whether it was merit or political connections that determined whether their project got put on the fast track or left on the back burner. |
|
|
|
