B.C. puts forward risky changes for environmental assessments

B.C. is looking to fast-track major project reviews, slashing environmental assessments to just 20 months without major additional funding. This amounts to cutting corners. 

What you can do 

Write to them demanding the review process be strengthened, not weakened. Remember don’t leave the box empty or your letter will be blank! 

Why this matters 

If successful, this will rush reviews through potential ecological impacts and provide less opportunity for the public, stakeholder groups and First Nations to have their say. Most importantly, future public comment periods will be cut in half.

Points to consider for your letter:

Feel free to use these points to inform your letter.
Do not leave the box empty or your email will be blank!

  • EAO reviews need to be strengthened, not weakened, and slashing the amount of time for assessments is a dangerous step in the wrong direction.
  • I oppose the BC EAO’s proposal to reduce the amount of time harmful projects are reviewed for by up to three times, and cut the number of public comment periods for projects in half. 
  • The proposed changes provide no detail on how the government will gauge whether First Nations support fast-tracking the review for a given project.
  • Environmental assessments in BC have been getting weaker and more difficult to participate in, and I oppose further efforts to reduce opportunities to weigh in.
  • Our engagement is already being stifled by the EPIC.engage platform, which forces us into survey formats instead of individual emails and masks specific public concerns.
  • Conflict over resource projects almost always arises from a lack of transparency and the feeling that voices are being disregarded. Shortening assessments will only increase legal challenges and social conflict across the province.
  • Environmental assessments in B.C. are already geared toward pre-determined outcomes. We need to strengthen the rigor of these reviews, not "streamline" them to favor project approval over ecological protection.
  • Compressing the timeline to 20 months does not allow for a full understanding of a project's long-term impact on local ecosystems, wildlife, and water health.
  • I am calling on the government to maintain current review timelines and focus instead on improving transparency by getting rid of the EPIC.engage platform, ensuring that all public comments are individually published and taken into serious account.
     
Points to consider for your letter:

Feel free to use these points to inform your letter.
Do not leave the box empty or your email will be blank!

  • EAO reviews need to be strengthened, not weakened, and slashing the amount of time for assessments is a dangerous step in the wrong direction.
  • I oppose the BC EAO’s proposal to reduce the amount of time harmful projects are reviewed for by up to three times, and cut the number of public comment periods for projects in half. 
  • The proposed changes provide no detail on how the government will gauge whether First Nations support fast-tracking the review for a given project.
  • Environmental assessments in BC have been getting weaker and more difficult to participate in, and I oppose further efforts to reduce opportunities to weigh in.
  • Our engagement is already being stifled by the EPIC.engage platform, which forces us into survey formats instead of individual emails and masks specific public concerns.
  • Conflict over resource projects almost always arises from a lack of transparency and the feeling that voices are being disregarded. Shortening assessments will only increase legal challenges and social conflict across the province.
  • Environmental assessments in B.C. are already geared toward pre-determined outcomes. We need to strengthen the rigor of these reviews, not "streamline" them to favor project approval over ecological protection.
  • Compressing the timeline to 20 months does not allow for a full understanding of a project's long-term impact on local ecosystems, wildlife, and water health.
  • I am calling on the government to maintain current review timelines and focus instead on improving transparency by getting rid of the EPIC.engage platform, ensuring that all public comments are individually published and taken into serious account.