B.C. plans 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 cut and paste the points below in your letter
Do not leave the box empty or your email will be blank!

  • I strongly oppose the proposal to compress EAO reviews from the current 3–5 year standard down to just 20 months. Shorthanding these reviews by up to three times is a dangerous step in the wrong direction.
  • With only marginal increases to the EAO budget, attempting to fast track complex reviews without a massive increase in review resources is equal to cutting corners on environmental safety and public health.
  • Cutting the number of public comment periods for major projects in half unnecessarily silences British Columbians and limits our ability to provide meaningful feedback on projects that affect the communities we live in.
  • The current proposal offers no clear details on how the government will gauge whether First Nations support fast-tracking a project.
  • Rushing these reviews risks bypassing the deep engagement and consent required for true reconciliation.
  • This is a follow up on Bill 15, which I am opposed to and was condemned by legal experts, Indigenous leaders, and environmental advocates as a power grab.
  • 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, ensuring that all public comments are individually published and taken into serious account.
Points to consider for your letter:

Feel free to cut and paste the points below in your letter
Do not leave the box empty or your email will be blank!

  • I strongly oppose the proposal to compress EAO reviews from the current 3–5 year standard down to just 20 months. Shorthanding these reviews by up to three times is a dangerous step in the wrong direction.
  • With only marginal increases to the EAO budget, attempting to fast track complex reviews without a massive increase in review resources is equal to cutting corners on environmental safety and public health.
  • Cutting the number of public comment periods for major projects in half unnecessarily silences British Columbians and limits our ability to provide meaningful feedback on projects that affect the communities we live in.
  • The current proposal offers no clear details on how the government will gauge whether First Nations support fast-tracking a project.
  • Rushing these reviews risks bypassing the deep engagement and consent required for true reconciliation.
  • This is a follow up on Bill 15, which I am opposed to and was condemned by legal experts, Indigenous leaders, and environmental advocates as a power grab.
  • 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, ensuring that all public comments are individually published and taken into serious account.