ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS (1993 – Revised 2007)

The Chamber reiterates that it clearly recognizes the need for continued sustainable economic development in the province and the requirement for the environmental reviews to be carried out prior to new or expanded development. It has become apparent, however, that a co-ordinated effort is required in the process.

There is a need for all levels of government to standardize the process of environmental reviews. The "playing field" must be better defined and all regulatory agencies must subscribe to that definition. Also and equally important, the "goal posts" must not be moved during the process. Furthermore, government decisions based on internal unwritten “practice” as opposed to legislation, regulation and written policy lead to inconsistency and make it difficult for business and industry to plan appropriately. As a result Canadian business becomes less competitive.

The present situation is creating a negative investment environment. Not only has this become a significant deterrent to investment in general but also to offshore investment in particular.

The Harmonized Process for BC Environmental Assessment Act and Canadian Environmental Assessment Act is working reasonably well for projects above the thresholds, but smaller projects that are not formally subject to BC Environmental Assessment Act Review face much lower certainty of process, to the point where smaller projects want to “opt into” the Harmonized Process because of greater certainty on timelines and process. The “one window” approach projects under the Land & Water BC process was a step in the right direction which was lost as a result of re-alignment of ministries. Current initiatives under Front Counter BC will hopefully re-establish that co-ordinated approach.

THE CHAMBER RECOMMENDS

That the provincial government:

1. increase the certainty for smaller projects by creating a framework similar to the Harmonized Process;

2. roll out Front Counter BC to create a “single window” that existed when Land & Water BC operated in this area;

3. base decisions on legislation, regulation and written policy rather than on unwritten practice;

4. ensure that, where approval for a project has been granted, that approval be final and binding; and

5. ensure that if the required approvals have been granted and the terms of the approval subsequently require amendment, or the approval is revoked, by any government body, including the courts, then compensation for consequent loss, damage and expense to the affected industry, trade or business must be contemplated.