A coalition of 56 Royal Society of Canada fellows has issued an urgent warning regarding the potential for permanent ecological damage under Bill C-39. The group is demanding specific legislative changes to the Building Canada Strong Act to ensure environmental protections remain intact during project fast-tracking.
The drive for one-year project assessments
The Building Canada Strong Act, also known as Bill C-39, is designed to accelerate the regulatory approval process for major energy and infrastructure projects across Canada. According to the report, the legislation seeks to create "zones of national interest" and mandates that federal assessments for new projects be completed within a streamlined one-year timeframe.
While the government has touted this omnibus legislation as the most ambitious reform to Canada's construction capacity in a generation, the speed of its progression has sparked intense debate. The bill aims to address labour uncertainty and economic growth, but critics argue that the haste may come at the expense of the nation's natural heritage.
Dr. Sarah Otto’s warning on sidestepping environmental laws
Dr. Sarah Otto, a zoology professor at the University of British Columbia, argues that the current draft of Bill C-39 effectively lowers or bypasses existing environmental protections. As reported by CTV News, Otto suggests that the legislation allows government ministers to dismiss specific conditions that are typically imposed to prevent damage to air, water, and delicate ecosystems.
The scientific experts involved in the open letter emphasize that the proposed changes could jeopardize the government's own promises to protect species at risk. Dr. Otto noted that by prioritizing immediate economic growth through these regulatory shortcuts, the government is essentially "borrowing from the natural resources of future generations."
An 11-to-1 partisan split on the House Committee
The legislative review of Bill C-39 is currently being handled by a specially constructed House Committee , a move that critics suggest is intended to find the path of least resistance. This committee is composed of 12 members, 11 of whom have already voted in favour of the legislation. The only member of Parliament to vote against the bill at its second readding was Bloc Quebecois MP Gabriel Ste-Marie.
The committee's composition has also drawn scrutiny because it excludes representatives from the Green Party and the NDP. While both parties sought exceeptions to participate despite lacking official party status, they have been left out of the primary study group tasked with evaluating the bill's impact.
The 8-hour limit on non-selected witnesses
Significant questions remain regarding the transparency and inclusivity of the committee's review process. NDP Parliamentary Leader Don Davies has pointed out that the Liberal-led committee has limited the time available to hear from witnesses who were not hand-selected by the government to just eight hours.
This time constraint is particularly contentious because the 56 Royal Society fellows have requested to appear as witnesses to present their scientific concerns, but they have not yet been invited. This leaves a critical gap in the testimony, as the current platform appears to be dominated by pro-commerce and manufacturing voices rather than the scientific community or labour groups concerned about changes to the Canada Labour Code.
Comments 0