B.C. Speeds Up Hospitals, Schools, Transit

Summary#

• The Infrastructure Projects Act lets the B.C. government fast‑track major public projects like hospitals, schools, transit, and other public works. It creates a formal way to name certain projects as “designated” and speed up their planning, approvals, and construction.

• The bill gives the Minister of Infrastructure new tools to coordinate across agencies, set timelines, use professional sign‑offs in place of some permits, and run faster environmental reviews.

• Key changes:

  • Government can designate projects (single projects or classes) as Category 1 or Category 2 and give them fast‑track tools.
  • The minister can manage Category 1 projects directly (including acting as project manager or general contractor).
  • Qualified professionals (like licensed engineers) can certify work in place of some permits when regulations allow.
  • Provincial permits can be prioritized with timelines; Cabinet can set extra steps if delays continue.
  • An expedited environmental assessment track with a set deadline can be used for designated projects.
  • If local or other rules slow a project (“constraints”), the minister can work with authorities to replace them with “replacement measures,” and, if needed, order replacements after consultation.
  • Rules about engagement with Indigenous peoples cannot be changed by these replacement powers.
  • The old Significant Projects Streamlining Act is repealed.

What it means for you#

• Residents

  • New hospitals, schools, transit lines, and similar projects could start and finish sooner.
  • Some permits may be approved faster using expert certifications, and environmental reviews may run on tighter timelines.
  • Local planning rules (like zoning or development processes) could be adjusted or replaced for designated projects after consultation.
  • Indigenous engagement requirements stay in place and cannot be bypassed.

• Local governments

  • Must act quickly on designated projects and work with the province to remove constraints.
  • May need to adjust bylaws, policies, or processes; once “replacement measures” are set, you must treat the project as if it met the original rules.
  • Can ask Cabinet to exempt or modify certain provincial planning requirements (under Local Government Act, Vancouver Charter, Islands Trust Act, or UEL Act) to speed a designated project.
  • Expect tighter timelines and more coordination with provincial regulators.

• Builders, engineers, and other professionals

  • May face clearer timelines and a single point of contact if the minister manages the project.
  • Qualified professional certifications can replace some permits, which may speed work but increase professional responsibility.
  • Opportunities for contracts may increase if more projects move ahead quickly.

• Provincial regulators and agencies

  • Must prioritize permits for designated projects and meet set timelines.
  • For projects that finish an environmental assessment, you can be ordered to issue related approvals within deadlines (municipalities are excluded from this specific order power).

• Project proponents (e.g., health authorities, school districts, Crown agencies)

  • Can get facilitators and monitors appointed by the province to help move projects along.
  • May be charged fees for facilitation, monitoring, or related costs set by regulation.
  • Must follow any “replacement measures” set by agreement or order.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Will cut red tape so public projects get built sooner, reducing delays and cost overruns.
• Clear timelines and permit prioritization will give builders and communities more certainty.
• Using qualified professionals for some approvals focuses government time on higher‑risk issues.
• A faster environmental assessment path still allows for conditions, while keeping essential protections.
• Lets local governments ask for relief from some planning requirements when they want to move a project faster.
• Protects Indigenous engagement rules by clearly excluding them from any replacement powers.

Opponents' View#

• Concentrates too much power in the minister and Cabinet, reducing checks and balances.
• Faster reviews and professional certifications could weaken environmental oversight and safety if not used carefully.
• Undermines local control over land use, with fewer chances for public input and appeal.
• Risk that deadlines push rushed decisions, lower quality, or missed impacts.
• Not clear how much this will cost or how costs and accountability will be tracked across agencies and proponents.
• Prioritizing some projects could slow other needed permits and stretch local staff and resources.