Citizens Can Trigger Quebec Environmental Reviews

Summary#

• This bill would let citizens trigger environmental reviews and would give more power and independence to Quebec’s environmental hearings office (the BAPE).
• It changes how the BAPE’s leaders are chosen, expands what the BAPE can ask of project promoters, and requires the government to explain itself if it overrules the BAPE.
• It also replaces an advisory committee and transfers its duties to the BAPE.

Key changes:

• The BAPE’s president and vice‑president would be chosen by the National Assembly with a two‑thirds vote, after a closed‑door interview by members from all parties.
• The BAPE could require a report that measures a project’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and lists ways to cut them. It could also do a gender‑based impact analysis.
• Citizens could force a BAPE public hearing or a targeted consultation by petition if they gather enough signatures in time.
• The BAPE could recommend that a project be fully assessed, could recommend approval with conditions or refusal, and could propose specific conditions or limits.
• If the government approves a project the BAPE said to refuse, it must file a special report to the National Assembly explaining why; a committee must study it within 60 days.
• The BAPE could combine related mandates, add part‑time members when needed, and keep a member on a file until it is finished.
• The Advisory Committee on Strategic Environmental Assessments would be abolished; its responsibilities would move to the BAPE.

What it means for you#

• Citizens and community groups

  • You could launch a petition on any environmental question or on a project that needs a minister’s authorization.
  • To file a petition, you need at least 1,000 signatures and to name contact people. The minister then posts the petition and opens a signature period.
  • To trigger BAPE action:
    • For a province‑wide question or project: at least 40,000 signatures from at least three regions, with at least 5,000 from each of those regions, within 180 days.
    • For a regional question or project: at least 15,000 signatures, including at least 7,500 from the concerned region, within 120 days.
  • If you meet the threshold, the BAPE must hold either a public hearing or a targeted consultation.
  • You would get more information about projects’ GHG emissions and possible ways to reduce them.

• Residents near proposed projects

  • You may see more opportunities to speak at hearings or consultations.
  • Projects could face added conditions to limit environmental impacts, or in some cases be recommended for refusal.
  • Timelines could change if a petition triggers a BAPE process.

• Businesses and project developers

  • You could be required to produce a GHG emissions report for your project and outline reduction measures.
  • Citizen petitions could trigger a hearing or focused consultation on your project.
  • The BAPE could recommend approval with specific conditions, or recommend refusal, and could suggest standards, limits, or prohibitions.
  • There may be added costs and time for analysis, consultation, and meeting new conditions.

• Local governments

  • You may be invited to take part in targeted consultations.
  • Regional signature thresholds mean local engagement will matter for regional projects.
  • Conditions proposed by the BAPE could affect local planning and permitting.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Gives people a clear, formal way to be heard on environmental issues, which can build trust in decisions.
• Strengthens climate accountability by requiring GHG quantification and reduction options for projects.
• Increases independence and transparency: cross‑party appointment of BAPE leaders and required public reasons if the government overrides a BAPE refusal.
• Lets the BAPE manage workload better by combining related files and adding part‑time members, which could reduce bottlenecks.
• Makes reviews more complete by allowing gender‑based analysis and by consolidating strategic assessment duties in one body.

Opponents' View#

• Petitions could delay infrastructure, housing, or energy projects, creating uncertainty for communities and investors.
• New reports and consultations may add costs for the government and for project promoters, especially small and mid‑size firms.
• Signature thresholds may be too high for smaller regions to meet—or, if met by well‑organized campaigns, could be used to stall projects.
• Giving more weight to BAPE recommendations and adding a public justification step may politicize approvals and deter investment.
• Abolishing the separate advisory committee could reduce the diversity of expert advice outside the BAPE.