Harris raises concerns about time limit on major project reviews

A former Enbridge executive is predicting the federal government's plan to impose a two-year timeline for reviews of major projects will backfire.

Instead of improving investor confidence, the timeline will actually do the opposite, argues Roger Harris, who was vice-president of aboriginal and community partnerships for Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines in 2008 and 2009.

"I'm not a big fan of them," Harris said.

Harris worried worthwhile projects will not get a fair hearing because they are too complex to be fully considered within the two years and will end up being rejected. Allowing "time outs" in the process effectively means a return to square one, he added.

But most importantly, imposing a timeline could expose the project to litigation.

"If you put a timeline in place, that allows anyone to go to the judicial system and say 'I didn't have adequate time to review the project,' and if the judicial system agrees, the project can find themselves in court forever," said Harris, now the B.C. Forest Safety Council ombudsman.

Harris, who has also been a Liberal MLA representing a northwest B.C. riding, sees harmonizing the federal and provincial processes - which is also part of pending legislation - as more effective. He also suggested adequately supporting processes to begin with.

A timeline will reduce the process to a "tick the box exercise," Harris said, particularly since cabinet will be able to overturn a National Energy Board (NEB) decision. That will detract from a project backer's incentive to develop a "social license" with affected communities.

"When they look at this and go, 'in two years I'm going to get a decision anyway and even if the NEB doesn't like it, cabinet can overturn it,' then why spend the time actually making sure that not just First Nations but the community as a whole think that what's about to happen is a good idea?" Harris said.

Prince George-Peace River Conservative MP Bob Zimmer countered that there is a need to expedite the process while still maintaining standards.

"There needs to be assessments done but done in a timely fashion," Zimmer said.

Even with the shortened process, Zimmer said corporations will still reach out to communities.

"The corporations of today understand that they need to have a relationship with constituents and people are going to be affected by projects," Zimmer said.

Zimmer likened some reviews to what can happen in the House of Commons, where MPs end up repeating themselves in debating issues.

"Even in limiting debate, if you do it quickly it still takes three to six months to get legislation through the House," Zimmer said. "We could debate for 20 years and at the end of the 20 years, there is still going to be a large part of the population that disagrees with the other, it's something that you're not necessarily going to resolve with more discussion."