British Columbia Guide to Watershed Law and Planning
/ --------
Search the BCGWLP WebsiteSitemap
--------

/HomeLinksGlossary of Related TerminologyHelp with the website
 
Click here to return to homepage Click here to return to homepage
   
  Government Required Private Planning

Government Required Private Planning

One of the most common reasons for industry to enter into planning to address public values, including the protection of watersheds, is a requirement by government.  Rather than do the planning itself, the government requires the industrial player who is doing something that may impact on public values to develop a plan showing how these impacts can be minimized or avoided altogether.  In other cases the government will offer to give legal effect to a plan developed by the private party, creating an incentive to do the planning.

This is not to say that industry will only engage in planning when government orders it to do so.  See the voluntary planning page for more information on why private companies might agree voluntarily to a planning process.  However, many industrial activities likely to impact on watersheds are highly regulated, and this regulation includes requirements to do planning, or give government the power to require industrial players to do planning.

Legislation requiring Private Planning

Most federal legislation requires that planning be done by the federal government or its agencies.  However, provincial legislation requires planning by the following private actors: 

·         Logging companies planning to log on B.C.’s public lands (under the Forest Practices Code);

·         Individuals planning to use pesticides on public lands, over the water or on certain other lands (under the Pest Control Act);

·         An individual constructing a geothermal energy plant under the Geothermal Resources Act; and

·         The Manager of a mine under the Mines Act. 

The information required under both of these types of planning is “operational”.  In theory it outlines the technical steps to be taken in reaching certain goals set in the legislation or by government.  This is to be contrasted with “strategic” plans, which set the goals that society hopes to achieve. 

Information Requirements

Many other statutes require industry to assemble and analyze specific information for government, including information about a proposed government decision, prior to a government approval.  This can look a lot like planning, but is subject to a high level of direction from government. 

Indeed, sometimes the information that government requires can even include planning or consultation with the public.  This blurs the line of between planning and information.  For example, under the Water Act the provincial government may require an individual applying for a water licence to provide “the plans, specification and other information the comptroller or the regional water manager requires.”  This requirement has been used by the provincial government to require water use planning, to reconcile competing demands on water and to address fish habitat water requirements. 

Public Participation

Most legislation requiring planning provinces for public involvement in planning in some way – often by providing an opportunity for the public to comment on the plans.  The specific requirements will depend on the specific legislation. 

Even where not specifically required, private companies will sometimes encourage public input as a way of giving the plan greater credibility or to address the concerns of individual government decision-makers. 

Problems with private planning

The environmental community has expressed concern over giving private players too much power to make plans involving public lands without government oversight.  The current government is moving towards reducing, and in some cases eliminating, the government approval of plans – instead punishing industry for poor planning after the fact.  There are concerns that:

·         Industry has a financial bottom line which may get in the way of meeting social and environmental goals, creating a conflict of interest;

·         Laws requiring punishment for “poor plans” may be subjective and difficulty to enforce;

·         Punishing environmental harm after-the-fact means that harm to the environment isn’t being prevented before it happens;

·         Cutbacks to government enforcement means that the adequacy of industry plans and implementation of those plans may not be monitored.

Related Guide Pages:

·         Participating in Planning Processes

·         Private Planning

·         Logging Plans

·         Pesticide Plans

·         Voluntary Plans

 

 
 
return to top
Site Info Disclaimer