Expedited Environmental Assessment: Survey Guide
Page 1: Demographics
The first page of the survey asks for basic demographic information.
Unfortunately, the Environmental Assessment Office has not made this section optional, which we recognize may make this survey less accessible.
Page 2: Providing Feedback
The following three multiple choice questions ask you to pick the top three most important aspects of a project that you would like to provide feedback on when participating in an EA.
Our guidance takes a choose-your-own adventure approach based on your level of lived experience engaging in the EA process and the extent to which you want to provide feedback. If you have experience engaging in EA processes, we encourage you to base your responses on that. If you don’t, we’ve offered what we see as generally the most important elements of a project EA for the public to engage on (though this could vary project-by-project).
Unfortunately these questions cannot be left blank so respondents are forced to choose a top three. However, we’ve also offered language to guide a written answer highlighting that all aspects should be engaged on.
Suggested top three multiple choice responses if you’re unsure what to select:
“The potential impacts to the environment, economy, people and communities that the EAO will assess”
“The potential for cumulative effects (combined impacts from all previous, existing and planned industrial projects in a specific area over time) from this project in combination with other industrial development in the area”
“Proposed conditions the Province may require to reduce or prevent potential negative impacts from the project (if it is approved) and how effective they may be”
Is there anything you’d like to share about why you chose your top three priorities? [written response]
We encourage you to use this space to share anything that is important to you about the priorities you’ve selected. Or you can use this space to highlight that all priorities are important (we’ve provided some sample text for this, that you can make your own).
Sample text if you’re unsure what to write (we encourage you to put it in your own words)
All seven of these priorities are critical for proper consultation. The scope of what's consulted on in a standard Environmental Assessment cannot be narrowed without harming the integrity of the Environmental Assessment process.
Is there any other aspect of a proposed project that you feel is very important to give input on? [written response]
We encourage you to use this space to share anything else that is important to you to give input on in an EA process (or you can leave this blank!)
Do you have any feedback on the proposed approach to public comment periods for designated projects undergoing an expedited environmental assessment?* [Y/N]
We suggest answering “yes” here, as it opens another question box that allows you to give more detailed feedback on the proposed approach to public comments, which is an important question to give feedback on.
[Important Question] *If you select yes to the previous question: Please tell us your feedback about the proposed approach to public comment periods and please be as detailed as possible.
We have provided some options of suggested points to raise here. These are intended as guidance to make this survey more accessible.
We encourage you to put these responses in your own words if possible, as that carries more weight than form responses. Please also feel free to share other points that are important to you.
Public engagement is not just a checkbox. It is meant to surface substantive concerns that may affect or harm communities for decades to come. If this process is shortened, then the EA process can no longer claim to provide sufficient environmental protections.
Cutting public engagement timelines undermines the purpose of environmental assessments. A key function of the environmental assessment process is meant to be public/community engagement. This cannot be cut without harming the integrity of environmental assessments.
14-day comment periods are too short, and will effectively remove public access to the EA process. This is not an accessible period of time, and will prevent the public from having their voices heard. EAs will not receive representative input under this timeline.
It is crucial that the public have the opportunity to review and comment on the EAO’s assessment of project impacts and proposed conditions for approval, to ensure that the EAO’s assessment is properly reflective of community interests. Removing this public comment opportunity would undermine the integrity of the EA process.
There is no evidence that public engagement was the core reason for long environmental assessment timelines. The public should not have to pay the cost of proponent and government delays.