Bill 5 risks undermining the efforts made by land-use planning stakeholders over the past several years, the co-signatories argue.
Quebec’s territory is a precious, finite and non-renewable resource. This is explicitly recognized in the National Policy on Architecture and Land Use Planning (PNAAT), which establishes government leadership by example as a fundamental principle guiding all interventions on the territory.
Yet Bill 5, An Act to accelerate the granting of the authorizations required to carry out priority national-scale projects, currently under review, runs counter to this commitment. The bill allows for departures from no fewer than 32 statutes, including the Act respecting land use planning and development, the Act respecting the preservation of agricultural land and agricultural activities, the Cultural Heritage Act, and the Environment Quality Act, while also bypassing standard consultation processes.
The directive is clear: simplify, override and move faster. Behind the promise of efficiency lies a less reassuring reality: a willingness to sidestep transparency requirements, increased reliance on discretionary power, and the normalization of arbitrariness.
The illusion of time gained
Responsible delivery of large-scale projects requires time and preparation. Consultation, planning, assessment and approval processes do not delay projects. On the contrary, they help prevent inadequate and costly outcomes while ensuring sustainable territorial development.
The Northvolt project in Saint-Basile-le-Grand and McMasterville is a telling example. Although it never materialized, it was rushed forward by a government eager to demonstrate results, leading to public opposition and environmental damage. A climate of distrust remains.
This is not an isolated case. Consider the Rabaska LNG terminal in Lévis, the Google data centre in Beauharnois, the future hospital in Vaudreuil-Dorion, and even Mirabel Airport, built on agricultural land. Governments too often favour major announcements at the expense of the environment, public well-being and food security.
Major projects must earn public trust. Experience shows that those failing the test of social acceptability are delayed or abandoned. The La Loutre mining project in the Papineau RCM also illustrates the risks associated with a democratic deficit.
These are precisely the scenarios that risk multiplying if Bill 5 is adopted in its current form.
The normalization of exceptional powers
Land-use planning practices have evolved significantly in recent years. There is greater collaboration among stakeholders, better policy alignment, and a professional community more attentive to local and regional realities. The PNAAT and new government orientations in land-use planning have become essential foundations for coherent and responsible territorial management at all scales. These advances represent a tangible legacy of this government.
Yet with this bill, the government turns its back on these commitments, disregarding existing policies, planning tools and regulations, while granting itself the power to impose its will.
Can all shortcuts be justified in the name of economic turbulence linked to the current geopolitical context? No. Such an approach only exacerbates the problem and perpetuates past mistakes we are trying to move beyond.
At its core, this bill promotes an arbitrary mode of governance lacking clear foundations, with harmful long-term consequences.
The territory as a collective heritage to protect
Quebec’s territory is a collective heritage that shapes the identity of Quebec, its regions and its communities. It reflects past decisions and determines our future. Large national projects, combined with major federal initiatives, inevitably generate externalities and increase pressure on ecosystems: altered landscapes, fragmented territories, and transformed natural and agricultural environments. They must therefore be carefully considered.
Adopting Bill 5, at least in its current form, risks undermining years of work by land-use planning stakeholders. Quebec’s territory deserves better than piecemeal decisions made without an overarching vision and in haste. It deserves a government that relies on existing planning tools grounded in the collective intelligence of its citizens, professionals and institutions.
Co-signatories: Dinu Bumbaru, Policy Director, Héritage Montréal; Brice Caillié, Executive Director, Réseau de milieux naturels protégés; Martin Caron, General President, Union des producteurs agricoles; Renée Genest, Executive Director, Action patrimoine; David Paradis, Co-Executive Director, Vivre en Ville; Geneviève Paul, Executive Director, Centre québécois du droit de l’environnement; Nathalie Prud’homme, President, Ordre des urbanistes du Québec.