Bill 19 establishes a statutory right for every person in New Brunswick to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment and imposes a corresponding obligation on the provincial government to protect that right. The measure embeds key principles of environmental law (precautionary principle, polluter‑pays, non‑regression, intergenerational equity, environmental justice), requires public participation, and creates institutional tools to monitor and enforce environmental rights.
To operationalize the right, the bill mandates an environmental registry, a jointly prepared Statement of Environmental Values, and an Environmental Rights Commissioner with investigatory powers and reporting duties. It also expands legal access: residents gain standing to bring judicial review and environmental protection actions against the government or private parties, while the statute supplies workplace reprisal protections, anti‑SLAPP measures, and a criminalized prohibition on knowingly subjecting children to environmental hazards.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill enshrines a provincial right to a healthy environment, requires the government to integrate that right into decisions, and establishes an Office of the Environmental Rights Commissioner to review compliance, conduct investigations and maintain a public registry. It creates processes for two‑resident applications for reviews and investigations and gives every resident public‑interest standing in court for environmental matters.
Who It Affects
Provincial ministries and regulators will face new procedural duties and transparency requirements; permit applicants must expect broader public disclosure of application materials; municipalities, industry and employers face greater litigation and reprisal‑complaint risk; children and vulnerable populations gain explicit statutory protection. Environmental NGOs, community groups and individual residents gain new tools to challenge government action or inaction.
Why It Matters
The bill shifts environmental governance from discretionary policy to enforceable rights and creates administrative and judicial pathways to hold government and private actors accountable. That combination — rights plus institutional enforcement — changes the legal and operational landscape for permitting, regulatory review and public participation in New Brunswick.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act starts by defining the environment broadly and importing modern environmental principles — precautionary approach, polluter‑pays, non‑regression, intergenerational equity and environmental justice — making them touchstones for interpretation. It then declares that every person living in New Brunswick, including every child, has a right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment and that the provincial government has an affirmative obligation to protect that right and safeguard children from environmental hazards.
To translate that right into practice, the bill requires public participation and information access through an environmental registry and explicit processes for consultation. The Minister of Environment and the Minister of Health must jointly prepare a Statement of Environmental Values — a policy document that sets measurable goals and explains how to weigh environmental rights against social, economic and scientific considerations — and must release a draft for public comment before finalizing it.
The registry is intended as a public portal for notices, proposals and decisions that could affect environmental or children’s health.The Office of the Environmental Rights Commissioner is the Act’s central oversight body. Appointed by the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council on the Legislative Assembly’s address, the Commissioner may review government compliance, request information from public bodies, order investigations into contaminants that threaten health, provide guidance to departments and run public education.
The Commissioner has broad access to information for reviews and investigations, subject only to solicitor‑client privilege and certified cabinet deliberations, and must keep most information confidential except where disclosure is necessary to support findings and recommendations.For town‑level enforcement, the Act lowers procedural barriers to challenge: two residents can apply to the Commissioner for a review or investigation of policies, laws, regulations or instruments, and any resident has public‑interest standing in the Court of King’s Bench to seek judicial review or to bring an environmental protection action against the government or a private person. The Act also creates administrative remedies: employees who suffer employer reprisals for participating in environmental processes can file complaints with the Labour and Employment Board.
Judges may declare abusive litigation improper and impose sanctions under a broad anti‑SLAPP provision. Finally, the statute creates a specific offence for knowingly exposing a child to an environmental hazard and requires public disclosure, on request, of documentation submitted with instrument applications.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Two residents of New Brunswick are sufficient to apply to the Environmental Rights Commissioner for a review or to request an investigation into alleged contraventions.
The Minister must establish a public environmental registry within one month after the Act comes into force to post proposals, decisions and instrument applications affecting environmental rights.
The Environmental Rights Commissioner has a statutory right to access all information needed to perform duties, except information protected by solicitor‑client privilege or certified cabinet deliberations.
Any resident has public‑interest standing to bring judicial review in the Court of King’s Bench for matters arising in the context of environmental rights, regardless of direct personal harm.
The Act makes it an offence under the Provincial Offences Procedure Act (Category J) to knowingly subject a child to an environmental hazard.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions, purposes and interpretive principles
This part sets out the Act’s scope and core definitions (environment, contaminant, environmental harm, public trust, children’s environmental health) and lists interpretive principles that courts and administrators must apply, such as the precautionary principle, polluter‑pays and non‑regression. Importantly, the Act declares that, where inconsistent, its provisions prevail over other provincial Acts or regulations, signaling that it is intended to be a high‑order statute for environmental decision‑making.
Right to a healthy environment and government obligations
Section 7 enshrines the individual right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment and imposes an affirmative obligation on the Government of New Brunswick to protect that right, with special emphasis on children and vulnerable populations. It also frames the environment as held in public trust by the provincial government — a legal standard that underpins later remedies and obligations.
Public participation, registry and Statement of Environmental Values
This part mandates minimum public participation in environmental decision‑making and creates an environmental registry to publish proposals, decisions and instrument applications. It requires the Environment and Health Ministers to jointly prepare a Statement of Environmental Values that sets measurable short, medium and long‑term goals and to circulate a draft to the Office of the Child, Youth and Senior Advocate and the public prior to finalization. The Statement must be considered before decisions that significantly affect environmental rights, which embeds a procedural check in regulatory and policy processes.
Environmental Rights Commissioner — powers, access and reporting
The Act establishes an independent Environmental Rights Commissioner appointed by Lieutenant‑Governor in Council on the Legislative Assembly’s address. The Commissioner reviews government compliance, provides guidance, runs education programs, and can order investigations into contaminants threatening health. The Commissioner has a wide right of access to departmental information (subject to solicitor‑client and certified cabinet exclusions), may examine witnesses under oath and must produce an annual report to the Legislative Assembly; the first report is due within one year of commencement.
Applications for review — who can apply and procedural timelines
Any two New Brunswick residents may apply for a review of policies, laws, regulations or instruments they believe should be changed to protect the environment or children’s health. The Commissioner must acknowledge such applications within 10 days and refer them to an appropriate minister; the Commissioner must report on application progress within 90 days. These procedural timelines create predictable administrative steps for community groups and regulators alike.
Investigations — threshold, process and reporting
Two residents may also request investigations into alleged contraventions of prescribed provincial Acts, regulations or instruments; applications must include an affirmation and supporting evidence. The Commissioner acknowledges receipt within 20 days, may decline frivolous or vexatious applications, must notify applicants with reasons within 60 days if declining, and provides 90‑day progress reports during investigations. After investigation, the Commissioner reports findings and recommends actions to the Minister.
Judicial review and environmental protection actions
The Act expands access to courts: any resident has public‑interest standing to seek judicial review in the Court of King’s Bench where the matter relates to environmental rights. Residents may bring environmental protection actions against the government for failures to fulfill duties (including enforcement failures) or against private persons for contraventions likely to cause environmental harm. Notably, the statute removes authorization as a blanket defence — government authorization does not automatically shield an activity from such actions.
Employer reprisal protections and anti‑SLAPP safeguards
Employees are protected from employer reprisals (dismissal, discipline, intimidation) for participation in processes under the Act; complaints go to the Labour and Employment Board which can order remedies including reinstatement and compensation. The Act also authorizes judges to declare legal proceedings improper and impose sanctions where actions are unfounded, frivolous, vexatious, retaliatory or otherwise abusive, with an explicit focus on protecting historically marginalized or Indigenous communities from prejudicial litigation.
Special protection for children, disclosure and general provisions
The Act criminalizes knowingly subjecting a child to an environmental hazard as a Category J provincial offence. It also requires that documents provided to departments in instrument applications be made public on request (despite the Right to Information and Protection of Privacy Act), mandates review of the Act every seven years and grants regulation‑making authority to the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council to flesh out procedures and prescribed lists referenced throughout the statute.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Children and vulnerable populations — the bill places children’s environmental health front and centre, creates a specific prohibition against knowingly exposing children to environmental hazards and requires decision‑makers to consider children in Statements of Environmental Values.
- Community groups, Indigenous communities and residents — the two‑resident application rule, public registry and public‑interest standing in court lower procedural barriers to challenge government decisions and seek investigations.
- Public health authorities and the Chief Medical Officer of Health — the Act mandates joint work on the Statement of Environmental Values and gives the Commissioner power to order investigations into contaminants that pose health hazards, creating more formal channels for health science to influence policy.
- Environmental NGOs and watchdogs — enhanced transparency (registry and public disclosure of instrument application documents) and anti‑SLAPP protections strengthen monitoring capacity and reduce the legal risk of public advocacy.
- Future generations and ecosystems — principles like intergenerational equity, non‑regression and explicit biodiversity protections embed long‑term conservation considerations into statutory interpretation and administrative review.
Who Bears the Cost
- Government of New Brunswick (ministries and regulators) — the province faces increased procedural duties, potential investigations ordered by the Commissioner, enhanced transparency obligations and more frequent litigation or judicial review, all of which imply administrative and financial burdens.
- Permit applicants and regulated industries — information submitted with instrument applications becomes publicly available on request, raising compliance costs, potential commercial confidentiality issues and reputational risk during public reviews or litigation.
- Employers and workplaces — the new reprisal complaint pathway to the Labour and Employment Board increases exposure to employment claims where staff participate in environmental processes or whistleblow.
- Taxpayers — establishing and operating the Commissioner’s office, running the registry, fulfilling new reporting and investigative duties and defending or litigating claims will require public funding not specifically allocated in the text.
- Courts and legal practitioners — broadened standing and novel causes of action will increase environmental litigation, requiring judicial resources and generating complex legal questions about remedies and statutory interpretation.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is that the Act empowers citizens and watchdogs with enforceable environmental rights and low procedural thresholds while simultaneously requiring government flexibility to manage complex regulatory trade‑offs; strengthening legal protections and transparency necessarily increases administrative burden, potential commercial harm from disclosure, and demands on courts to reconcile the new rights with existing legal frameworks.
The Act is deliberately expansive in rights and remedies, which creates both opportunities and implementation challenges. First, the statutory supremacy language and broad interpretive principles (non‑regression, intergenerational equity, precaution) leave significant room for judicial interpretation about how to prioritize environmental rights against competing social and economic objectives.
Courts will be asked to balance those principles with statutory schemes in other provincial Acts, and the Act’s statement that it prevails where inconsistent may trigger constitutional and administrative law disputes, especially where federal jurisdiction or Indigenous treaty rights intersect.
Second, the bill imposes investigative and disclosure obligations that raise operational and confidentiality questions. The Commissioner’s wide information access — coupled with the requirement to make instrument application documents public on request — creates tension between transparency and legitimate commercial, privacy or security protections.
The Act limits the Commissioner’s access only by solicitor‑client privilege and certified cabinet deliberations, but many other confidentiality claims (e.g., third‑party business information, personal health data) will need procedural rules in regulation or judicial resolution. Finally, the two‑resident threshold and broad standing lower the bar for public challenges, which improves access but risks a higher volume of applications and litigation; the Act contains dismissal and anti‑SLAPP provisions, but their subjective standards (frivolous, vexatious, prejudicial, retaliatory) will themselves become contested in practice.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.