The Act amends New Brunswick’s Degree Granting Act to require that any institution located in the province obtain formal authorization before granting degrees, offering degree programs, advertising them, or selling documents that imply a degree. It creates a two‑step gate: designation as a degree‑granting institution by the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council (cabinet) and program‑level approvals by the Minister, both subject to regulatory requirements.
The changes concentrate decision‑making power in the executive and the Minister’s office, introduce a clear application process and regulatory checklist, and add ministerial powers to set terms, conditions, durations and to suspend or revoke program approvals. The regulation amendments also adjust French wording and add procedural requirements (including a Minister’s form) for program applications.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires institutions to be designated by the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council or be authorized by statute before they may grant degrees, run degree programs, advertise them, or provide degree‑implying documents. It also authorizes the Minister to approve, condition, suspend or revoke specific degree programs and to set the terms and duration of approvals.
Who It Affects
Public and private post‑secondary institutions in New Brunswick, out‑of‑province or for‑profit providers operating in the province, provincial regulators (the Minister’s office and cabinet), and consumers/students who enroll in programs or rely on degree documentation.
Why It Matters
It converts what has been a looser marketplace into a controlled authorization regime where program expansion and public advertising are contingent on ministerial approval and regulatory compliance, shifting compliance costs and market entry risk onto institutions while giving government stronger tools to manage quality and consumer protection.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act rewrites who may lawfully grant degrees and how they do it. Rather than leaving degree activity broadly defined, the revised statute lists four specific activities—granting degrees, offering degree programs, advertising degree programs, and selling or issuing documents that indicate or imply a degree—and makes those activities contingent on legal authorization.
An institution located in New Brunswick must either be designated by cabinet as a degree‑granting institution or be expressly authorized to grant degrees by another Act.
Designation is no longer a generic label: the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council must specify which programs an institution may deliver and may attach terms and conditions. That makes designation program‑specific and subject to constraints set at the executive level.
On top of designation, the Act creates a separate, program‑by‑program approval route handled by the Minister: a designated institution may apply to the Minister for approval to add programs, and the Minister can approve them for a defined term and attach conditions.The Minister gets explicit enforcement tools. Approvals for additional programs can be suspended or revoked if an institution fails to meet regulatory requirements or to comply with the Minister’s terms.
The Act also authorizes the Minister to allow institutions to advertise prospective programs before formal approval—an explicit carve‑out that preserves some market activity but keeps it under ministerial control. Finally, the accompanying regulatory amendments (largely to the French text) impose that the same application requirements apply to these additional programs and formalize that applications must be made on a Minister‑provided form.
The Five Things You Need to Know
An institution may only grant degrees, offer degree programs, advertise them, or distribute degree‑implying documents if it is designated by the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council or authorized by statute and it has applied to and met regulatory requirements under the Minister,, The Lieutenant‑Governor in Council’s designation must list the specific programs the institution may provide and may include any terms or conditions it deems necessary, making designation program‑specific,, The Minister may approve additional programs for a defined term, impose terms and conditions on those approvals, and suspend or revoke an approval if regulatory requirements or conditions are not met,, The Minister may permit pre‑approval advertising of additional programs, but advertising prior to approval is explicitly placed under ministerial discretion,, Regulatory amendments require applications for additional programs to meet the same criteria as initial designation requests and to be submitted on a Minister‑provided form; several French wording changes standardize terminology in the regulation.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Tidy the definition of “educational institution”
This amendment removes the phrase “or conferring” from the definition’s paragraph (d). Practically, that is a drafting clean‑up to align the statutory definition with the newly explicit list of activities in section 2. It narrows ambiguity about whether mere conferment language creates an independent authorization and prepares the ground for the new application/designation regime.
List degree‑related activities and require an application plus designation or statutory authorization
The Act recasts subsection (1) to enumerate four discrete activities (granting degrees; providing degree programs; advertising degree programs; and selling or issuing documents that indicate or imply degree conferral). It then adds subsection (1.1), which conditions all of those activities on an application to the Minister, satisfaction of regulatory requirements, and either cabinet designation or express legislative authority. The practical effect is a formal entry process: an institution cannot lawfully undertake those activities simply by operating in the province—it must clear administrative and executive gates first.
Make cabinet designations program‑specific and conditional
The revised section empowers the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council to designate institutions as degree‑granting but requires that any designation spell out the specific programs allowed and permits the imposition of terms and conditions. That shifts what used to be a broad institutional status into a more granular, program‑level instrument controlled by cabinet—useful for restricting scope but also a lever for political or policy priorities.
Ministerial approval process for additional programs, with durations and enforcement
This new provision establishes a separate Minister‑led approval route for designated institutions seeking to add programs. The Minister may approve additional programs for a term and attach conditions, and may suspend or revoke approvals for non‑compliance with regulatory requirements or ministerial terms. Notably, the Minister can authorize advertising of a program before approval is finalized—an explicit concession that allows recruitment and market signaling but keeps advertising subject to ministerial controls.
Clean up statutory cross‑references to the new application scheme
Section 11’s amendments update cross‑references so enforcement and penalty sections point to the new application and designation subsections. This is technical but important: it ensures penalties and compliance hooks in the Act apply to the new authorization pathway rather than to the repealed wording.
Procedural requirements and language standardization in the regulation
Most regulation edits correct French terminology (changing “institution” to “établissement”, adjusting capitalization) and align the French text with the new Act by adding that applications under the new program approval provision must meet the same requirements as initial designation applications. The regulation also requires the program application to be made on a Minister‑provided form and updates ministerial recommendation and revocation language—practical changes that tighten process and reduce ambiguity in the bilingual regulatory regime.
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
- Prospective students and employers — they gain clearer rules that make it easier to identify which institutions and programs are officially authorized, improving consumer protection against unaccredited or misleading providers.
- Designated institutions seeking legitimacy — institutions that comply get an explicit program list and formal approvals that can be marketed as a quality signal.
- Provincial government and regulators — cabinet and the Minister gain granular control to shape program mix, attach conditions, and respond to non‑compliance without needing new legislation.
Who Bears the Cost
- Private, out‑of‑province and for‑profit providers — they face new application, reporting and compliance costs and the risk that program proposals will be narrowly approved or conditioned.
- Institutions expanding quickly — the requirement for Ministerial approval for additional programs introduces timing, conditionality and potential uncertainty that can delay program launches and revenue generation.
- Minister’s office and regulatory staff — the new duties to review applications, set terms, monitor compliance and administer suspensions or revocations increase administrative workload and demand for expertise (and funding).
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill trades increased consumer protection and centralized quality control for greater executive discretion and regulatory uncertainty: tighter gates and ministerial oversight reduce the risk of diploma mills and misleading advertising but also constrain institutional autonomy and create compliance burdens that may slow program innovation and market entry.
The Act centralizes discretion in the Lieutenant‑Governor in Council and the Minister while leaving significant detail to regulations and ministerial determinations. That produces efficiency for government control and the ability to tailor approvals, but it also creates implementation challenges: regulatory criteria will determine how onerous applications are, how transparent decisions must be, and how appeals or judicial review are handled — none of which the Act itself resolves.
The Minister’s power to set terms, durations and to suspend or revoke approvals creates a flexible enforcement regime, but it also introduces uncertainty for institutions planning new programs because conditions may be idiosyncratic or change over time.
Allowing pre‑approval advertising under ministerial permission is a deliberate compromise: it preserves market signaling and recruitment but risks enabling promotional activity before independent quality checks are completed. The regulatory changes focus on clarifying French language text and procedural formality (a Minister’s form), which reduces translation‑based ambiguity but does not by itself address broader bilingual implementation issues, such as whether the French and English texts will be interpreted identically in close cases.
Finally, the Act does not set out appeal procedures or timelines for Ministerial decisions, so institutions may face delays and potential legal uncertainty unless the regulations or departmental practices fill those gaps.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.