Mixed reviews for Bill 63

In 2024, Québec’s government introduced a number of amendments to the province’s Mining Act, packaged in a legislative item commonly referred to as Bill 63. The amendments, which came into force in November 2024, represent the most substantial update to Québec’s mining regulatory framework in a decade, including changes to exploration rights, new environmental assessment reporting requirements, and a selection of new ministerial powers. GBR spoke with some of Québec’s top mining lawyers to build a picture of the mining sector’s response to the bill, and heard reports of mixed reactions from industry stakeholders.

Among the Bill’s central changes were a series of alterations to requirements upon prospectors in Québec. Where speculators could previously accumulate land claims without intent to develop them further, passively awaiting a potential buyer, the Bill made those claims – now labelled “exclusive exploration rights” – subject to minimum work requirements, providing impetus for active exploration. There has also been some praise for updated environmental assessment processes, including evaluations by the Office of Public Hearings on the Environment (BAPE), which now apply to all new projects regardless of size. Frank Mariage and Dominique Amyot-Bilodeau, partners at Fasken and McCarthy Tétrault respectively, agreed that these changes were broadly accepted gladly by Québec’s mining sector: “These changes were well received, thanks to the industry’s commitment to transparency,” said Mariage; while Amyot-Bilodeau similarly affirmed: “These steps promote credibility and transparency,” and called the changes “positive.”

Other amendments, however, have been regarded as burdensome for exploration companies. Among them was the prohibition of prospecting on lands covered by urbanization perimeters or private holdings, with the municipality or landholder’s consent now required to conduct exploration activity. Exploration in Québec has increasingly moved southward, closer to denser urban areas less acquainted with mining, as demand for the region’s critical mineral reserves has risen in recent years. Amyot-Bilodeau commented on the potential challenge this presents to mineral explorers: “This shift may hinder future discoveries, especially as demand for strategic minerals rises. Many of today’s priority minerals were not considered critical a decade ago, underscoring the need for territorial flexibility.”

Mariage summarized explorers’ responses, in the context of a challenging financial market for junior miners: “Extra burdens for juniors, when they are already struggling to fund their activities, have not been well received. We have to make exploration easier, not harder.”

Meanwhile, new discretionary powers for the Minister of Natural Resources and Forests, allowing the Minister to restrict access to mining lands or roads in cases of safety concerns, or to order the relocation or removal of mined material, were also widely regarded as concerning. The lawyers interviewed for this report identified the potential for these new powers to further politicize mining project development and foment uncertainty for explorers and their potential investors. “The bill introduces uncertainty, adds regulatory complexity, and is seen as increasing operational risk,” asserted Andrew Disipio, partner at Bennett Jones.

Responding to those concerns, Minister Maïté Blanchette Vézina assured that the new powers did not present a barrier to mining: “These are exceptional measures, rarely used, and not intended to block development. Since the law was adopted, I have had no intention of exercising them. Their purpose is to enhance social acceptability and ensure projects move forward more smoothly, not to create obstacles,” she said.

Lavery’s René Branchaud and Josiane Beaudry highlighted an additional potential knock-on effect of Bill 63’s provisions: with the US moving to liberalize parts of its mining regulatory framework, there remains a risk that these Mining Act amendments drive up costs for explorers, frustrating Québec’s relative jurisdictional attractiveness. Bennett Jones’ Disipio was explicit on this point: “While responsible governance is essential, Bill 63's amendments to the Mining Act do little to make Canada more attractive and competitive as a global mining jurisdiction,” he advised.