For all the merits of eliminating the often mindless and costly bureaucratic obstacles to investment in B.C., the Campbell government's recent bill to ease the approval process for major projects is more about ribbon-cutting than cutting red tape.

Bill 75, the Significant Projects Streamlining Act, will put political decisions exactly where the Liberal government promised never to intrude: in the selection of winners and losers in the market place.

This legislation fast-tracks projects that are "provincially significant." But what criteria will be used to define "provincially significant," and who will make that determination

Deregulation Minister Kevin Falcon says a project should have "broad benefits for the economic, social or environmental well-being of B.C." Nowhere in the act is this written. Nor could it be, since a whole new set of criteria would have to be defined. How wide is broad, what's a benefit or well-being

And so, in an amazing leap from the multi-ring circus of bureaucratic hoop-jumping that confronts all other submissions, a project's provincial significance will be determined by the provincial cabinet. We know, for example, that anything with an Olympic 2010 sticker on it will get automatic entry into, and presumably the blessing of, Mr. Campbell's executive council.

So much for removing political levers from the market's machinery.

One also can assume that a new library in the Interior or a hockey rink in the North won't be "provincially significant" to warrant a fast-track designation. Those and other projects will continue to endure the contortions of the bureaucratic ballet for their proposals to be approved. Or, more likely, lobbyists (the one business which unequivocally benefits from Bill 75) will be hired to short-cut the process.

The provincial government made a promise leading up to the 2001 election to "cut red tape and the regulatory burden by one-third within three years." To date, the Liberals have done a commendable job, having eliminated tens of thousands of regulations that made B.C. a place to avoid by investors and businesses.

Between 1994 and 1999, B.C. suffered a net loss of 469 companies to other provinces. In the past six years, more than 43,000 British Columbians left for Alberta alone. Even today, the ill effects of the previous regime's anti-business climate are tough to shake. Finance Minister Gary Collins' recent quarterly budget report projects a 42 percent decrease in its forecasted net migration to the province for 2003.

Moreover, the latest BC Checkup 2003 study from B.C.'s Institute of Chartered Accountants, which compares B.C., Alberta and Ontario as places to live, work and invest, shows that B.C. is a "less competitive place to do business."

Mr. Falcon is rightly concerned about these indictors and the "inefficient processes" and "delays caused by conflicting requirements from multiple ministries." It is imperative for risk takers and investors -- the people B.C. desperately needs to create the wealth that spurs job creation -- that the regulatory burden be unburdensome, and, just as importantly, predictable.

Instead, Bill 75 makes the approval process unpredictable, unfair and potentially costly, should a lack of due diligence result in a fast-tracked proposal being approved when it wouldn't have passed traditional reviews.

Business groups and would-be investors may applaud the new legislation, but the majority will be tempering their enthusiasm once their cherished projects aren't deemed "provincially significant." Then, like all taxpayers that expect to see an unpoliticized approval process, they'd wish the government had drafted legislation to streamline the review process for all projects.