Eby Says B.C. Is Building. Then Why Kill the Project Ledger?
The Major Projects Inventory gave British Columbians a public baseline for proposed, underway, completed, stalled and cancelled projects. If the pipeline is strong, the ledger should be visible.
David Eby’s government keeps telling British Columbians that B.C. is building. Then it should be willing to show the list.
The Province’s Major Projects Inventory was not a campaign slogan. It was a public accountability tool. The B.C. Data Catalogue describes the inventory as a record of selected major projects in categories including proposed, under construction, completed, on hold, cancelled and operational, with estimated capital costs. In plain English, it helped workers, local governments, suppliers, investors and taxpayers see what was actually moving and what was not.
Now the public ledger has gone dark. The Province’s Major Projects Inventory page says that, effective 2025, British Columbia will no longer release the annual inventory, while older reports remain available. The Data Catalogue still describes the dataset’s purpose as providing public access to project information, but the current-data reference cited in the candidate record sits at Q4 2024, with a January 31, 2025 data release and metadata updated February 26, 2025.
That matters because major-project politics is where talk and reality separate. A mine can be announced for years without permits. A housing project can sit in the “proposed” pile. A hospital, port, power line, mill, transmission upgrade or industrial facility can slide quietly from promise to delay. Without a current inventory, the public loses one of the simplest ways to compare government claims against project status.
ICBA Independent reported on September 15 that the Province had ended the inventory and warned that the decision leaves investors with less visibility into B.C.’s project pipeline. The post also attributed concern to B.C. Construction Association president Chris Atchison, arguing the sector relied on an authoritative public baseline for planning and investment. That is not a small complaint from people who build things; it is a warning from the part of the economy that has to price risk, line up workers and decide whether B.C. is a place where projects can actually get done.
The Eby government may prefer press releases, ribbon cuttings and selective numbers. But major-project accountability requires a boring, current, comparable ledger. What projects were added? Which ones began construction? Which were cancelled? Which are on hold? Which regions are gaining capital investment, and which are losing it? Which sectors are advancing, and which are stuck in permitting or cost uncertainty?
If the answer is good, show it. If the answer is bad, British Columbians deserve to know. Ending a transparency tool does not build a single bridge, mine, hospital, port or home. It only makes it harder for the public to see whether the government’s building story matches the ground truth.