The Alberta Court of Appeals says the federal government’s environmental impact law is unconstitutional.
The Alberta government, calling it a Trojan Horse, had challenged the Impact Assessment Act for what the province argued was its overreaching of provincial powers.
The law, formerly known as Bill C-69, received royal approval in 2019. It lists activities that trigger an impact review and allows Ottawa to consider the effects of new resource projects on a variety of environmental and social issues, including the climate change.
Alberta had argued that the law could use those concerns to greatly expand the range of federal oversight in areas of provincial jurisdiction.
Most of the five judges who gave their legal opinion in the 204-page document released Tuesday sided with Alberta, calling it a “stunning appropriation of provincial authority.”
All five justices agreed that the threat of climate change must be addressed, but the majority opinion said the environment is not the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, so it has no unilateral power to regulate it.
“Intraprovincial activities are not immune from regulation by the federal government, so long as the regulation remains within constitutional dividing lines,” Chief Justice Catherine Fraser wrote in the opinion published Tuesday.
He adds that legitimate concerns about the environment and climate change should not override the division of powers.
“If the federal government believes otherwise, it should make a case for increasing its jurisdiction to the Canadian public.”
A fourth judge signed that opinion with the exception of one section.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sheila Greckol said that the federal environmental impact law is a valid exercise of constitutional authority.
“The federal environmental assessment regime…prohibits projects…that may have effects within federal jurisdiction — on fish and fish habitats, aquatic species, migratory birds, on federal lands or projects funded by the federal government, among others.” provinces, outside of Canada and with respect for indigenous peoples,” he wrote.
“The complexities and urgency of the climate crisis call for the cooperative interconnection (of) environmental protection regimes across multiple jurisdictions.”
Now is not the time to “give credence to any kind of ‘Trojan Horse’ metaphor proposed by Alberta and Saskatchewan,” Greckol wrote. “Comparing Canada to an invading foreign army deceptively breaching our protective walls only fuels suspicion and pits one level of government against each other.”
There were 17 interveners in the case.
Alberta was supported in its challenge by the governments of Saskatchewan and Ontario, as well as three First Nations and the Indian Resource Council.
Seven of the interveners, including a wide range of environmental and legal groups, as well as other First Nations, supported Ottawa.
Federal Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson said Ottawa will appeal to the Supreme Court.
“We are very confident that this is constitutional, that our position will be upheld,” he said before the start of the question period.
“But what I would tell them is that the point of an environmental assessment process is to have rigor, to make sure that we are really addressing substantive environmental concerns at an early stage, so that good projects can go ahead and projects that really are not. can conform to good environmental standards they don’t.
Federal Attorney General and Federal Environment Minister David Lametti and Steven Guilbeault issued a joint statement on the Alberta Court of Appeals opinion, saying they are confident Ottawa will win the appeal and noting that the opinion has no the effect of nullifying legislation.
“It is important to note that the Alberta Court of Appeals decision is advisory in nature and the Impact Assessment Act and regulations remain in effect,” they said.
Conservative Calgary MP Michelle Rempel released a statement saying the Court of Appeals opinion “confirms what Albertans already knew: Bill C-69 was nothing more than an unconstitutional and ideologically driven power grab. for [Prime Minister] Justin Trudeau who intended to destroy Alberta’s energy sector.”
“This government’s constant attacks on Alberta’s economy have cost thousands of jobs and destroyed livelihoods. After six years of ideological attacks by Justin Trudeau, Alberta deserves a reward for destructive political decisions.”
Reference-www.cbc.ca