Days after Ottawa proposed weakening the Impact Assessment Act, NDP environment and climate critic Laurel Collins warns that abandoning greenhouse gas emissions from federal reviews of major projects is an abandonment of responsibility.
As part of its budget implementation bill, Ottawa included amendments to the Impact Assessment Act that remove transboundary air pollution, such as greenhouse gases, from assessments of major projects such as tar sands expansions. The decision is a response to the Supreme Court of Canada’s October landmark case, which found federal impact assessment law was veering out of its lane into provincial jurisdiction.
That decision sent the federal government back to the drawing board to draft amendments intended to defend the legislation from potential court challenges. But some environmentalists say the planned changes are too much of a retreat. If the Impact Assessment Act, passed in 2019, saw the federal government overreach into provincial jurisdiction, critics say the feds have now swung too far in the opposite direction in response.
Specifically, the proposed changes make the federal government maintain jurisdiction over things like at-risk species, migratory birds, and transboundary marine pollution. But cross-border air pollution was eliminated. The changes are sure to create new challenges for Ottawa, as Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault has above major sources of greenhouse gas emissions as one of the reasons why Suncor’s proposed tar sands expansion plans would cause “unacceptable” harm to the environment.
Collins May 2 letter to Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, and Guilbeault did not mince words.
“While the amendments were necessary to ensure the constitutionality of the Impact Assessment Act…the proposed amendments do not simply address the [court’s judgment]but to abandon critical federal responsibilities in impact assessment,” he wrote.
Collins said the decision to remove greenhouse gas emissions from the law sets a “dangerous precedent” for the federal government’s responsibility to protect the environment.
“By not including greenhouse gas emissions in the law, the government is essentially asserting that air pollution is not within federal jurisdiction, even in cases of cross-border pollution,” he wrote. “We can defend constitutionality in environmental assessment without undermining strong climate action.”
Collins’ comments hint at a tense political fight over the proposed changes. On the same day she sent her letter to Liberal cabinet ministers, Green Party leader Elizabeth May held a Press conference where he characterized the proposed amendments as a “quick, dirty and inadequate” fix to the Impact Assessment Act. He said the Greens intend to vote against it.
“By not including greenhouse gas emissions in the [Impact Assessment Act]”The government is basically claiming that air pollution is not within federal jurisdiction, even in cases of cross-border pollution,” warns @Laurel_BC.
“Give it to the liberals on this one,” he said. “They have managed to break three platform promises of the 2015 campaign in one fell swoop.”
He accused the Liberals of failing to adequately engage and consult with Indigenous people, violating a pledge not to use omnibus budget bills to significantly change federal laws and breaking a promise to fix environmental assessments.
Fourteen civil society groups also wrote to federal ministers this week, urging them to keep cross-border air pollution and “nationally significant” greenhouse gas emissions in law.
“Canadians have the right to be protected from environmental harm caused by provinces in which they do not reside,” said the letter of environmental groups lee. “Indeed, this is a key principle of our federation: ensuring that the federal government can make decisions that benefit Canadians, while individual provinces focus on promoting the interests of their own residents.
“The federal government should not bow to pressure from the provinces and industry and give up its crucial role in protecting the environment.”
As previously reported by Canadian National ObserverGuilbeault says he understands environmentalists’ concerns, but given the propensity of provinces like Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and others to sue Ottawa over important environmental and climate change laws, a solution had to be found.
From that point of view, liberals do not see the amendments as weakening the law, but rather as strengthening it by limiting the ways in which it can be challenged. If the federal government lost a court case because it did not limit its jurisdiction in a way the Supreme Court of Canada was comfortable with, “our Impact Assessment Act would fall apart and then we would have nothing,” he said.
Since the Impact Assessment Act was implemented, Ottawa has introduced mandates for electric vehicles, clean fuel standards, a carbon price and is working to pass clean electricity regulations and a cap on emissions from the oil and gas sector, Guilbeault said.
“We have strengthened our climate legislation and regulations so much that it may not be the end of the world if [greenhouse gas emissions are] not in the impact evaluation as a criterion for stopping projects,” he added.