Connect with us

Alberta

Alberta fighting federal “unconstitutional intrusion” into provincial jurisdiction

Published

5 minute read

Alberta to fight federal plastics ban once more

Alberta’s government will continue defending the province’s constitutional jurisdiction and economy by intervening in Ottawa’s appeal of the Federal Court’s ruling on plastics.

On Nov. 16, the Federal Court of Canada ruled that the federal order-in-council classifying plastics as toxic is not only unreasonable but unconstitutional. The federal government has chosen to appeal this decision, ignoring calls from Alberta and others to accept the court’s decision.

As a result, Alberta’s government will participate in the appeal and will argue that the federal government’s decision to label plastic as a “toxic substance” is an unconstitutional intrusion into provincial jurisdiction.

“It is past time for Ottawa to listen. We have told them they are overreaching their jurisdiction, the private sector has told them so, and so have both the Supreme Court and the Federal Court. Ottawa cannot assume regulatory authority over any substance simply by designating it as toxic. We will continue to push back against Ottawa’s unconstitutional actions, including through this legal action, until they listen.”

Danielle Smith, Premier

The toxic designation and bans have also had a detrimental impact on Alberta’s economy. Alberta’s Industrial Heartland Association estimates the designation will potentially jeopardize more than $30 billion in capital investment in the petrochemical sector by 2030. Those risks would also put Albertan and Canadian workers at risk of losing their jobs.

“The Federal Court clearly ruled that the federal government’s plastics ban policies were unconstitutional. The federal government’s environmental policies and constitutional overreach have been heavily criticized and this ruling further confirms the indisputable nature of provincial jurisdiction in these matters. We are intervening in this appeal and will continue to participate wherever and whenever necessary to protect Alberta’s interests.”

Mickey Amery, Minister of Justice

In addition to intervening in the appeal, Alberta will monitor any further legal action taken to remove plastic manufactured items from the current Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Several Calgary-based companies producing compostable plastic bags are now caught in the ban and will be barred from supplying Calgarians with low-emissions alternatives to traditional plastic shopping bags.

“Instead of listening to the courts and to Canadians, the federal government has chosen overreach once again. We will continue standing up for our constitutional jurisdiction while focusing on more effective ways to reduce plastic waste and keep it out of landfills.”

Rebecca Schulz, Minister of Environment and Protected Areas

Alberta is committed to reducing plastic waste through initiatives like extended producer responsibility, which encourages businesses to find new ways to recycle materials and reduce waste. The province also advocates for strategies that create economies of scale, promote recycled content and develop local markets for transformed plastic waste.

Quick facts

  • On April 23, 2021, the administrator in council issued an order-in-council directing that “plastic manufactured items” be added to Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA).
  • The category of plastic manufactured items includes every piece of plastic that enters Alberta.
  • Once a substance is designated as toxic under CEPA, CEPA allows the federal government to make regulations regulating every aspect of that substance’s life, from manufacture to sale to use and to disposal.
  • Canada subsequently enacted the Single-use Plastics Prohibition Regulations (SUPPR) prohibiting the manufacture, import and sale of six single-use plastics. SUPPR is only valid if “plastic manufactured items” is listed as toxic on Schedule 1 of CEPA.
  • The Responsible Plastic Use Coalition, Dow, Imperial Oil and Nova applied for a judicial review of the order. They challenged it as unreasonable on administrative law grounds and as unconstitutional on division of powers grounds.
  • On Sept. 7, 2022, Alberta intervened in the application to address the constitutional questions. Saskatchewan intervened on Oct. 24, 2022.
  • The application was heard March 7-9, 2023, and the court reserved its decision.
  • On Nov. 16, the federal Court of Canada issued its decision. Justice Angela Furlanetto concluded that the order adding “plastic manufactured items” to the Schedule 1 was both unreasonable from an administrative law perspective, and unconstitutional.

This is a news release from the Government of Alberta.

Follow Author

Alberta

Alberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert

Published on

From Resource Now

By

Alberta renews call for West Coast oil pipeline amid shifting federal, geopolitical dynamics.

Just six months ago, talk of resurrecting some version of the Northern Gateway pipeline would have been unthinkable. But with the election of Donald Trump in the U.S. and Mark Carney in Canada, it’s now thinkable.

In fact, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith seems to be making Northern Gateway 2.0 a top priority and a condition for Alberta staying within the Canadian confederation and supporting Mark Carney’s vision of making Canada an Energy superpower. Thanks to Donald Trump threatening Canadian sovereignty and its economy, there has been a noticeable zeitgeist shift in Canada. There is growing support for the idea of leveraging Canada’s natural resources and diversifying export markets to make it less vulnerable to an unpredictable southern neighbour.

“I think the world has changed dramatically since Donald Trump got elected in November,” Smith said at a keynote address Wednesday at the Global Energy Show Canada in Calgary. “I think that’s changed the national conversation.” Smith said she has been encouraged by the tack Carney has taken since being elected Prime Minister, and hopes to see real action from Ottawa in the coming months to address what Smith said is serious encumbrances to Alberta’s oil sector, including Bill C-69, an oil and gas emissions cap and a West Coast tanker oil ban. “I’m going to give him some time to work with us and I’m going to be optimistic,” Smith said. Removing the West Coast moratorium on oil tankers would be the first step needed to building a new oil pipeline line from Alberta to Prince Rupert. “We cannot build a pipeline to the west coast if there is a tanker ban,” Smith said. The next step would be getting First Nations on board. “Indigenous peoples have been shut out of the energy economy for generations, and we are now putting them at the heart of it,” Smith said.

Alberta currently produces about 4.3 million barrels of oil per day. Had the Northern Gateway, Keystone XL and Energy East pipelines been built, Alberta could now be producing and exporting an additional 2.5 million barrels of oil per day. The original Northern Gateway Pipeline — killed outright by the Justin Trudeau government — would have terminated in Kitimat. Smith is now talking about a pipeline that would terminate in Prince Rupert. This may obviate some of the concerns that Kitimat posed with oil tankers negotiating Douglas Channel, and their potential impacts on the marine environment.

One of the biggest hurdles to a pipeline to Prince Rupert may be B.C. Premier David Eby. The B.C. NDP government has a history of opposing oil pipelines with tooth and nail. Asked in a fireside chat by Peter Mansbridge how she would get around the B.C. problem, Smith confidently said: “I’ll convince David Eby.”

“I’m sensitive to the issues that were raised before,” she added. One of those concerns was emissions. But the Alberta government and oil industry has struck a grand bargain with Ottawa: pipelines for emissions abatement through carbon capture and storage.

The industry and government propose multi-billion investments in CCUS. The Pathways Alliance project alone represents an investment of $10 to $20 billion. Smith noted that there is no economic value in pumping CO2 underground. It only becomes economically viable if the tradeoff is greater production and export capacity for Alberta oil. “If you couple it with a million-barrel-per-day pipeline, well that allows you $20 billion worth of revenue year after year,” she said. “All of a sudden a $20 billion cost to have to decarbonize, it looks a lot more attractive when you have a new source of revenue.” When asked about the Prince Rupert pipeline proposal, Eby has responded that there is currently no proponent, and that it is therefore a bridge to cross when there is actually a proposal. “I think what I’ve heard Premier Eby say is that there is no project and no proponent,” Smith said. “Well, that’s my job. There will be soon.  “We’re working very hard on being able to get industry players to realize this time may be different.” “We’re working on getting a proponent and route.”

At a number of sessions during the conference, Mansbridge has repeatedly asked speakers about the Alberta secession movement, and whether it might scare off investment capital. Alberta has been using the threat of secession as a threat if Ottawa does not address some of the province’s long-standing grievances. Smith said she hopes Carney takes it seriously. “I hope the prime minister doesn’t want to test it,” Smith said during a scrum with reporters. “I take it seriously. I have never seen separatist sentiment be as high as it is now. “I’ve also seen it dissipate when Ottawa addresses the concerns Alberta has.” She added that, if Carney wants a true nation-building project to fast-track, she can’t think of a better one than a new West Coast pipeline. “I can’t imagine that there will be another project on the national list that will generate as much revenue, as much GDP, as many high paying jobs as a bitumen pipeline to the coast.”

Continue Reading

Alberta

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.

Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.

His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.

On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.

To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.

The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”

Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.

Tegan Hill

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X