Alberta
Supreme Court decision disappoints Mikisew Cree First Nation
Edmonton, AB – ?While the Mikisew Cree First Nation is disappointed with the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision today in ?Courtoreille v. Canada, their struggle to defend their treaty rights continues. Though today’s ruling means provincial and federal governments do not have the duty to consult about legislation threatening First Nation rights, Mikisew expects Canada to live up to the statements made in court that it would consult.
The decision ends Mikisew’s 2013 legal challenge to the previous federal government’s cuts to Canada’s environmental protection laws. Through Bills C-38 and C-45, the Harper government changed the ?Canadian Environmental Assessment Act,? the ?Fisheries Act?, the ?Species at Risk Act?, and the ?Navigable Waters Protection Act, d?drastically ?reducing federal oversight over fish and their habitat, navigable waters, and species at risk. The Bills also reduced the number of projects requiring federal environmental assessments and reduced the scope and depth of assessments for those projects.
“We are very disappointed that the court refused to advance reconciliation with this case,” said Mikisew’s legal counsel, Robert Janes. “The lack of consultation on these Bills led to bad laws, which resulted in failures like the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project and weaker environmental protection for all Canadians.”
The Harper Government passed these laws without consulting with Mikisew and other affected First Nations. At the Federal Court, Mikisew successfully argued that governments have a legally binding duty to consult First Nations when developing legislation that may impact the rights of First Nations. After the Federal Court of Appeal overturned the earlier ruling in 2016, Mikisew took its case to the Supreme Court of Canada, which has upheld the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision.
Mikisew Chief Archie Waquan said the ruling was a missed opportunity.
“Mikisew and other First Nations have valuable knowledge, laws and experience to contribute. We should be at the table with government not reacting after the fact through litigation.” This decision does not end Mikisew’s fight to protect its treaty rights. Chief Waquan noted the decision does not prevent the Crown from actually consulting. “The Crown has said they could and would consult and we will hold them to that promise.”
Background
Mikisew Cree First Nation signed Treaty 8 in 1899. The Mikisew Cree continue to live a traditional lifestyle where, even today, most of their members in Fort Chipewyan rely on “country foods” such as fish, birds, and moose for a significant portion of their diet.
Athabasca Delta is the heart of their traditional lands, which range over much of the area where the Athabasca Oil Sands deposits have been found. Mikisew Cree First Nation shares this territory with four other First Nations that make up the Athabasca Tribal Council. 2900 people make up the Mikisew First Nation. Their governing body is made up of six Councillors and a Chief.
Since Treaty 8 was signed, many large scale industrial developments have affected Mikisew lands and waters, with the pace of development increasing significantly over the past decades. In 2005, Mikisew made history when it won a landmark case at the Supreme Court of Canada, which established that the Crown had to consult First Nations with historical treaty rights. Mikisew continues to employ a variety of strategies to seek protection of its rights and culture and to create opportunities for the nation. ?The Supreme Court ruling today is the result of a lengthy legal challenge by the Mikisew Cree which began in 2012.
Click here for a Blog for reference.
Read more stories on Todayville.com.
Alberta
Alberta Next Panel calls to reform how Canada works
From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill
The Alberta Next Panel, tasked with advising the Smith government on how the province can better protect its interests and defend its economy, has officially released its report. Two of its key recommendations—to hold a referendum on Alberta leaving the Canada Pension Plan, and to create a commission to review programs like equalization—could lead to meaningful changes to Canada’s system of fiscal federalism (i.e. the financial relationship between Ottawa and the provinces).
The panel stemmed from a growing sense of unfairness in Alberta. From 2007 to 2022, Albertans’ net contribution to federal finances (total federal taxes paid by Albertans minus federal money spent or transferred to Albertans) was $244.6 billion—more than five times the net contribution from British Columbians or Ontarians (the only other two net contributors). This money from Albertans helps keep taxes lower and fund government services in other provinces. Yet Ottawa continues to impose federal regulations, which disproportionately and negatively impact Alberta’s energy industry.
Albertans were growing tired of this unbalanced relationship. According to a poll by the Angus Reid Institute, nearly half of Albertans believe they get a “raw deal”—that is, they give more than they get—being part of Canada. The Alberta Next Panel survey found that 59 per cent of Albertans believe the federal transfer and equalization system is unfair to Alberta. And a ThinkHQ survey found that more than seven in 10 Albertans feel that federal policies over the past several years hurt their quality of life.
As part of an effort to increase provincial autonomy, amid these frustrations, the panel recommends the Alberta government hold a referendum on leaving the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and establishing its own provincial pension plan.
Albertans typically have higher average incomes and a younger population than the rest of the country, which means they could pay a lower contribution rate under a provincial pension plan while receiving the same level of benefits as the CPP. (These demographic and economic factors are also why Albertans currently make such a large net contribution to the CPP).
The savings from paying a lower contribution rate could result in materially higher income during retirement for Albertans if they’re invested in a private account. One report found that if a typical Albertan invested the savings from paying a lower contribution rate to a provincial pension plan, they could benefit from $189,773 (pre-tax) in additional retirement income.
Clearly, Albertans could see a financial benefit from leaving the CPP, but there are many factors to consider. The government plans to present a detailed report including how the funds would be managed, contribution rates, and implementation plan prior to a referendum.
Then there’s equalization—a program fraught with flaws. The goal of equalization is to ensure provinces can provide reasonably comparable public services at reasonably comparable tax rates. Ottawa collects taxes from Canadians across the country and then redistributes that money to “have not” provinces. In 2026/27, equalization payments is expected to total $27.2 billion with all provinces except Alberta, British Columbia and Saskatchewan receiving payments.
Reasonable people can disagree on whether or not they support the principle of the program, but again, it has major flaws that just don’t make sense. Consider the fixed growth rate rule, which mandates that total equalization payments grow each year even when the income differences between recipient and non-recipient provinces narrows. That means Albertans continue paying for a growing program, even when such growth isn’t required to meet the program’s stated objective. The panel recommends that Alberta take a leading role in working with other provinces and the federal government to reform equalization and set up a new Canada Fiscal Commission to review fiscal federalism more broadly.
The Alberta Next Panel is calling for changes to fiscal federalism. Reforms to equalization are clearly needed—and it’s worth exploring the potential of an Alberta pension plan. Indeed, both of these changes could deliver benefits.
Alberta
Alberta’s huge oil sands reserves dwarf U.S. shale
From the Canadian Energy Centre
By Will Gibson
Oil sands could maintain current production rates for more than 140 years
Investor interest in Canadian oil producers, primarily in the Alberta oil sands, has picked up, and not only because of expanded export capacity from the Trans Mountain pipeline.
Enverus Intelligence Research says the real draw — and a major factor behind oil sands equities outperforming U.S. peers by about 40 per cent since January 2024 — is the resource Trans Mountain helps unlock.
Alberta’s oil sands contain 167 billion barrels of reserves, nearly four times the volume in the United States.
Today’s oil sands operators hold more than twice the available high-quality resources compared to U.S. shale producers, Enverus reports.
“It’s a huge number — 167 billion barrels — when Alberta only produces about three million barrels a day right now,” said Mike Verney, executive vice-president at McDaniel & Associates, which earlier this year updated the province’s oil and gas reserves on behalf of the Alberta Energy Regulator.
Already fourth in the world, the assessment found Alberta’s oil reserves increased by seven billion barrels.
Verney said the rise in reserves despite record production is in part a result of improved processes and technology.
“Oil sands companies can produce for decades at the same economic threshold as they do today. That’s a great place to be,” said Michael Berger, a senior analyst with Enverus.
BMO Capital Markets estimates that Alberta’s oil sands reserves could maintain current production rates for more than 140 years.
The long-term picture looks different south of the border.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that American production will peak before 2030 and enter a long period of decline.
Having a lasting stable source of supply is important as world oil demand is expected to remain strong for decades to come.
This is particularly true in Asia, the target market for oil exports off Canada’s West Coast.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) projects oil demand in the Asia-Pacific region will go from 35 million barrels per day in 2024 to 41 million barrels per day in 2050.
The growing appeal of Alberta oil in Asian markets shows up not only in expanded Trans Mountain shipments, but also in Canadian crude being “re-exported” from U.S. Gulf Coast terminals.
According to RBN Energy, Asian buyers – primarily in China – are now the main non-U.S. buyers from Trans Mountain, while India dominates purchases of re-exports from the U.S. Gulf Coast. .
BMO said the oil sands offers advantages both in steady supply and lower overall environmental impacts.
“Not only is the resulting stability ideally suited to backfill anticipated declines in world oil supply, but the long-term physical footprint may also be meaningfully lower given large-scale concentrated emissions, high water recycling rates and low well declines,” BMO analysts said.
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta’s huge oil sands reserves dwarf U.S. shale
-
Alberta1 day agoCanada’s New Green Deal
-
Energy1 day agoCanada’s sudden rediscovery of energy ambition has been greeted with a familiar charge: hypocrisy
-
Business1 day agoCOP30 finally admits what resource workers already knew: prosperity and lower emissions must go hand in hand
-
armed forces1 day agoOttawa’s Newly Released Defence Plan Crosses a Dangerous Line
-
Indigenous1 day agoResidential school burials controversy continues to fuel wave of church arsons, new data suggests
-
Business1 day agoOttawa Pretends To Pivot But Keeps Spending Like Trudeau
-
Daily Caller1 day agoParis Climate Deal Now Decade-Old Disaster


