Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Environment

Canada says B.C. trying to impede Trans Mountain with pipeline legislation

Published

VANCOUVER — The Canadian government says British Columbia is trying to obstruct the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion with “Trojan Horse” legislation that the province is passing off as a benign environmental measure.

Lawyer Jan Brongers asked the B.C. Court of Appeal on Wednesday to reject proposed amendments to the province’s Environmental Management Act, because the changes aim to regulate interprovincial oil projects that fall under federal jurisdiction.

“This legislation appears to be a Trojan Horse. It’s one that is designed to appear as constitutionally acceptable, local environmental protection measures,” he told a panel of five judges.

“But in substance, it’s an unconstitutional initiative that’s only logical reason for being is to limit federally-regulated pipelines and railways from moving additional heavy oil.”

The Appeal Court is hearing a reference case on the proposed amendments, which would enable B.C. to create a permitting regime for companies that transport hazardous substances through the province.

The province has argued it’s not attempting to block Trans Mountain or any other resource project, but is aiming to protect against ecological harm and require companies to pay for damages.

Brongers said the proposed amendments are clearly intended to hinder additional oil shipments because they’re selective, narrow and targeted.

The only hazardous substance covered by the amendments is heavy oil, Brongers said, and only companies that intend to increase the amount of heavy oil they’re transporting will need to get a permit.

“We still don’t know why the volume of diluted bitumen that’s in the existing Trans Mountain pipeline is somehow deserving of an automatic exemption from the regime, but the new volumes that would be carried by the expanded Trans Mountain pipeline are not,” Brongers said.

Justice Harvey Groberman challenged Brongers on that point, saying these are amendments to legislation and are presumably designed to deal with a new problem.

“The fact that it’s directed at that emerging or new problem doesn’t seem to me to prove anything other than that the legislation is targeted,” Groberman said.

The amendments also don’t apply to ships, and Brongers quoted B.C. Attorney General David Eby as saying last year that tankers were excluded because they are under federal jurisdiction.

Brongers said B.C. has suggested that heavy oil is the first of a number of hazardous substances to be targeted by the proposed permitting regime, but the province has not said what those other substances would be.

Premier John Horgan and other B.C. government officials have stated on multiple occasions, primarily while in opposition, that they were opposed to the Trans Mountain expansion and were looking for legal tools to stop it, Brongers noted.

After taking power in 2017, the minority NDP government received legal advice that it doesn’t have constitutional authority to directly stop the project, but it did have the authority to apply conditions and impose regulations to protect its coast, he said.

Brongers quoted Horgan as telling a reporter that the proposed amendments were about ensuring that increased heavy oil shipments through the province “don’t happen in the future.”

“The proposed legislation’s real purpose and effect, is the creation of a mechanism — a tool in the toolbox — to potentially impede additional heavy oil originating outside of British Columbia from being transported through the province,” Brongers said.

The federal government has purchased the Trans Mountain pipeline for $4.5 billion and the expansion would triple the capacity of the existing line that runs from the Edmonton area to a marine terminal in Burnaby, B.C.

The governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan, as well as Trans Mountain Corp., Enbridge Inc., and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, have filed documents in support of the federal government.

First Nations, cities and the environmental group Ecojustice have delivered arguments in support of B.C.’s proposed amendments.

Assembly of First Nations lawyer Julie McGregor urged the court to ensure its ruling respects the rights of Indigenous Peoples to make decisions about their territories.

“First Nations, as the original guardians of this environment since time immemorial, have always been concerned about the health and well-being of their lands,” she said.

“The days where government actions unilaterally infringe upon or extinguish First Nations treaty or Aboriginal rights — those days are over.”

Laura Kane, The Canadian Press

Advertisement [bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

City of Red Deer

Environmental Master Plan steers Red Deer’s sustainable future

Published

on

From The City of Red Deer

City Council adopted an updated version of the Environmental Master Plan, a document which will guide Red Deer’s environmental strategy now and into the future.

The Environmental Master Plan (EMP) was originally released in 2011 and serves as a guide to improve environmental sustainability in Red Deer by setting goals and providing short-, medium- and long-term strategies. The EMP is designed to provide The City and the people of Red Deer with a road map to improved environmental performance. The updated plan outlines clear goals and measurable targets, as well as suggested actions for The City to undertake during implementation.

“The EMP refresh is a higher-level document that was designed to provide a foundation for strategic decision making in the future. We focused on six areas: air, ecology, energy, waste, water and community design, which combined transportation and built environment from the previous plan,” said Nancy Hackett, Environmental Initiatives Supervisor, “Each of the sixareas have specific targets and metrics, but we refined the plan to 20 actions that providebroader direction.”

A variety of public engagement sessions provided key community insight that was used to assess current conditions and determine future focuses and goals for the plan. In addition to sessions with targeted community groups, a Community Engagement Group took part in monthly, in-depth sessions to discuss Red Deer’s focus areas, targets and actions for the future.

Now that the plan has been adopted, City Staff will begin implementation to ensure Red Deercontinues on its’ path of reducing its environmental footprint.

A full version of the EMP is available on the City’s website at reddeer.ca/EMP.

Continue Reading

City of Red Deer

Goulet-Jones says City’s new Environmental Master Plan means higher taxes and an assault on energy sector

Published

on

This opinion piece was submitted by Calvin Goblet-Jones

City Council Unanimously Rejects reason by approving a severely flawed Environmental Master Plan.

I honestly can not believe every councillor voted in favour of this document, I am severely disappointed in our Council Today.
Make no mistake, this document deserves to be put through the shredder.  There are a few good elements of the $150,000 document such as strengthening our inner city forests however the document is nothing more than a glimpse into a future of higher taxes, bans and a continued assault on our energy sector by a council who says they support energy.
Of course the document is full of buzzwords and flowery language but this document rejects the benefits of our local energy sector.  Instead of looking towards cheap natural gas as an energy source they look to failed renewable energy projects that you and I will pay heavily for.  The Document wants to limit Red Deers energy consumption, wants to limit your personal fuel consumption, and wants to ban ban ban.  The document wants to ban wood fires, wants to heavily regulate vehicles, and wants to shift all the vehicles the city owns to be electric which will cost taxpayers heavily.
Quickly, take a look at Action 20, they don’t mention a ban outright but they mention open air burning, wood burning and vehicles as part of their “action plan” it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to interpret what they mean.

Look at Focus Area 1.2.2.3 where they want to limit consumer energy consumption and how they reject our local cheap, economy supporting fossil fuels.

Shame on Council for Unanimously approving this document.
Continue Reading

july, 2019

thu18jul(jul 18)12:00 pmmon29(jul 29)8:00 pmTaste of Edmonton12:00 pm - 8:00 pm (29)

sun21jul11:00 am2:00 pmOne Eleven Jazzy Brunch11:00 am - 2:00 pm

fri26jul6:00 pm9:00 pmTaste of Red DeerSummer Just Got More Delicious!6:00 pm - 9:00 pm

Trending

X