Alberta
ONE RELATIONSHIP AT A TIME: THE PATH TO PROJECT SUCCESS
ONE RELATIONSHIP AT A TIME: THE PATH TO PROJECT SUCCESS
Infrastructure development is full of risks, which are managed in a number of ways. Risk management might sound cold and impersonal, but it has the potential to incent real human connections and build genuine relationships. Key risks may have leading practice on how best to mitigate, transfer, ignore or hold those risks, but when it comes to energy development across Canada, meaningful consultation and accommodation is non- negotiable. As most are well aware at this point, the Crown must consult and accommodate where Aboriginal or Treaty rights are impacted. Far from being a mandatory ‘checkbox’ in the process of project development, the undertaking of engagement and relationship-building holds the potential for mutual benefits for both the project and the impacted First Nations, Inuit, or Métis community.
Genuine relationship-building is a solid foundation for partnership on energy projects, to the benefit of both parties. This partnership can take the form of Impact Benefit Agreements (IBA) Mutual Benefit Agreements (MBA) or equity participation arrangements, among others. Both IBAs and equity arrangements have the potential to grow economic and social prosperity, but determining which approach is the best fit will be influenced by the priorities and capacity of both the developer and the Indigenous community.
In both these common approaches there are similar objectives:
- Compensation for and mitigation of potential impact
- Influence or control over project design and development
- Securing benefits for the community
- Securing social license
- Working towards consent and support of the project
- Reduced risk of opposition or disruption
- Improved financing as a result of managed risks
Both also reflect an underlying premise that it is no longer acceptable to develop resources or energy infrastructure in a manner where impacts fall to one party, and benefits to the other.
When comparing and contrasting IBAs and equity arrangements, some key considerations are the degree of potential impact, the capacity and interest of the community in the project’s development and management, the project’s term, risk tolerance of either party, and financing and funding opportunities.
Impact Benefit Agreements between a project developer and impacted Indigenous community formalize project benefits sharing. Often, these IBAs will provide some employment, training, and contracting opportunities, but the economic benefits will often be tied to the project’s degree of impact to traditional lands and lifestyle (e.g., land impacts, hunting and gathering impacts, etc.). Regardless of how well the project is performing, the IBAs will guarantee a steady revenue stream to the Indigenous community. This can be a safe bet for risk adverse councils but holds the potential for serious revenue inequity in the case where the project is successful and very profitable.
Pivoting from partnership to ownership, equity participation agreements clearly scale the revenue sharing between the project developer and community as the project success and profitability increases. If the energy project does well, the First Nation, Inuit, or Métis equity partner is also going to do well and see greater revenues. The inverse is also true. In these equity arrangements, which are becoming more prevalent in the eastern provinces, the Indigenous partner has a greater say in project operations, as they are a shareholder. It also arguably provides more security to the developers, as the Indigenous partner is a proponent of the project, and no longer a potential opponent. Both partners would look to maximize the economic benefits of the project, while minimizing the adverse economic, environmental and social consequences flowing from the project. Without focusing too much on the direct revenue arrangement, equity arrangements will often also include guaranteed or preferential opportunities for contracting, procurement, employment and training.
To be clear, in either an IBA or equity arrangement model, the duty to consult and accommodate is neither negated nor automatically fulfilled. But the relationship between developer and community becomes formalized and clearer, adding transparency and certainty to an otherwise risk-filled process.
Managing project risk is a mandatory part of project development. But the means of managing risk holds so much potential for empowerment, leadership, and benefit. Project success and economic development are not an end in themselves, but rather a means to an end – the end being healthier and more prosperous First Nations, Inuit, and Métis communities, and Canada as a whole. All the while moving the dial on reconciliation through real connections, business developments, and cultural education – one relationship at a time.
Robyn Budd was a 2019 member of the Energy Council of Canada’s Young Energy Professionals program and was a Manager in KPMG’s Global Infrastructure Advisory practice, based in the unceded territory of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh nations (Vancouver). She was also the Leader of KPMG’s National Indigenous Network.
Zachary McCue is Founder of The Waabgaag Group, with expertise in renewable, infrastructure, and resource development, specializing in equity participation and impact benefit agreements. He is a proud member of Curve Lake First Nation and is based in Ontario.
Thanks to Todayville for helping us bring our members’ stories of collaboration and innovation to the public.
Click to read a foreward from JP Gladu, Chief Development and Relations Officer, Steel River Group; Former President and CEO, Canadian Council for Aboriginal Business.
JP Gladu, Chief Development and Relations Officer, Steel River Group; Former President & CEO, Canadian Council for Aboriginal Business
Click to read comments about this series from Jacob Irving, President of the Energy Council of Canada.
Jacob Irving, President of Energy Council of Canada
The Canadian Energy Compendium is an annual initiative by the Energy Council of Canada to provide an opportunity for cross-sectoral collaboration and discussion on current topics in Canada’s energy sector. The 2020 Canadian Energy Compendium: Innovations in Energy Efficiency is due to be released November 2020.
Click to read more stories from this series.
INDIGENOUS CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT AT CANADA’S ENERGY AND UTILITY REGULATORS
News release from the RCMP and Parks Canada
Parks Canada and RCMP continue to respond to a rockslide at Bow Glacier Falls near Bow Lake, approximately 37 km north of Lake Louise in Banff National Park. Search and rescue operations resumed at 6:30 am on June 20, 2025.
RCMP confirm that the individual located deceased at the scene on June 19, 2025, was a 70-year-old female resident of Calgary, Alberta. RCMP also confirm that a second deceased individual was recovered on the morning of June 20, 2025. RCMP is notifying their next of kin and no further information is available at this time. Three individuals transported to hospital by STARS and ground ambulance on June 19, 2025 were all in stable condition at last report.
At this time, there are no additional persons reported missing and no additional unidentified vehicles at the trailhead located at Bow Lake.
Parks Canada and RCMP extend our deepest condolences to the families and friends of the two individuals who lost their lives, our hearts are with them. Our thoughts also remain with those in hospital and we hope for their full recovery.
In a continued effort to complete a thorough assessment, Parks Canada visitor safety teams continue work today with support from a geotechnical engineer with Canada Task Force One (CAN-TF1 Vancouver), as well as members of Canada Task Force Two (CAN-TF2 Calgary) and their partners in the Calgary Police Service.
The safety of first responders and park visitors is our top priority.
Bow Lake and the trail to Bow Hut have reopened. Bow Glacier Falls remains closed to all visitors. The NOTAM (no-fly zone) remains in place to ensure public safety and for park operations. Parks Canada and RCMP thank visitors for giving teams space to work safely.
The Icefields Parkway (Highway 93N) remains open with potential intermittent, short-term traffic stoppages in the vicinity of the incident. Heavy precipitation including snow is occurring on the Icefields Parkway. Please check the weather forecast and Alberta 511 before travelling.
Banff National Park remains open and safe to visit.
Updates will be provided as more information is available.
BACKGROUND:
RCMP AND PARKS CANADA – JOINT STATEMENT #2
June 20, 2025 8:10 AM
Lake Louise, Alberta – On June 19, 2025, at 1 pm Parks Canada received a report of a serious rockfall at Bow Glacier Falls located west of the Icefields Parkway (Highway 93N) near Bow Lake, which is approximately 37 km north of Lake Louise in Banff National Park.
Parks Canada wardens and RCMP remained on site overnight. Parks Canada visitor safety teams will continue working today with support from Canada Task Force Two (CAN-TF2 Calgary), a national disaster response team.
CAN-TF2 is conducting infrared flights, through their partners in the Calgary Police Service, in a continued effort to complete a thorough assessment. A Canada Task Force One (CAN-TF1 Vancouver) geotechnical engineer will conduct a slope stability assessment. The safety of first responders and park visitors is our top priority.
As reported yesterday, one person was located deceased at the location on June 19th. RCMP are working to notify next of kin. No further information about this individual is available.
Bow Lake remains closed to all visitors. A NOTAM (no-fly zone) remains in place to ensure public safety and for park operations. Parks Canada and RCMP thank visitors for giving teams space to work safely.
Alpine Club of Canada guests staying at Bow Hut are safe. Visitors staying at Bow Hut will be able to exit on schedule via the usual route, which is unaffected and safe to travel.
The Icefields Parkway (Highway 93N) remains open with potential intermittent, short-term traffic stoppages in the vicinity of the incident. Heavy precipitation including snow occurring on the Icefields Parkway. Please check the weather forecast and Alberta 511 before travelling.
Banff National Park remains open and safe to visit.
From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy
Most pundits missed it, but Alberta’s revised Bill of Rights just strengthened property rights in a big way. Senior research fellow Joseph Quesnel breaks down how new amendments could protect landowners from regulatory takings—government actions that restrict property use without compensation. He examines key Supreme Court of Canada rulings and explains why every Canadian jurisdiction should take note. Could this be a game-changer for property rights?
Property rights amendments prevent governments from seizing land or restricting its use without compensation
Alberta is one of the few Canadian jurisdictions with a citizen’s bill of rights outlining fundamental freedoms. In 1972, the Lougheed government introduced the Alberta Bill of Rights, which supersedes other laws and requires provincial legislation to be consistent with it.
Premier Danielle Smith faced controversy last year for amending Alberta’s Bill of Rights. While most commentators focused on the amendments protecting the right to refuse vaccinations, they overlooked the significance of changes that strengthen property rights.
Section 1 now states: “The right to the enjoyment of property and the right not to be deprived thereof to the extent authorized by law and except by due process of law.”
Another new clause reads: “The right not to be subject to a taking of property except to the extent authorized by law and where just compensation is provided.”
The law defines a “taking” in two ways: as “a transfer of property ownership without the consent of the owner (expropriation)” and as a situation where “an owner of property [is] being deprived of all reasonable uses of that property.”
Unlike the United States, Canada lacks constitutional protections for property rights. While Canadians have some legal safeguards, they are not as extensive as those in the U.S. In the British common law tradition, there is a presumption that if the government takes a citizen’s property, it must follow legal procedures and provide compensation.
This principle dates back to the Magna Carta of 1215, which opposed arbitrary seizure, and extends to the 1920 British case Attorney General v. De Keyser’s Royal Hotel, which ruled: “Unless the words of the statute clearly so demand, a statute is not to be construed to take away the property of a subject without compensation.”
Following this precedent, federal, provincial and territorial governments in Canada must provide fair compensation when expropriating property. While provinces and territories have different expropriation laws, they all require due process.
However, a legal loophole allows governments to deprive citizens of their property without compensation. Courts refer to this as a “regulatory taking” when government regulations restrict land use to the point that it is effectively expropriated.
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled on regulatory takings in two cases: Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Vancouver (2006) and Annapolis Group Inc. v. Halifax Regional Municipality (2022). The court determined that compensation for regulatory takings requires two conditions: the government must acquire a beneficial interest in the property, and the regulation must remove all reasonable uses of the land. A beneficial interest means the government gains a financial share or the right to occupy a property without legally owning it.
Peter Russell, one of Canada’s top constitutional law scholars, argued that the requirements established in the CPR case are nearly impossible to meet. Proving the removal of “all” reasonable uses sets a high bar, granting governments broad discretion to restrict land use without compensation.
The Annapolis ruling clarified this issue. The Supreme Court determined that municipalities do not need to gain a proprietary interest in a property to constitute a regulatory taking. Instead, a claimant only needs to prove the government received “a benefit or advantage accruing to the state” due to regulatory activity. This means the government can deprive a titleholder of potential economic use without taking legal ownership.
The Annapolis decision also established that courts must consider future-oriented land uses when determining whether a regulatory taking has occurred. The amended Alberta Bill of Rights now explicitly includes both expropriations and regulatory takings, strengthening property rights protections.
This amendment is significant because it expands safeguards for Albertans by applying not only to provincial laws but also to municipal bylaws. While Alberta cannot enforce laws that conflict with the amended Bill of Rights, the revisions give courts more authority to ensure governments treat citizens fairly.
The updated Bill of Rights is now law in Alberta. Other provinces and territories should follow its lead and strengthen protections for their citizens.
Joseph Quesnel is a senior research fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.
Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!
“Evacuate”: Netanyahu Warns Tehran as Israel Expands Strikes on Iran’s Military Command
Carney’s European pivot could quietly reshape Canada’s sovereignty
Manhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband
Alberta’s grand bargain with Canada includes a new pipeline to Prince Rupert
Minnesota shooter arrested after 48-hour manhunt
The Canadian Medical Association’s inexplicable stance on pediatric gender medicine
-
Business2 days agoCanada’s critical minerals are key to negotiating with Trump
-
David Clinton22 hours agoWhy Are Ontario’s Public Schools So Violent?
-
Economy2 days agoOttawa’s muddy energy policy leaves more questions than answers
-
Business20 hours agoSenator wants to torpedo Canada’s oil and gas industry
-
Bruce Dowbiggin20 hours agoFUBAR: How Trudeau & Trump Rewrote This Century’s Political Handbook
-
Business2 days agoRFK Jr. planning new restrictions on drug advertising: report
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta’s carbon diet – how to lose megatonnes in just three short decades
-
espionage1 day agoFrom Sidewinder to P.E.I.: Are Canada’s Political Elites Benefiting from Beijing’s Real Estate Reach?