Connect with us

Alberta

Premier Smith negotiates publicly with PM Trudeau: cancel ‘just transition’ and collaborate on carbon capture

Published

8 minute read

Letter from Premier Smith to Prime Minister Trudeau

Premier Danielle Smith invites Ottawa to collaborate with Alberta on carbon capture, utilization and storage investment and halt introduction of Just Transition legislation and oil and gas emissions cap.

Dear Prime Minister:

I am writing in follow up to our meeting of February 7th, during which we discussed the need for the Government of Canada to halt introduction of the proposed Just Transition legislation and implementation of unachievable targets and measures under the federal Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP) such as the Clean Electricity Regulations (CER) and oil and gas sector emissions cap.

As a much more productive alternative, I invited your government to agree to commencing a collaborative effort between Ottawa and Alberta to develop a series of cooperative initiatives to attract investment and workers into Alberta’s emerging, conventional and non-conventional energy sectors while substantially reducing Canada’s and Alberta’s net emissions.

In that meeting, you expressed a willingness to pursue this course of collaborative action, but requested it be commenced promptly. The morning following my return to Alberta, I met with several of my ministers regarding this issue and can advise as follows.

The Government of Alberta is prepared to work with the federal government on a coordinated approach for a carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) incentive program for the purpose of net emissions reductions in our province while attracting billions in new investments for Alberta-based oil and gas projects, electricity, manufacturing and other sectors.

To this end, we propose coordinating a federal CCUS income tax credit with an expansion of our current Alberta Petrochemicals Incentive Program (APIP) to include CCUS projects. This new incentive program would be in addition to the over $1.8 billion already invested into CCUS projects across the province by the Government of Alberta as well as our province’s additional implicit contribution to CCUS made through our current royalty regime.

Our government is also willing to discuss with your government expanding this coordinated approach to incentivizing other emerging emission reducing technologies as well, though we suggest beginning with agreement on a coordinated CCUS incentive program, so we are able to establish a successful foundation on which to build upon.

To this end, I request that we immediately create a federal/provincial minister-led working group with the objective of reaching agreement on a coordinated provincial-federal CCUS incentive program in the coming weeks.

Prime Minister, I must make it clear that the above invitation for cooperation and collaboration on this CCUS proposal and other energy and climate initiatives comes with one non-negotiable condition.

It is that the federal government refrain from introducing any new federal legislation or policies that materially impact Alberta’s oil and gas resource development, management or workforce participation without the full involvement, consultation and consent of Alberta.

This includes the contemplated Just Transition legislation and implementation of unachievable targets and measures under the federal Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP) such as the Clean Electricity Regulations (CER) and oil and gas sector emissions cap.

Each of these initiatives, as currently understood, would pose an unconstitutional and existential threat to the Alberta economy and the jobs of hundreds of thousands of Albertans.

As an alternative to this policy package of economic destruction, Alberta proposes working collaboratively with the federal government on aggressively advancing emission reducing technologies in Alberta as outlined above while simultaneously increasing export of LNG through the lens of replacing higher emitting fuels around the world to meet aggressive but achievable overall emissions reduction in Alberta’s oil and gas and other sectors. Ideally, our government would like to incorporate these collaborative federal-provincial initiatives into our soon-to-be-released Alberta Emissions Reduction and Energy Development Plan.

I must once again emphasize to you, Prime Minister, that although Alberta is willing to work as an active partner with the federal government on a coordinated approach to reducing Alberta’s and Canada’s net emissions, under no circumstances will our province accept the imposition of arbitrary and unachievable targets or policies that spell the end of meaningful long-term investment in Alberta’s energy sector, and as a result, the imminent phase out of Alberta’s largest industry. In such circumstances, our government would have no other choice but to oppose these destructive policies using every tool at our disposal in order to protect Albertans, their jobs and our province’s future.

Prime Minister, this issue is far larger and more important than you or I. There are literally hundreds of billions in public revenues and investments, and millions of jobs, riding on Alberta and Ottawa working together – instead of in conflict – on energy and environmental issues to create an attractive and certain investment climate that millions around the world want to invest in and move to.

Failure to do so will not only undermine Canada’s prosperity by driving billions in energy investment and revenue out of Canada and into the hands of the world’s most brutal and undemocratic regimes, but will also result in increased energy poverty and food insecurity in many of the world’s most impoverished countries, a loss of our nation’s global influence, and most ironically, an increase in the world’s global emissions due to an increased use of coal, as opposed to LNG, by developing nations to meet increasing world demand for electricity.

Canada has the potential to become a global energy superpower with all of the economic and political influence for good that such standing would grant us. We can and must seize this opportunity without delay. Please come to the table and work collaboratively with Alberta on likely the most important economic issue facing this country in a generation.

I look forward to reading your response and to learning of the appointment of your government’s side of the federal/provincial minister-led working group for the CCUS incentive program so that our two governments can take our first steps in this critical collaborative effort.

This is a news release from the Government of Alberta.

Follow Author

Alberta

ASIRT investigations concluded on fatal officer-involved shooting involving the RCMP.

Published on

Incident investigation report from the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT)

Introduction

On December 22, 2022, the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team (ASIRT) was directed pursuant to s. 46.1 of the Police Act to investigate a then non-fatal Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officer-involved shooting. The shooting of the affected person (AP) was reported to have happened during an interaction with him, as a result of him being a suspect in a complaint of a man with a gun.

While AP initially survived, he died of complications from the shooting the following day.

ASIRT’s Investigation

ASIRT’s investigation was comprehensive and thorough, conducted using current investigative protocols and principles relating to Major Case Management. Information from civilian witnesses, the subject and a witness officers, and importantly video recordings provided sufficient information to determine whether the force used by the subject officer during this incident was reasonable.

Circumstances Surrounding the Officer-Involved Shooting

On December 01, 2022, Maskwacis RCMP received a call reporting that a male [AP] had been drinking and left the caller’s house with a gun. AP was shooting the gun in the country (believed to be the area around the residence). Two RCMP officers responded.

Witness officer (WO) located AP walking on the road with a rifle. AP walked toward WO’s marked police vehicle with the rifle pointed at the vehicle/WO, while WO was seated in the driver’s seat. WO then exited his vehicle with his carbine rifle and moved to the rear of his vehicle while AP kept the rifle pointed at the police vehicle. The subject officer (SO) arrived on scene, but came from the opposite direction. AP turned around and walked toward SO with the barrel of the rifle pointed upwards. SO exited his police vehicle with his service pistol drawn and walked toward AP while he
repeatedly provided verbal direction to AP to drop the firearm. AP and SO were walking toward each other; at that time AP still had the barrel of the rifle pointed upward. As SO and AP got within approximately five meters of each other, AP lowered the barrel of the rifle and pointed it directly at SO. SO fired multiple rounds and struck AP with four rounds causing AP to stumble, drop the rifle and fall to the ground. AP initially survived the shooting and was transported to an Edmonton hospital, where he underwent emergency surgery. The following day, AP succumbed to his injuries.

Analysis

The subject officer was lawfully placed and acting in the execution of his duties in dealing with AP as a person who was the subject of a complaint about him being in possession of a firearm and shooting it off.

The Use of Force

Under s. 25 of the Criminal Code, police officers are permitted to use as much force as is necessary for the execution of their duties. Where this force is intended or is likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm, the officer must believe on reasonable grounds that the force is necessary for the self-preservation of the officer or preservation of anyone under that officer’s protection.

A police officer’s use of force is not to be assessed on a standard of perfection nor using the benefit of hindsight.

With the benefit of hindsight, time for detached reflection and knowledge of the ultimate outcome, it is easy to speculate about how things could have been done differently. That is not the standard, however, against which an officer’s conduct is measured. The question is, applying principles of proportionality, necessity, and reasonableness, whether the force used falls into a range of possible reasonable responses.

Proportionate Response

Proportionality requires balancing a use of force with the action to which it responds. Here, the subject officers were faced with an individual that was armed with a gun and pointing it in their direction. As such, the response by the subject officers in using their respective firearms to shoot AP was proportionate to the threat of death or grievous bodily harm that he reasonably posed to both of them.

Reasonably Necessary

As set out previously in this report, AP presented as a lethal threat to both SO and WO given his actions in pointing his rifle at them. While WO did not shoot during this incident that does not impact the analysis of SO’s actions. Under the circumstances as then faced by SO, no other use of force options were reasonably available for attempted use. The use by SO of his firearm to incapacitate this lethal threat was reasonably necessary. Given the above, the defence available to SO under s. 25 of the Criminal Code would apply.

Conclusion

Under s. 25 of the Criminal Code a police officer is justified in doing what he or she is authorized to do and to use as much force as is reasonably necessary where he or she has reasonable grounds to do so. Force intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm is justified if the officer believes, on reasonable grounds, that the force was necessary to prevent the death or grievous bodily harm of the officer and/or any other person. The analysis under s.34 of the Criminal Code leads to a similar finding that subject officer’s actions were lawfully permitted.

After a thorough, independent and objective investigation into the conduct of the subject officers, it is my opinion that they were lawfully placed and acting properly in the execution of their duties. There is no evidence to support any belief that any officer engaged in any unlawful or unreasonable conduct that would give rise to an offence. The force used was proportionate, necessary and reasonable in all the circumstances.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Alberta requests more control over provincial immigration system

Published on

Alberta is requesting more control over its provincial immigration to address its skilled workforce shortage, including increasing Ukrainian evacuee participation in the job market.

Premier Danielle Smith has written a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau asking him to re-evaluate his government’s decision limiting the number of allocations for Alberta’s provincial nominee program in 2024. Last week, the federal government informed the province it would only receive 9,750 such allotments – which is the same number of allocations Alberta received in 2023 and is less than the 10,140 for 2024 the federal government had originally allocated.

As of February 2024, Alberta accounts for just under 12 per cent of Canada’s population, but it leads the nation in net employment growth, with 42.8 per cent of the country’s employment gains between January and February 2024. By not providing the requested increase to Alberta’s provincial nominee allocations, the federal government is restricting the province’s ability to keep up with its growing labour market demands, especially as it relates to integrating Ukrainian evacuees into Alberta’s job market.

“Alberta is growing and that is good news. Since January 2023, more than 100,000 new jobs have been created in our province and our employment rate has led the country even longer. At the same time, we continue to experience labour shortages that could be resolved by welcoming skilled workers from around the world, including evacuees from Ukraine, many of whom have the exact skills that our job market most needs. Alberta has long been the economic engine of Canada and we are once again requesting Ottawa respect section 95 of the Constitution and let us welcome the skilled individuals we need into our province on our terms.”

Danielle Smith, Premier

With Alberta’s population growth at levels not seen in four decades, Alberta’s Provincial Nominee Program is best placed to address the province’s unique immigration and economic goals.

Part of Alberta’s population growth has resulted from Russia’s invasion in Ukraine on February 24, 2022. Since that time, Alberta has welcomed a significant number of Ukrainian evacuees to the province. While it is anticipated that many will return to Ukraine following the war, Alberta is also expecting a number of families to apply for permanent residency via the Alberta Advantage Immigration Program. An increase in the number of allocations from the federal government would assist these new Albertans to fill positions in the province’s workforce.

“Immigration is key to Alberta’s ability to address labour shortages and to grow our economy. This limitation imposed by the federal government on our provincial nominee program will be a very difficult pill to swallow, not only for businesses that need this skilled labour but also to the many Ukrainian evacuees who have the skills we need and wish to stay permanently in Alberta.”

Muhammad Yaseen, Minister of Immigration and Multiculturalism

Quick facts

  • The federal government through Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada sets provincial immigration nomination limits. It also approves all permanent resident applications.
  • Alberta maximized its 9,750 nomination allocations in 2023, with a total of 10,029 nominations issued within the federal government administrative buffer.

Related information

Continue Reading

Trending

X