Continued failure to consult on uranium exploration a harmful mistake: Mi'kmaw Chiefs
Pictou Landing First Nation Chief Tamara Young said the Mi'kmaq people were neither consulted nor notified when Nova Scotia introduced then passed a bill that opens the province up to potential uranium mining and fracking.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Observer
11 hours ago
- National Observer
Coastal First Nations call on Carney to uphold oil tanker ban
Indigenous leaders on British Columbia's north coast are calling on the federal government to hold out against pressure from Alberta and industry to reverse the west coast oil export ban. On Tuesday, the Coastal First Nations, a group of nine First Nations along the north and central coast of BC and Haida Gwaii, wrote an open letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney. The group urged the government to uphold Bill C-48, known as the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act. Since 2019, this law has prohibited tankers carrying over 12,500 metric tons of crude oil and other oil products from stopping or transferring cargo at any port between the northern tip of Vancouver Island and the Alaska border, which includes Haida Gwaii, the Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound. The act formalizes protections that Indigenous communities and environmentalists have been seeking since the 1970s. It effectively bans crude oil supertankers from one of the world's most pristine cold-water marine ecosystems, home to whale habitats, wild salmon, seabirds and ancient rainforests. Exports through the Juan de Fuca Strait are allowed, meaning the ban has not interfered with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. The controversy comes as Carney said in a recent statement that a new bitumen pipeline to BC's north coast is 'highly, highly likely.' His remark aligns with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and federal Conservative MPs push to lift the tanker ban. Smith has specifically called for faster federal approvals for pipeline projects and an exemption at the Port of Prince Rupert to allow oil exports to Asia. But Marilyn Slett, president of the Coastal First Nations and chief councillor of the Heiltsuk Tribal Council, said oil tankers are a 'non-starter' for her community. 'An oil tanker project is not something we can ever provide consent to,' she said. 'Our communities rely on healthy oceans and ecosystems for our livelihood and culture. Reversing or weakening this legislation would put everything our communities depend on at risk.' Marilyn Slett, president of the Coastal First Nations and chief councillor of the Heiltsuk Tribal Council, said oil tankers are a 'non-starter' for her community. The tanker ban was instituted after more than a decade marked by energetic opposition to pipelines to the West Coast. The Northern Gateway pipeline, first proposed by Enbridge in 2002, was ultimately halted in 2016 after more than 130 First Nations publicly opposed the project and courts ruled that consultations had been inadequate. Slett called the decision a major win for Indigenous rights and protection of coastal areas, and said any new talks should not repeat old mistakes. Marilyn Slett, president of Coastal First Nations and Heiltsuk chief councillor, signs an open letter urging Prime Minister Carney to uphold the north coast oil tanker ban. Indigenous leaders have come out against crude oil tankers but have been more accepting of other types of ships, especially those carrying liquefied natural gas (LNG). By 2030, as many as 600 LNG vessels are expected to pass through their waters — activities accommodated through lengthy engagement and approval processes with communities, said Danielle Shaw, chief councillor of the Wuikinuxv Nation and a board member of the Central Coast Indigenous Resource Alliance. 'We're open to discussing projects that will be sustainable and responsible and can strengthen the economy of Canada and British Columbia,' Shaw said. 'But there's strong opposition to oil tankers on this coast because of the impacts it would have for our communities directly.' Slett noted that with 175 LNG tankers already passing through coastal channels this year and more expected, the impact on the ecosystem is significant. 'This is substantial, and those have cumulative effects on the ecosystem. They are in place and serving as projects for British Columbia and other communities. This [oil tankers] is something we cannot add … it's not something we would support.' The risks from oil spills are considered too great. 'When it comes to allowing oil tankers on our coast, it wouldn't be if something were to happen, it would be when something happens,' Shaw said. Slett criticized the lack of formal consultation regarding renewed pipeline proposals. Bill C-5 was rushed through Parliament in just two weeks, and a meeting between Carney and First Nations leaders from across Canada last week was allotted just a few hours. 'There's been a lot of talk about us without talking to us,' she said. She said she learned about energy proposals through the news rather than direct government engagement. The open letter invites Carney to visit the north coast to see why the tanker moratorium remains vital and to consider how a path forward without an oil pipeline can benefit the region. Slett said her communities prefer discussion and collaboration but remain firm in their opposition. 'Court challenges and direct action would always be a last resort,' she said. 'We've built relationships with provincial and federal partners that we want to maintain, but we won't support new pipelines. The tanker ban must stand.'
Winnipeg Free Press
12 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Nation-building projects and government rules
Opinion The Mark Carney-led liberals were elected for a change. We hoped that the new prime minister, intimate of the titans of finance, was ideally equipped to ride the wave of national outrage (and pride) to provide the leadership to counter the economic assault from our southern neighbours. One of the hallmarks of national leadership is to advance at least some initiatives that are clearly in the national interest but may draw fire from some segments of society. The prime minister would certainly say that Bill C-5, legislation to — among other things — speed up the approval process for 'nation-building' projects, and a companion initiative to identify 'unnecessary' regulation exemplify such leadership. The main criticisms of C-5 have come from First Nations and environmental groups. These concerns have been well articulated, and are now being acted out in court. Although it may change, the fact is that this bill is now the law of the land, and therefore should also be assessed in terms of whether it will in fact achieve its objective of speeding up the approvals process for 'nation-building' projects. Of course the bill begs the question of just what kind of a nation we want to build, or more fundamentally, what kind of a nation we already have. Adopting a national flag, repatriating the constitution, these were nation-building projects, neither of which were capital projects. Bill C-5 is more about capital development. Perhaps the rollout of these 'nation-builders' will revive serious public dialogue about what we are and what we aspire to be. Major undertakings in Canada have to navigate processes that are often five years or more in length. At a time when we will have to construct a coast to coast web of electrical transmission, substantially increase our renewable energy capacity and restructure our economy to counter the U.S. economic onslaught, this is not acceptable. One brake has been government — federal and provincial — that has often been unable produce timely and credible analyses of development proposals. This is partly as a result of a bipartisan failure to allocate sufficient resources to their own environmental institutions, and an institutional mindset that all development is good. Proponents regularly bellyache about 'red tape' but often produce incomplete or scientifically deficient assessments of their own projects, resulting in time consuming do-overs. Most major projects involve both federal and provincial governments. Duplication and overlap is inevitable. In addition, the federal environmental assessment process has been used as a lever to require, as part of federal sign-off, approval of factors that lie outside Ottawa's jurisdiction. And then there's consultation. Governments have not imposed discipline on this aspect of project approvals and this can result in a process lacking temporal and financial boundaries. This is not to say this is bad (or good), but simply that consultation is one of the factors contributing to the length of process that Ottawa wants to accelerate. So, does Bill C-5 address the previous process friction sufficiently to ensure major project reviews conclude in two years? That depends. Assuming that the objective is to still produce quality project assessments, just faster, then If Ottawa and the provinces are prepared to adequately fund their review infrastructure; if governments are able to harmonize their review processes; if proponents are given clear objectives their own project analysis must meet, and the consequences of failing to meet them; and if governments are prepared to define when consultation is considered complete — then perhaps speed up can be achieved. Nothing in the legislation, however, guarantees this result. Continuing his lurch to the right, the PM has initiated a search for 'unnecessary' regulations that prevent or hamper good things from happening. You may remember our late, lamented provincial government set about this quest with great fanfare. The result? Absolutely nothing. Regulations pass through a rigorous enough process to ensure that, at least at the time, their benefits exceeded their cost. Of course, some regulations no longer serve the public interest as the conditions that spawned them have changed. A periodic review to ensure that we weed out such anachronisms makes sense and in fact does routinely occur. Regulatory reviews — and there have been many over the years — tend to focus on possible negative effects on business. Let's hope the PM — an ultimate high finance insider — does not lighten the 'burden' of business regulation at the expense of the public welfare. 'Approving development projects takes way too long, red tape is hamstringing business and it's harming our economy.' Sound familiar? This was the refrain of the Harper government and Conservative governments across the country. Now, perhaps the PM's current initiatives are more pragmatic and not ideology driven, simply a necessity in the face of a dire threat. We rejected Pierre Polievre; let's hope we didn't get him anyway. Norman Brandson is the former deputy minister of the Manitoba departments of environment, conservation and water stewardship.
Vancouver Sun
18 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Opinion: Turning the tide for southern resident killer whales
A new political era is unfolding in Canada, characterized by a push for expedited development approvals through the Building Canada Act under Bill C-5. This legislation empowers the federal cabinet to approve projects deemed to serve the national interest, overriding environmental reviews and the permitting procedure. While this may expedite new development, it poses an urgent question: Will safeguarding coastal ecosystems and endangered species like southern resident killer whales receive equal urgency? The whales are perilously close to extinction. At 73 individuals, their decline since being listed as endangered two decades ago is unfolding in plain sight of scientists, governments, First Nations and the public, despite mounting science on how to reverse it. A daily roundup of Opinion pieces from the Sun and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Informed Opinion will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. These whales aren't interchangeable with other killer whales. Southern residents are a distinct population that have been separated from other whales for hundreds of generations. They have rich cultural traditions, strong social bonds, share their prey and use calls not shared by any other killer whales. To lose them wouldn't only entail the loss of a genetically unique population, but also a lineage of culture and knowledge deeply intertwined with our coastal ecosystem. In 2018, the government of Canada declined to issue an emergency order under the Species at Risk Act, opting instead for a series of alternative conservation measures. Subsequently, annual protection measures were implemented, but many were limited in scope, voluntary or weakly enforced. In 2025, despite a federal assessment confirming the population wasn't recovering and remained at risk of imminent extinction, a second emergency order request was once again denied. In June, the Canadian government announced its 2025 protection measures for southern resident killer whales. Although well-intentioned, the measures largely mirror previous ones: fishing closures in designated areas, vessel-restricted zones, voluntary vessel slowdowns and a proposed increase in the minimum distance vessels must maintain from the whales. In March, we invited 31 scientists from Canada, the U.S., and Europe to Vancouver to address a critical question: What would it take to save this population? The result was a science-based set of 26 recommendations, some new, others improvements to existing actions. The list is solidly grounded in evidence and bolstered by expert consensus. The full workshop report, Strengthening recovery actions for Southern Resident killer whales, was released earlier this month and is publicly available at All the recommendations could be implemented now, without waiting for further research. The full workshop report is publicly available at All the recommendations could be implemented now, without waiting for further research. Consider chinook salmon. Southern residents depend on chinook that are large and high fat. While many salmon runs have declined, what is particularly problematic is that there has been a shift from runs once abundant with big, fatty chinook in the spring, to fall runs often comprising smaller, leaner individuals — a shift that has been exacerbated by hatcheries. We recommend maintaining fishery closures that prioritize the whales' access to their important salmon. One way to do this is to shift fishing effort to locations near or in rivers. This would give southern residents a better chance to feed before those salmon are targeted by fishermen. Reducing underwater noise is also urgent. Southern residents rely on echolocation to find their prey, and the vessel noise that currently saturates their habitat greatly reduces the rate at which they can find fish. The Port of Vancouver's ECHO program has undertaken substantial work to identify plausible noise reduction targets. Our panel of scientists recommended making those targets biologically relevant by accounting for the whales' need for quiet time, communication and foraging. Expanding the geographic and seasonal scope of ship slowdowns, adopting noise output standards for commercial vessels and requiring clear noise-reduction plans for future development projects are among the other steps needed. Contaminants, though less visible, remain a chronic threat. Southern residents remain among the Earth's most polluted marine mammals. We urged stronger source controls, green infrastructure to reduce urban run-off, accelerated phaseouts for banned chemicals and an overhaul of Canada's chemical review system to account for risks posed to long-lived species like killer whales and their prey. Southern resident killer whales have transcended their status as symbols of the Pacific Northwest, becoming ecological sentinels that serve as a warning about the health of our coast, our fisheries and our collective stewardship. Although recovery is still within reach, it will not be achieved by perpetuating the status quo. With the recent appointment of new federal government ministers in place, now is the time for them to demonstrate leadership by prioritizing the conservation of southern residents. The new government has a responsibility to act, and now it has the information needed to do so effectively. Lance Barrett-Lennard and Valeria Vergara are cetacean scientists with the Raincoast Conservation Foundation. Misty MacDuffee is a salmon scientist with Raincoast. Paul Paquet is a senior scientist with Raincoast.
