Latest news with #AssemblyofFirstNations
Calgary Herald
a day ago
- Politics
- Calgary Herald
Liberals could find out soon whether their rushed projects bill will spark another Idle No More
If Liberal MPs experience the 'long hot summer' of protest that some Aboriginal activist groups have promised in response to the federal government's new major-projects legislation, they won't be feeling that heat anywhere close to Parliament Hill. Article content Politicians were already starting to flee Ottawa, off to their home ridings or vacations for the summer break, before Bill C-5 received its rubber stamp from the Senate and royal assent on June 26. They left behind what could be a ticking time bomb: the Building Canada Act, allowing the federal cabinet to fast-track major infrastructure projects by identifying them as being in the 'national interest' and bypassing the normal conditions and approval rules. Article content Article content How to define 'national interest' is shaping up to be an explosive question. The Liberal government, the Conservative Opposition and most business groups see the new law as a major step forward in allowing Canada to build badly needed projects, especially in mining, oil and gas, to improve lagging competitiveness. The legislation is at least in part a response to American tariffs that threaten much of the national economy, and a backlash to years of what seemed like paralysis in getting government approvals under the Trudeau government. Article content Article content Aboriginal groups are less sure. Some are eager to see more economic growth too, but virtually all agree they need to be properly consulted and treated as partners when a project infringes on their land or their rights. Certain factions objected to the bill before it was passed, and are digging in for a fight. Some are predicting the revival of the 2014 Idle No More Indigenous protests. That movement led to flash mobs and blockades of critical rail lines and highways over the then Conservative government's attempt roll back environmental regulations. Article content Article content 'Nothing's off the table,' said Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak, National Chief for the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), referring to options for resistance. Asked if Indigenous activists might rise up forcefully against the bill, she said, 'I wouldn't blame them.' Article content Article content The legislation has been criticized, including by pro-development advocates, for giving the federal government too much power and discretion — to hurry along projects the cabinet considers important, while leaving behind unfavoured projects. And the Carney government has been trying to convince Aboriginal groups that the legislation in fact includes sufficient provisions to protect their rights, even as it rushed the bill through. It agreed to remove from the bill the initial power for cabinet to override the Indian Act, but the Senate declined to heed appeals from Indigenous representatives to slow the bill for more study, as the government aggressively pushed it through in time for summer. Article content The question to be answered now is whether the government has done enough to assure Aboriginal groups, or if Canada is weeks away from that 'long, hot summer' of protests. What everyone agrees is that an ugly struggle could shatter years of steady progress in the relationships between governments and Indigenous Canadians, while spooking project backers and delaying critical infrastructure projects. Article content As Prime Minister Mark Carney suggested last week on a visit to Calgary, he can only approve an oil pipeline if a private company is willing to try proposing one. The government has the power to promote a project, but 'the private sector is going to drive it,' he told Postmedia. Article content Interviewed last month after her appearance before the Senate in which she pressed senators to slow the bill, Woodhouse Nepinak said the legislation was 'rammed through' without reasonable Indigenous consultation. She questioned why a bill backing more pipelines, ports and other projects gets passed in just weeks, while infrastructure needs on Indigenous reserves, such as schools, connectivity and clean water, have lingered for decades. Article content Article content Alvin Fiddler, the Grand Chief of Nishnawbe Aski Nation, which represents 51 First Nations communities in northern Ontario, has already said the legislation in Ottawa, as well as similar bills in Ontario and British Columbia, has decimated the trust that had been growing in recent years between those governments and Aboriginal communities. Article content After seeing progress improving life on remote reserves, and a more respectful tone from Ottawa, he said 'Canada is going backwards' with the new law. Article content The Nishnawbe Aski Nation says its land covers about two-thirds of Ontario, including the mineral-rich Ring of Fire area in the northwestern part of the province. That area is often mentioned as a leading candidate to be the site of a big project that could get fast-tracked. But Fiddler has warned that a resistance movement will only unnerve mining investors. Article content Article content Ontario's Ring of Fire and Alberta's oil sands are typically held up as two of the resource bounties that have been held back, or even thwarted, for years under the Trudeau government, whose attitude toward developing resources and infrastructure ranged at times from uninterested to hostile. The story of then environment minister Steven Guilbeault ordering a federal assessment of a planned Ontario highway because of a frog habitat served as a vivid exemplification of the atmosphere: it took a costly, time-consuming court battle to slap back another attempt by the federal government to overreach into provincial jurisdiction. Article content Plenty of economists agree that Canada needs to export its natural resources, as well as manufactured goods, as easily and efficiently as possible to reach its economic potential. But in many cases, those needed roads, rail lines, ports and pipelines don't exist, or they're antiquated and unable to compete, leaving resources in the ground and money and jobs in both native and non-native communities on the table. Article content The key to the new legislation, the Carney government maintains, is that it will reduce the process time for big projects that can meet all the necessary safety and environmental standards by reducing red tape, namely the assessments, challenges and overlapping regulations. So, in other words, all the regulatory effects without the regulatory runaround that Canada's system was infamous for. Article content 'Canadian jobs are at risk. Canadians' livelihoods are at risk and, quite frankly, the prosperity of the country is at risk,' Tim Hodgson, the federal natural resources and energy minister, said earlier this month. 'We need to do things that we have not done in a long time, in time frames we have not done since the end of World War Two.' Article content A lot of Indigenous leaders agree with the urgency of powering up the economy. Article content David Chartrand, president of the Manitoba Metis Federation, told the Senate that he supports the legislation because the tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump threaten the Canadian economy, which would cause hardship for his people. 'We stand with you,' he said. Article content Article content Natan Obed, president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, said he's concerned about the legislation's ability to limit native rights but he's also hopeful that big projects could be very good for Far North communities. 'There's an incredible opportunity to really become an Arctic nation,' Obed said. Article content Whatever acrimony has erupted over the legislation obscures the improved relations between Indigenous groups and Canadian governments, said Shannon Joseph, chair of Energy for a Secure Future, a non-partisan group that focuses on energy policy. Article content One of the recent trends that had helped improve the relationship is the increase in the number of natural resources projects where Aboriginal communities have taken equity stakes, aided at times by government loan guarantee programs. Article content 'Indigenous peoples are at the heart of this (process),' Joseph said. Article content Article content Carney is now going to great lengths to show that he sees things that way too, emphasizing that Ottawa won't deem projects to be in the national interest without first consulting with affected Aboriginal communities. The new office responsible for advancing big projects will include an Indigenous advisory council that he said will be responsible for ensuring that Aboriginal rights are respected. Article content After the federal bill was passed in Parliament, however, Carney acknowledged that there's more work to be done and said that he plans to begin consultations with Indigenous groups July 17. Article content 'The first thing we will do to launch the implementation of this legislation in the right way is through full-day summits,' Carney said a week before the bill was passed. Article content The federal legislation has company in its intent and controversy: Recent bills have also passed in Ontario and British Columbia that were designed to fast-track major projects. And both were criticized for inadequate consultation with First Nations. Ontario Premier Doug Ford made things worse when he opened old wounds around trust and paternalism when he boosted his provincial bill by arguing that Aboriginal communities can't expect to continue to get economic support if they don't support the infrastructure projects that the economy needs.
Edmonton Journal
a day ago
- Politics
- Edmonton Journal
Liberals could find out soon whether their rushed projects bill will spark another Idle No More
Article content If Liberal MPs experience the 'long hot summer' of protest that some Aboriginal activist groups have promised in response to the federal government's new major-projects legislation, they won't be feeling that heat anywhere close to Parliament Hill. Article content Politicians were already starting to flee Ottawa, off to their home ridings or vacations for the summer break, before Bill C-5 received its rubber stamp from the Senate and royal assent on June 26. They left behind what could be a ticking time bomb: the Building Canada Act, allowing the federal cabinet to fast-track major infrastructure projects by identifying them as being in the 'national interest' and bypassing the normal conditions and approval rules. Article content Article content Article content How to define 'national interest' is shaping up to be an explosive question. The Liberal government, the Conservative Opposition and most business groups see the new law as a major step forward in allowing Canada to build badly needed projects, especially in mining, oil and gas, to improve lagging competitiveness. The legislation is at least in part a response to American tariffs that threaten much of the national economy, and a backlash to years of what seemed like paralysis in getting government approvals under the Trudeau government. Article content Article content Aboriginal groups are less sure. Some are eager to see more economic growth too, but virtually all agree they need to be properly consulted and treated as partners when a project infringes on their land or their rights. Certain factions objected to the bill before it was passed, and are digging in for a fight. Some are predicting the revival of the 2014 Idle No More Indigenous protests. That movement led to flash mobs and blockades of critical rail lines and highways over the then Conservative government's attempt roll back environmental regulations. Article content Article content 'Nothing's off the table,' said Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak, National Chief for the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), referring to options for resistance. Asked if Indigenous activists might rise up forcefully against the bill, she said, 'I wouldn't blame them.' Article content Article content The legislation has been criticized, including by pro-development advocates, for giving the federal government too much power and discretion — to hurry along projects the cabinet considers important, while leaving behind unfavoured projects. And the Carney government has been trying to convince Aboriginal groups that the legislation in fact includes sufficient provisions to protect their rights, even as it rushed the bill through. It agreed to remove from the bill the initial power for cabinet to override the Indian Act, but the Senate declined to heed appeals from Indigenous representatives to slow the bill for more study, as the government aggressively pushed it through in time for summer. Article content The question to be answered now is whether the government has done enough to assure Aboriginal groups, or if Canada is weeks away from that 'long, hot summer' of protests. What everyone agrees is that an ugly struggle could shatter years of steady progress in the relationships between governments and Indigenous Canadians, while spooking project backers and delaying critical infrastructure projects. Article content As Prime Minister Mark Carney suggested last week on a visit to Calgary, he can only approve an oil pipeline if a private company is willing to try proposing one. The government has the power to promote a project, but 'the private sector is going to drive it,' he told Postmedia. Article content Interviewed last month after her appearance before the Senate in which she pressed senators to slow the bill, Woodhouse Nepinak said the legislation was 'rammed through' without reasonable Indigenous consultation. She questioned why a bill backing more pipelines, ports and other projects gets passed in just weeks, while infrastructure needs on Indigenous reserves, such as schools, connectivity and clean water, have lingered for decades. Article content Article content Alvin Fiddler, the Grand Chief of Nishnawbe Aski Nation, which represents 51 First Nations communities in northern Ontario, has already said the legislation in Ottawa, as well as similar bills in Ontario and British Columbia, has decimated the trust that had been growing in recent years between those governments and Aboriginal communities. Article content After seeing progress improving life on remote reserves, and a more respectful tone from Ottawa, he said 'Canada is going backwards' with the new law. Article content The Nishnawbe Aski Nation says its land covers about two-thirds of Ontario, including the mineral-rich Ring of Fire area in the northwestern part of the province. That area is often mentioned as a leading candidate to be the site of a big project that could get fast-tracked. But Fiddler has warned that a resistance movement will only unnerve mining investors. Article content Article content Ontario's Ring of Fire and Alberta's oil sands are typically held up as two of the resource bounties that have been held back, or even thwarted, for years under the Trudeau government, whose attitude toward developing resources and infrastructure ranged at times from uninterested to hostile. The story of then environment minister Steven Guilbeault ordering a federal assessment of a planned Ontario highway because of a frog habitat served as a vivid exemplification of the atmosphere: it took a costly, time-consuming court battle to slap back another attempt by the federal government to overreach into provincial jurisdiction. Article content Plenty of economists agree that Canada needs to export its natural resources, as well as manufactured goods, as easily and efficiently as possible to reach its economic potential. But in many cases, those needed roads, rail lines, ports and pipelines don't exist, or they're antiquated and unable to compete, leaving resources in the ground and money and jobs in both native and non-native communities on the table. Article content The key to the new legislation, the Carney government maintains, is that it will reduce the process time for big projects that can meet all the necessary safety and environmental standards by reducing red tape, namely the assessments, challenges and overlapping regulations. So, in other words, all the regulatory effects without the regulatory runaround that Canada's system was infamous for. Article content 'Canadian jobs are at risk. Canadians' livelihoods are at risk and, quite frankly, the prosperity of the country is at risk,' Tim Hodgson, the federal natural resources and energy minister, said earlier this month. 'We need to do things that we have not done in a long time, in time frames we have not done since the end of World War Two.' Article content A lot of Indigenous leaders agree with the urgency of powering up the economy. Article content David Chartrand, president of the Manitoba Metis Federation, told the Senate that he supports the legislation because the tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump threaten the Canadian economy, which would cause hardship for his people. 'We stand with you,' he said. Article content Article content Natan Obed, president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, said he's concerned about the legislation's ability to limit native rights but he's also hopeful that big projects could be very good for Far North communities. 'There's an incredible opportunity to really become an Arctic nation,' Obed said. Article content Article content Whatever acrimony has erupted over the legislation obscures the improved relations between Indigenous groups and Canadian governments, said Shannon Joseph, chair of Energy for a Secure Future, a non-partisan group that focuses on energy policy. Article content One of the recent trends that had helped improve the relationship is the increase in the number of natural resources projects where Aboriginal communities have taken equity stakes, aided at times by government loan guarantee programs. Article content 'Indigenous peoples are at the heart of this (process),' Joseph said. Article content Article content Carney is now going to great lengths to show that he sees things that way too, emphasizing that Ottawa won't deem projects to be in the national interest without first consulting with affected Aboriginal communities. The new office responsible for advancing big projects will include an Indigenous advisory council that he said will be responsible for ensuring that Aboriginal rights are respected. Article content After the federal bill was passed in Parliament, however, Carney acknowledged that there's more work to be done and said that he plans to begin consultations with Indigenous groups July 17. Article content 'The first thing we will do to launch the implementation of this legislation in the right way is through full-day summits,' Carney said a week before the bill was passed. Article content The federal legislation has company in its intent and controversy: Recent bills have also passed in Ontario and British Columbia that were designed to fast-track major projects. And both were criticized for inadequate consultation with First Nations. Ontario Premier Doug Ford made things worse when he opened old wounds around trust and paternalism when he boosted his provincial bill by arguing that Aboriginal communities can't expect to continue to get economic support if they don't support the infrastructure projects that the economy needs.
Yahoo
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
First Nations opposition to Bill C-5 draws comparisons to Idle No More movement
As more First Nations voice opposition to Bill C-5, some are drawing comparisons to the 2012 Idle No More movement. Hayden King, executive director of the Yellowhead Institute, an Indigenous-led research and education centre at Toronto Metropolitan University, said both the speed with which it was passed and ideas in the bill remind him of former prime minister Stephen Harper's omnibus bill that helped create the Idle No More movement. "It was trying to do the very same thing, right? It was trying to fast-track resource development and it got pushed back and it got resistance," said King, who is Anishinaabe from Beausoleil First Nation in Ontario. "And as basically [Prime Minister Mark] Carney's first act, he's taken up that mantle to really drive and push that extractive resource development." Passed into law last week, Bill C-5 aims to remove interprovincial trade barriers while another, more controversial, part of the law aims to speed up projects of national interest, including energy development projects, by allowing special "designated projects" to bypass some federal laws. "We're talking about species at risk laws, Fisheries Act, and I think importantly for Indigenous people, we're talking about… the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act," King said. Under the Impact Assessment Act, Indigenous people must be consulted and Indigenous knowledge and rights — and impacts on those rights — should be considered during a project's assessment. Each of these laws outline what consultation should look like, King added, so without them, communities are unsure how much they will be consulted. The federal government has said that Indigenous Peoples will be consulted during the process of choosing the projects to be designated and the review process for projects chosen will include further consultations with those potentially impacted by them. The federal government has also announced a series of "summits" that will take place over the summer with First Nations, Inuit and Métis. A statement from the Assembly of First Nations said it would be holding a virtual forum with chiefs on July 10 to discuss amendments made to Bill C-5, ahead of the prime minister's planned meeting with First Nations on July 17. National Chief Cindy Woodhouse's statement also thanked Mi'kmaw Sen. Paul Prosper who proposed an amendment last week to have free, prior, and informed consent included in the bill, though it was voted down. Many Indigenous communities and groups have put out statements outlining their concerns with the bill, in addition to demonstrations and other actions like a letter-writing campaign. Earlier this month, the Chiefs of Ontario released a statement saying that the bill was being pushed through Parliament "at an unprecedented speed." In the same statement, Temagami Chief Shelly Moore-Frappier said "this bill is about exercising power over the First Peoples and our lands and resources." Multiple nations in Alberta have also released statements, including Samson Cree Nation which called C-5 the "No Indigenous Rights" bill, adding that it cannot be used to bypass the need for free, prior and informed consent on projects. Similarly, Assembly of First Nations Québec-Labrador said the federal government chose confrontation rather than co-operation in its approach to passing the bill, and said it did "nothing about climate, biodiversity or a just transition." Idle No More Ontario, a grassroots group, called C-5 and similar provincial bills a betrayal of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and treaty obligations "In terms of respecting Indigenous rights, respecting Indigenous sovereignty, respecting Indigenous peoples jurisdiction — certainly to say no to unwelcome development in their territory — none of these pieces of legislation make any space for that," King said. John Desjarlais, executive director of the Indigenous Resource Network, an organization that advocates for workers, business owners and communities who support Indigenous inclusion in the natural resources sector, said he doesn't see anything in the bill that is "designed to bypass rights." Rather, he said, the bill is an opportunity to respond to world forces while respecting constitutionally protected rights. "We've never seen… government so willing and able to get to the table," Desjarlais said. Desjarlais said he's heard signals from the government that Indigenous equity and ownership of infrastructure projects will be outcomes of the bill. "There's a strong assurance there, which means that these communities can use these source revenues to to self-determine and to reinvest in their communities on their terms," he said. In light of the many statements brought forward by First Nations groups, Desjarlais said, "I err on the side of that maybe there wasn't enough [consultation]." "It's always a challenge to determine what's an appropriate level of consultation." Because of historical circumstances where projects were pursued without proper or adequate consultation of Indigenous rights holders, Desjarlais said, the current approval system has become risk averse with many sets of approvals to go through. "But this is where it becomes a little burdensome, layer upon layer upon layer," he said. The government has said the goal of the bill is to speed up the approvals process so that projects can complete federal review in under two years. Desjarlais said when projects reach a point where "we know 90 per cent of what we need to know" then more consultation only slows down the process. At that point, he said, it's OK for projects to move forward and then adapt later if needs arise.
Time of India
01-07-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Trade Minister Freeland announces removal of 53 federal trade barriers as Canada moves toward 'one united economy' under Carney's vision
Canada removed federal trade barriers. Chrystia Freeland announced the removal of 53 exemptions under the Canadian Free Trade Agreement. This followed the One Canadian Economy Act. The move aims to unite Canada's economy. It reduces reliance on the US amid trade disputes. Provincial exemptions remain for now. Industry groups support the modernization. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads One Canadian economy Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What changed, and what hasn't Bill C‑5 Internal Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland stated that Ottawa has removed all 53 federal exemptions under the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) in a landmark move announced on June 30, carve-outs, known as 'exceptions,' gave preferential treatment in federal procurement to certain sectors such as finance, commercial land development, transportation services, and space projects, but also blocked companies from doing business across provincial borders.'Removal of all federal exceptions in the Canadian Free Trade Agreement is one of the many recent measures we are taking, following the passing of the One Canadian Economy Act , to eliminate internal trade barriers and cut red tape for Canadian businesses,' Freeland said in the announcement comes just one day before Canada Day, fulfilling Prime Minister Mark Carney 's commitment to finish this work by July 1. Carney, who campaigned on uniting Canada's 13 provinces and territories into 'one Canadian economy', immediately hailed this as a victory in a broader strategy to reduce Canada's reliance on the US amid ongoing trade exemptions lifted were federal-only issues, such as procurement rules that gave Ottawa bias. Provincial exemptions remain in place, including in areas like dairy, alcohol, and licensing laws. Provinces and territories are scheduled to review and remove their exceptions, with updates expected at a special Committee on Internal Trade meeting on July announcement follows the June 20 passage of Bill C‑5, known as the One Canadian Economy Act, which received royal assent on June 26. The bill has two parts, one codifies the elimination of federal trade and labour restrictions; the other fast‑tracks large national projects deemed in the national groups, including the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, support the move, calling it a long‑overdue modernization. But critics raise flags. The Assembly of First Nations and environmental groups worry the new Building Canada Act, part of Bill C‑5, could override provincial, Indigenous, and environmental laws in pursuit of 'national interest' megaprojects.
National Observer
26-06-2025
- Business
- National Observer
National chief wants senators to slow down major projects bill, as senator collapses
The national chief of the Assembly of First Nations is calling on senators to slow down Ottawa's sprint to pass Prime Minister Mark Carney 's controversial major projects bill this week. Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak said Wednesday she hopes the Senate "does the right thing this week" and allows more time to study the legislation and bring forward amendments — a call that went largely unanswered when she issued it to MPs. The legislation was introduced in the upper chamber on Wednesday and the Senate completed second reading, after the bill was fast-tracked through the House of Commons and went through a rare pre-study by the Senate. A programming motion adopted by the chamber fixes the bill to a tight schedule, with a final vote that must take place by the end of Friday. The politically charged legislation has angered Indigenous and environmental groups who criticize the government for rushing to grant itself sweeping new powers to fast-track project permits. But Carney has said Canada is facing an economic crisis due to the trade war with the United States and the country urgently needs to approve new "nation-building" projects. Senate debate on the bill was suspended for roughly 30 minutes by Speaker Raymonde Gagné after Sen. Patrick Brazeau collapsed sideways onto the floor after rising to speak. A Senate spokesman said the Quebec senator appears to be recovering. Before collapsing, Brazeau questioned the value of the government holding consultations after the legislation passes with national Indigenous organizations, given they all receive funding from Ottawa. He said they are largely seen not to speak on behalf of rights-holding individuals and communities. "They are political lobby organizations," Brazeau said. "Is that really helping the process for real First Nations in this country?" The projects bill found broad support in the Commons, where the Conservatives voted with the Liberals to pass it at third reading. It succeeded by a margin of 306 votes to 31 on June 20, with one Liberal MP voting against it. Sen. Paul Prosper said in an interview Tuesday night that the bill is moving too quickly through Parliament, and it needs to better reflect concerns raised by Indigenous groups who fear that accelerated project approvals will push aside their rights. He has vowed to try to amend the bill but was not ready to say how. 'The overall objective of the bill, I'm sure a lot of people resonate with that and see the need for it," Prosper said. "But does it have to be within this prescribed and shortened timeline when you're not following the typical democratic process to consider something like this? "There are some overarching provisions that allow the government to suspend existing laws and legislation, which is an extraordinary power in that regard. So there might be a need for some parameters to help ensure certain considerations with respect to the environment, and which are integral to ensure Indigenous issues are taken into account." Conservative Senate Leader Leo Housakos said the bill is crucial for Canada's economic potential, but said the government has failed to provide enough details to measure the legislation's economic impact. Meanwhile, Gagné rejected a request from Sen. Marilou McPhedran to split the bill into separate votes, which theoretically would have allowed senators to pass some parts of the legislation while rejecting others. Gagné said this did not fit Senate protocol for final votes on a bill. Woodhouse Nepinak pointed out that the concept of "free, prior and informed consent" — a condition of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that Canada approved — is not mentioned in the bill itself, despite Carney and his ministers saying they'll consult with Indigenous Peoples. She said she's also worried about the Indigenous Advisory Council the government wants to insert into the projects' approval process. She said the government can't use that body to claim it consulted with First Nations because that consultation wouldn't take into account the varied positions of leaders across the country. "An advisory council appointed by the government will not be accountable to First Nations and will have no real power to ensure First Nations involvement in the project," she said. Conservative Sen. Mary Jane McCallum of northern Manitoba argued there is no need for the bill. "Resource extraction industries have already been granted the power to continue to do catastrophic harm to pollute and to destroy," she said. "As First Nations, we have been sacrificed for the greater good all our lives."
