Latest news with #environmentalassessments
CBC
7 days ago
- Politics
- CBC
Why Danielle Smith has eased off the 'Kill Bill C-69' language in the Carney era
Premier Danielle Smith wasn't doing anything politically revolutionary when she demanded the repeal of Ottawa's environmental assessments act during the federal election campaign. Then she demanded it again, many times, when the Conservatives who promised to do so lost and the Mark Carney Liberals won. It was a longstanding, years-old cry from Alberta leaders, ever since the moment that the Trudeau-era Bill C-69 — what former premier Jason Kenney dubbed the "no more pipelines act" — was first passed in 2019 (and became repealable). Then, a few weeks ago, Smith's tune began to change about the legislation that has been strongly contested by energy companies. Her rhetoric softened from urging the guillotine to a blade with more precision on the law now known as the Impact Assessment Act (IAA). Some revisions Since June, she's thrown in alternative recommendations. They include: " overhauling" in a June 17 comment; " substantially revised" in a July 2 reply to a reporter; and " repealing or amending" in a July 7 joint press conference with Ontario's premier — and the same dual-option language at Tuesday's announcement at the premier's summit. Smith put some rationale behind her refined stance in a mid-June interview on Rosemary Barton Live, when she expressed support for Carney's major bill to expedite project approvals, but reiterated her hopes he'd still address the IAA. "Let's be practical: the federal government has jurisdiction for linear projects that go cross-border … whether it's pipeline or whether it's transmission lines but … there's measures that they've put into the bill that are not technical, that are ideological and that don't really have any measurables around them and create confusion," Smith said. "So that's part of the reason why C-69 needs to be substantially revised." But Smith didn't explain her shift in tone that day, or otherwise. It was a quiet pivot after years of a provincial fight for the outright demise of legislation that became so notorious that protestors made Quentin Tarantino-style posters demanding "Kill Bill C-69." When asked about the moderated message, the premier's office wouldn't say there's been a change from her past language. But the revised tone that observers have noticed could be Alberta's premier offering a spirit of greater compromise, in line with Carney's own different direction than his Liberal predecessor Justin Trudeau. It could also be a reflection that the oil and gas companies don't actually want the Impact Assessment Act swept off the books. When the coalition of energy CEOs issued a "Build Canada now" open letter during the election campaign, it instead called on the IAA to be "overhauled and simplified." As much as the oil sector dislikes the federal law, businesses' opposition to full repeal boils down to this: scrapping the IAA means there's no environmental assessment law, and Parliament must start all over again. And if there's one thing the oil industry dislikes, it's uncertainty, said Heather Exner-Pirot, a senior fellow of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute think-tank. "From the industry's perspective, that could much more likely be a nightmare than be a smooth path toward clarity on regulation," she said. "Everyone hates the idea of just going back and forth with a whole new federal environment assessment process after every election or after every government." Industry would prefer amendments that keep the basic system in place but alter the "project list" to remove from federal scrutiny proposed mines and resource developments wholly situated within provincial jurisdiction, said Exner-Pirot, who is also a special adviser to the Business Council of Canada. She believes the Smith government's harder stance was "for obviously political reasons," but that may also account for recently easing it. "I think they believe [Energy Minister Tim] Hodgson and Carney and they're giving them some extra leash." While the Carney government's new Building Canada Act would let the federal government bypass some review processes for projects deemed to be "nation-building," that has not eased the pressure it's faced to further neutralize the IAA. The Liberal government already did so last year, amending the bill to bring it into compliance with a Supreme Court ruling that found the bill unconstitutional — a court victory for Alberta after the province challenged the bill. Smith laid out several demands for further amendments to the IAA in a letter last October to Trudeau, and a month later Alberta brought another court challenge to strike down the updated law. In an email to CBC News, Smith spokesman Sam Blackett referred to the premier's letter last fall and said she "has consistently called for the repeal or significant overhaul of [the] federal Liberal government's bad laws," including C-69. The IAA aside, Alberta's premier has continued to demand straight repeal of other federal laws or policies, including the West Coast tanker ban and the carbon emissions cap on the oil and gas sector. Smith has said she's hoping for such changes when Parliament returns this fall from summer recess, and that it could help cool Albertans' lingering frustrations with Ottawa, as well as separatist sentiment. A brighter assessment The Carney government has not indicated it's about to significantly weaken existing climate and energy policies. Asked about potential IAA reforms, a federal spokesperson said the recently passed Bill C-5 will expedite "projects of national significance," and that Ottawa wants to strike deals to recognize provincial or Indigenous-led assessments as substitutes for federal ones. "Canadians know that we don't have to choose between rigorous impact assessments and building projects in our national interest — we can do both," said Keean Nembhard, press secretary to Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin, in an email. Were there to be additional revisions to the federal assessment act, that could provoke further pushback from the environmental and Indigenous groups the IAA was initially designed to cater to, with its enhancements to the review and consulting processes. There could be some concessions to Alberta, said Martin Olszynski, a University of Calgary law professor who was co-counsel for WWF Canada as intervenor in Alberta's IAA court challenge. And that might help explain Smith's call for amendments instead of repeal. "Symbolic pandering to your base apparently has limits when there are potentially concrete policy gains on the table," Olszynski told CBC News. Discarding the IAA remained part of federal Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre's election platform this spring, and it's still in his rhetorical repertoire. Earlier this month, he told CBC Radio's The House he wants "the full repeal of C-69, the anti-pipeline and anti-energy law." Former oilsands executive Richard Masson deems the current law largely a failure at helping build anything. According to a recent analysis by the law firm Torys, no major project has been approved yet though the IAA process other than the Cedar LNG project, whose review was mostly done through British Columbia's provincial assessment process, substituting for the work of the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada. A spokesperson for the federal agency told CBC News that the 2024 amendments have narrowed the scope of the act, and that the agency has been "doing things differently to ensure all projects can be assessed in two years moving forward" — in line with a Liberal campaign promise. Despite his criticism, Masson agrees that scrapping the IAA runs counter to industry wishes to ensure predictability and avoid disruption. He credits Smith for finding a more nuanced position than before. "It's an example of figuring out what's possible, what has a chance of success," says Masson, an executive fellow at the University of Calgary School of Public Policy. "Otherwise we're just going to disappoint a lot of people pushing for something that can't be achieved." It's not, however, clear that substantial revision is in the cards either, for the bill that's long been disdained by Alberta political and business leaders alike. But now, at least, the oil executives and the pro-oil premier who champions them are singing the same tune.
Irish Times
22-07-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Government to prioritise infrastructure delivery as it unveils €200bn National Development Plan
Exemptions to some environmental assessments and a planning fast track for key national infrastructure are measures being studied by the Government as it bids to accelerate project delivery. The Cabinet committee on infrastructure was briefed last week on a review of blockages to delivery of projects and told that, while common-law jurisdictions are being hit hard by delays to infrastructure projects, Ireland is especially vulnerable due to the slow pace of the civil legal system here. As part of the review, reforms introduced in other countries are being examined, with the Government considering whether legislative steps are needed here. This comes as the Coalition prepares to unveil its €200 billion National Development Plan (NDP), which was agreed on Monday night when the funding allocation for the Department of Housing was signed off. READ MORE Officials are assessing legislative reforms undertaken in other common-law jurisdictions. The committee was told the California Environmental Quality Act essentially exempts developments on brownfield sites from certain environmental assessments. The committee heard Canada's One Canada Act enables the fast-tracking of infrastructure deemed to be of national importance. Infrastructure delivery is a priority for the Government as it seeks to tackle damaging shortfalls in housing in particular. Tánaiste Simon Harris recently told Fine Gael members that 'new ways' to better deliver infrastructure are needed, with the current process 'taking too long and causing significant problems for the economy and society'. It is understood that a presentation to the committee from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform outlined changes made in the UK's planning and infrastructure bill, as well as reforms introduced in New Zealand and Australia. The committee was told that infrastructure delivery in Ireland is being held back by complex regulatory frameworks that in turn contribute to an increase in High Court judicial reviews, place a burden on the courts and contribute to uncertainty. All of this drives up costs and can lead to years-long delays. Meanwhile, co-ordination between regulators is lacking and there is duplication between processes, Ministers were told. They were also briefed on issues in procurement, State co-ordination and funding. [ Ireland's infrastructure is 32% behind international peers, IMF finds Opens in new window ] The Cabinet will on Tuesday sign off the NDP, allocating billions to water and grid infrastructure, as well as capital investment in the likes of prisons and sports facilities. There will be more money for defence as well, with increased funding for radar, sonar and protection for Irish troops. On Monday night talks were continuing in an effort to reach agreement on funding for housing and water projects. The Government is to allocate an additional €30 billion to its existing capital funding allocation to boost infrastructural development across the economy over the next five years under plans to be unveiled on Tuesday. The housing and water funding was the final element of the NDP agreed on Monday night, with €40 billion allocated over five years. Alongside the NDP, the summer economic statement, to be published on Tuesday by Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe, will identify investment in water and energy infrastructure as a key priority for Budget 2026. Mr Donohoe will announce that the State will continue to put money away in the Infrastructure, Climate and Nature Fund and the Future Ireland Fund, to protect Ireland from external shocks, and in anticipation of the increased costs of an ageing society. Mr Harris will tell Cabinet that this year's summer statement differs from previous ones due to the threat of significant US tariffs. He will say that budget decisions have to focus on jobs and investment amid 'considerable uncertainty' in EU-US trade talks.
CBC
16-07-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Trade war 'existential crisis' shouldn't fall on backs of First Nations, says BCAFN regional chief
B.C. Assembly of First Nations Regional Chief Terry Teegee says lawmakers should not skirt around environmental assessments to fast-track major projects. He tells BC Today host Michelle Eliot that any response to the trade war with the U.S. must also uphold Indigenous rights.
BBC News
19-06-2025
- Business
- BBC News
New guidance published for North Sea oil and gas projects
The UK government has published guidance on how it will consider fresh applications for oil and gas move will determine whether production can go ahead in the controversial Scottish fields, Rosebank and Jackdaw - but gives no indication as to whether ministers would give their will now have to draw up new environmental impact assessments that take emissions released from burning oil and gas into account - not just the emissions from Minister Michael Shanks said the guidance provided clarity on the way forward for the North Sea oil and gas industry. Climate campaigners say new developments will make "barely a dent" in the UK's reliance on imported fossil new guidance was drawn up in response to a landmark Supreme Court ruling last year, that Surrey County Council should have considered the full climate impact of burning oil from new those assessments took into account emissions generated by the process of extracting oil and gas. However, they did not count the greenhouse gases which would be released when those fossil fuels were eventually burned - known as "downstream" or "Scope 3" January, the Court of Session in Edinburgh ruled that the decision in that case should apply retrospectively to Rosebank and Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea was originally approved by the previous UK Conservative government, and the industry regulator, in summer for the Rosebank oil development, 80 miles west of Shetland in the North Atlantic, was granted in autumn Ericht said work on both fields could continue while the new information was gathered but no oil and gas could be extracted unless fresh approval was granted. The climate watchdog - Offshore Petroleum Regulator for Environment and Decommissioning - and regulator the North Sea Transition Authority had paused decisions on licenses for new drilling projects and the granting of existing licenses until the government clarified its of the new guidance means offshore developers can submit their applications for consent to extract oil and gas in already-licensed Secretary Ed Miliband and the regulator will then reconsider whether or not to grant consent, taking downstream emissions into UK government said it would consider the significance of a project's environmental impact, "while taking into account and balancing relevant factors on a case-by-case basis such as the potential economic impact and other implications of the project".No decisions are expected until the end of the Shanks said: "This new guidance... marks a step forward in ensuring the full implications of oil and gas extraction are considered for potential projects and that we ensure a managed, prosperous, and orderly transition to the North Sea's clean energy future, in line with the science."We are working with industry, trade unions, local communities and environmental groups to ensure the North Sea and its workers are at the heart of Britain's clean energy future for decades to come – supporting well-paid, skilled jobs, driving growth and boosting our energy security." 'Incompatible' with climate commitments Tessa Khan, executive director of the climate campaign group Uplift, said the new guidance means that oil and gas companies will be "finally be forced to come clean over the enormous harm they are causing to the climate".She said: "In the case of the Rosebank oil field, which Equinor can now seek reapproval for, it is overwhelmingly obvious that the project is incompatible with the UK's climate commitments. "Whether or not this government then follows the science and rejects Rosebank will be a real test of its climate credibility."Ms Khan added that Rosebank is a "bad deal" for the UK, would not help lower fuel bills or boost energy update comes shortly after the UK government's Spending Review last week, which included about £200m for the Acorn Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) scheme in also told the BBC he expects plans to be announced "soon" for the future of Grangemouth. This is a significant moment for the future of the North Sea but it effectively tells us it does, though, is it takes the brakes off future development within existing licence seeking consent to produce oil and gas will now be allowed to resume their applications, which have been on hold since the Supreme Court now have to produce an environmental impact assessment which sets out at all the planet warming greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production and consumption of the that, they have to set out what impact those emissions will have on the warming of the receive consent, they must set a compelling case for why those emissions must be offset against the benefits of giving the project the go the minister will use a matrix to decide whether to approve or reject any won't really know what impact all of this will have on those decisions until the first of them are there's a summer of uncertainty ahead. But we could start to gather a picture of whether the North Sea has a viable future from August onwards.
