The introduction of Bill C-69 confirms Justin Trudeau’s deceitful objective of destroying Canada’s energy industry. Intended to replace the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the goal of the new Impact Assessment Act (IAA) is to improve the environmental impact of industrial projects such as pipelines undertaken in Canada. A review of the conditions that must be met under Bill C-69 confirms that if this bill is passed any pipeline (including any future upgrades of those existing), will never be built. If approved, this bill will increase complexity, unnecessarily delay project assessment processes, and add serious and unnecessary opportunities for court challenges by pipeline opponents. The message to prospective pipeline investors who study the law behind Trudeau’s political social salesmanship of this proposed bill will take their investment elsewhere. Here’s why;
First, the Federal Court of Appeal shot down the Trans Mountain upgrade because some of the opponents of the project claimed they were not given an opportunity to present their objections (resulting in the court challenge in the first place). The proposed IAA includes demands even greater participation from environmentalists and First Nations or “anyone who does not support a pipeline.” To hear from an unlimited number of people presenting an unlimited volume of material for an unlimited amount of time could theoretically take forever. If a time limit were imposed, it would only create more court challenges precisely what Trudeau disingenuously intends.
Second, the Act specifies that “Canada is committed to reconciliation with First Nations.” (What land claims or societal reconciliation have to do with building a pipeline that can only make First Nations wealthier is beyond comprehension?) The problem is that Bill C-69 has been written in such a way that it provides opportunities for First Nations to object to every piece of science that the pipeline proponent may provide based on a statement in the bill that permits First Nations to present in confidence, their “Indigenous Knowledge” challenging any pipeline proponent’s evidence of satisfactory environmental protection. (In other words, since the act does not clearly define “Indigenous Knowledge”? any First Nation representative can challenge the assessment based on that particular First Nations mythological or ancient reference permitting no opposing challenge)?
Third, the IAA gives the National Energy Board conflicting responsibilities. Not only is the NEB responsible for defining the environmental assessment of the proposed pipeline, it is now responsible for evaluating any environmental issue that may result in possible harm to sea life or damage that might occur from tankers on the West Coast. (What building a pipeline through an unpopulated area of Western Canada has to do with tanker traffic or fish is beyond understanding); one has nothing to do with the other, but this is now a requirement in the assessment process.
Fourth; in his discussions of environmental protection requirements Trudeau brags about the act and its inclusion of protection of women in construction (of pipelines), but the IAA also refers to transgender people, not only sexual equality in the work place. One has nothing to do with the other. The social issues around gender protection have nothing to do with the building of pipelines.
Fifth, I am paraphrasing here but put simply, the IAA must (emphasis on must), consider how any Canadian pipeline project if built, would affect the environment of the Earth itself and the health, social and economic conditions of the people on it. (The idea of a Canadian parliament enacting legislation that is required to investigate what might happen to the environment in any other country is beyond common logic). What is even more astounding is that this proposed legislation takes all authority away from the IAA and the NEB and requires that all decisions related to any final pipeline approval can only be made by the Canadian government eliminating provincial authority.
The information presented here is only a fraction of what I learned after a careful review of Mr. Andrew Roman’s critique, titled Pipelines, the environment and the economy: Canada’s new impact assessment law. There is no doubt in my mind that Trudeau fully intends to eliminate any future pipeline projects in our country. He could have and should have challenged the recent Federal Court of Appeal decision regarding the Trans Mountain Pipeline upgrade. He did not, because he supports the decision, clear indication that he wants to destroy our energy industry.
I urge each and every Canadian who believes in rebuilding the economy of Canada to read Mr. Roman’s critique of Trudeau’s Impact Assessment Act, Bill C-69. This act must not be passed.
I would be pleased to discuss this issue with anyone who refutes my research.
L. (Tex) Leugner
