Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

The government clearly wants to jam Bill C69 through the Senate before June and everything is put on hold before the October federal election


Suits and Boots is calling on the federal government to shelve controversial Bill C-69 and launch a Royal Commission on Resource Development in Canada. The call for a Royal Commission comes as the Senate Committee on Energy, Environment and Natural Resources prepares to start its study of Bill C-69 on February 6. 

"(It's) the single most important 90-days in Canada's
resource sector
" - Suits and Boots founder Rick Peterson
It’s clear from our work and conversations with thousands of Canadians from coast-to-coast that Bill C-69 is simply a non-starter for Canadians from all walks of life,” said Rick Peterson, an Edmonton-based investment industry executive and Suits and Boots founder.

This is a wandering, overly ambitious, poorly written piece of legislation that will stall pipeline and other resource projects in the courts and destroy any future investment appetite for Canada’s resource sector,” he said. 

This isn't hyperbole.  This is THE fight for the Canadian resource sector.

The government clearly wants to jam this Bill through the Senate before June and everything is put on hold before the October federal election. Too much is at stake for that to happen. Too many voices -especially resource sector workers and their families – still need to be heard on this issue before we can produce a fully thought-out, clear and cohesive resource sector investment structure that works for all Canadians.  


Only a Royal Commission can fully allow Canadians from all walks of life to have a voice in this. The time is now – we need to shelve Bill C-69 and go out and listen to Canadians from coast-to-coast and come back later and write a better Bill.”

The last time the federal government launched a resource-related Royal Commission was the 1986 review of the sealing industry, and before that, the 1968 Donald Commission into the Cape Breton coal industry.

Since the 1960s Royal Commissions have been launched into a broad range of matters of national importance such as the RCMP, electoral reform and party financing, Aboriginal Peoples, the future of health care, the blood system, and most recently the 2006 – 2008 royal commission into the Air India Flight 182 bombing investigation. No Royal Commission has taken place since 2008.

Responsible resource development is Canada’s past and future, central to our continued prosperity and funding for social services, and yet we can’t get good projects over the finish line in the face of foreign-funded PR campaigns and lobbying,” Peterson said.

We owe it to ourselves and future generations to take a deep, honest look at this critical issue, get to the bottom of what’s going on, and craft a clear way forward for our nation. With so much at stake and so many competing points of voice, it is clear that the only way to accomplish this is to have a national discussion through a Royal Commission.”





The future of Canada’s resource industry today sits in the hands of Canada’s 95 Senators.  Bill C-69, known as the “Impact Assessment Act”, is the federal government’s attempt to impose new “environmental assessment” measures on Canada’s resource sector.  It’s terrible legislation.



CLICK HERE for the full article, “10 Reasons to Kill Bill C-69 in Canada’s Senate”


  1. The proposed law was introduced by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change – not by the Minister of Natural Resources. It was reviewed by the House environment committee rather than the energy committee, and only had minimal witness hearings from the energy department.
  2. The Bill also contains a clause that will require new resource projects to be scrutinized according to “the intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors.” Seriously?
  3. This Bill clearly gives the federal Environment Minister added discretionary power on deciding whether a project goes ahead or not. Foreign investors will clearly see this for what it really is: a vague, long, expensive and politically motivated decision making process.
  4. The Business Council of BC says this proposed law will lead to “greater difficulty securing permits… heightened uncertainty among company managers, project developers and investors.” The Council says Bill C69 will help “accelerate outflows of business investment to other jurisdictions”.
  5. Project review timelines will be extended from an already slow 4 years, on average, by another 8-10 months. All this while American regulators are moving to two-year timelines.
  6. Bill C-69 imposes new geographic and upstream/downstream criteria on Greenhouse Gas Emission standards. This effectively takes away provincial government authority on natural resource development or exploration and is largely out of control of pipeline companies.
  7. Fuzzy scientific standards being imposed by Bill C-69 make it unclear if they are the same for both indigenous and non-indigenous bodies who will be doing assessments.
  8. New and relaxed public input standards for participation in hearings sets the bar so low that it’s easy to see a huge influx of poorly informed, politically stacked and repetitive presentations. This obviously favours opponents of resource projects who have the time, money and support from offshore sources.
  9. The Bill contains a clause that sets a dangerous precedent by turning Canada’s voluntary commitments in climate change into legal obligations that could be used against us by our trading partners.
  10. Bill C-69 falls far short of setting enough support for proponents of resource development during the review process. The Trans Mountain Expansion Project Application had 8,800 pages describing the negative effects on local communities – but just two pages on its economic, fiscal and energy benefits. This won’t change under C-69.





Suits and Boots was launched by six investment industry colleagues in April of 2018 with the mission of giving Canada’s resource sector workers a constructive voice in the decisions impacting their lives and livelihoods. The organization has since grown to 3,200 members in hundreds of communities across Canada. Suits and Boots has held rallies and flown banners over Parliament, written Senators asking them to kill the current version of Bill C-69 and send this flawed attempt at re-working Canada’s environmental assessment regulations back to the House of Commons, and sat down with politicians in Ottawa to advocate for change.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Budget 2027: After a Decade of Decline, NDP Budget Delivers an Assault on Seniors, Working Families, and Small Businesses

Peter Milobar, BC Conservative Finance Critic, condemned the NDP government’s latest budget as the result of a decade of decline that has left British Columbians broke, unsafe, and paying more for less.   “After ten years of NDP mismanagement, this budget is an assault on seniors, working families, and the small businesses that drive our economy,” said Milobar. “The NDP have turned their back on the people working hardest to make ends meet and the seniors who built this province.” Milobar pointed to a new $1.1 billion annual income tax increase and warned that the government is piling new costs onto households already struggling with affordability.   “This government keeps asking British Columbians for more, while delivering less,” Milobar said. “The question people are asking is simple: Where has all the money gone?” Milobar noted that BC has gone from a surplus in the first year of NDP government to a projected deficit of more than $13 billion this year, while prov...

WARD STAMER -- Those are REAL forestry numbers, not just made-up numbers

The following is a condensed version of remarks Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s made, regarding Forestry, in the BC Legislature, on Tuesday afternoon (02/24/2026)   Let’s talk a little bit, when we talk about Budget 2026, about the forest industry, which is near and dear to my heart. Forestry remains one of British Columbia’s foundational industries. It’s a pillar that built this province. Entire communities depend upon it. Interior towns, northern communities, Vancouver Island regions, the Kootenays, the Lower Mainland, with manufacturing facilities in Surrey and Maple Ridge, just to name a few — everywhere in BC is touched by forestry. One word that was not mentioned in Budget 2026 was forestry. That’s a shame, an incredible shame. It wasn’t an oversight – it was intentional. This government has driven forestry into the ground .... INTO THE GROUND! We can talk a little bit about some of the initiatives that this government has brought forth, to try to resurrect ...

FORSETH -- Before anyone gets excited about one poll showing a candidate with a 25 percent lead, and 44 percent support overall, let’s give it a few more weeks

Is this based in reality -- how accurate are the numbers? In the past couple of weeks a couple of candidates, for the leadership of the BC Conservative Party, have been presenting polling results that they lead the pack – one even going so far as to say they have a lock on 44% of those who will be voting, and a twenty-five percent lead over the individual ranked second. I am going to say that this one, from Kerry-Lynne Findlay, is highly suspect. First of all the company conducting the poll, ERG National Research, is not a Member of Industry Bodies (the Canadian Research Insights Council), meaning they do not adhere to established industry standards for research, such as transparency, privacy, and methodological rigor. AI Overview states that ... based on alerts from the Canadian Research Insights Council (CRIC) and reports, ERG National Research should be treated with extreme caution regarding its reliability, and legitimacy, in conducting political polling. Before I even read this in...

Labels

Show more