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

Richard Neufeld: Some Provinces are calling Bill C-69 unconstitutional and a federal infringement on provincial jurisdiction, and others calling for its outright defeat


The year 2019 has been rough on the Trudeau Liberals. The Prime Minister has been accused of interfering in a criminal prosecution involving SNC-Lavalin. Even the Liberals most recent re-election budget has generated little interest from Canadians and, surprisingly, the media. Things aren’t so sunny in Trudeauland these days.

In the midst of all this, the government is pursuing its legislative agenda and urging Senators to pass Bill C-69 which seeks, among other things, to replace the  with the Impact Assessment Agency and replace the National Energy Board with the Canadian Energy Regulator.

I bet many Canadians have never heard of C-69. Yet, this bill has the potential of totally disrupting our energy and natural resources sectors. I don’t fault anyone for disregarding this legislation since it’s rather technical in nature with more than 350 pages. Quite honestly, it would probably put most people to sleep.
Senator Richard Neufeld

However, I urge Canadians to pay attention to it because its impacts are far-reaching. Bill C-69 (along with government bills C-48 and C-68) will further erode Canada’s competitiveness in terms of attracting capital into our resource development sector. It threatens the very fabric of our Canadian prosperity.

If Canada can’t get major projects off the ground – like pipelines, high-frequency trains, bridges, clean electricity projects and transmission lines, marine terminals – we risk serious harm to our economy.

Naturally, this implies less good-paying, family-supporting jobs for Fred and Martha – your everyday Canadians – and less revenues from royalties and taxes to fund our country’s many social, health and education programs. And don’t get me started on trying to reduce Trudeau’s year-over-year deficits.


Senators recognize the significance of this bill and the sweeping impacts it can have on our economy and our environment, which is why we have taken the extraordinary step to take this bill on the road. The Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources is traveling to Western Canada for five full days of public hearings this week in Vancouver and Calgary, Fort McMurray and then Saskatoon yesterday (April 11th) and Winnipeg.

Some argue this decision to travel is unnecessary – like environmentalists who are likely concerned we will further expose the negative impacts of this bill. I, on the other hand, feel this was the right decision considering the witness testimony we’ve heard in Ottawa.

In fact, the Committee has already held more than 30 hours of hearings in Ottawa and heard from dozens of witnesses including premiers and ministers, industry, indigenous representatives, and other stakeholders. Some of the testimony is seriously troubling.

Over the course of our meetings, many issues have been raised and given us much to consider in terms of amendments including on matters related to predictability and certainty for proponents; assessment timelines; regulatory independence; inefficient bureaucratic red tape; ministerial discretion; the lack of a designated project list; factors to be considered when assessing a project; poorly defined concepts; the removal of the standing test; and more.

For those who argue that Conservative Senators are stalling the passage of this bill, or that the Committee doesn’t need to hear from so many witnesses, I would simply say that more than 40% of the witnesses who appeared at the House of Commons committee represented the Government of Canada in some capacity.

To my astonishment, there were no pipeline companies, no port authorities, no natural gas companies, and no resource sector service businesses or local Mom-and-Pop shops who would be impacted by the bill.

The Liberal-dominated committee heard from zero provincial governments. Of course, this does not surprise me. Based on my calculations, 9 out of 10 provinces have concerns of various degree regarding this bill, some calling it unconstitutional and federal infringement on provincial jurisdiction, and others calling for its outright defeat.

It has become increasingly clear that this bill must be further amended and Conservative Senators are determined to make that happen – not as a delay tactic but rather as an attempt to partly satisfy some of the concerns we’ve heard and, ultimately, to try to make this work for Canada.

While the Ottawa bubble has been captivated by the SNC-Lavalin scandal (and rightfully so), the Prime Minister has another thing coming if he thinks the Senate’s Official Opposition will sit idle and let this high-consequence, high-controversy bill pass without putting the spotlight on its many flaws.

After all, that’s the role of the Senate – to take a sober, second look at legislation and try to improve it.

Bill C-69 needs serious improvement and I’m committed to making it better because Canadians deserve better.



The Honourable Richard Neufeld is a Senator for British Columbia. He is a member of three Senate Committees: Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources; National Finance; and Arctic. 

Prior to his appointment to the Senate in 2009, he served in the British Columbia Legislative Assembly from 1991 to 2008 as MLA for Peace River North. He was Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources from 2001 to 2009.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

'Very good news' that Supreme Court will hear B.C. mineral claims case, Eby says

The BC government needs clarity from the Supreme Court of Canada on a landmark mineral rights claim, Premier David Eby says. But the lawyer representing the challenger says that they would have preferred the province respect the lower court's decision. Eby said Thursday it is very good news that the court will hear its appeal of a ruling that found the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the provincial mineral claims regime are "inconsistent." The BC Court of Appeal ruled in December that the provincial Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, or DRIPA, should be "properly interpreted" to incorporate the UN declaration into the laws of B.C. with immediate legal effect. That ruling set off the appeal from the province amid concerns that it could cause economic uncertainty ... CLICK HERE for the full story 

EBY OFFSIDE WITH NATIONAL INTEREST AS CARNEY AND SMITH BUILD BC'S ECONOMIC FUTURE WITHOUT HIM ~~ BC Conservatives

IMAGE CREDIT :  CBC News   Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced a landmark agreement today committing Ottawa to designate a new pipeline to BC's west coast as a project of national interest by October 1, 2026, with construction approval targeted for September 1, 2027. The deal pairs the pipeline with a new industrial carbon pricing framework and a fall 2027 construction start. British Columbia, the province where the pipeline ends, where the jobs would land, and where the export terminal would be built, was nowhere at the table. "This is a nation-building deal, and the BC NDP have been locked out of the room," said Trevor Halford, Interim Leader of the Official Opposition.  "While the Prime Minister and the Premier of Alberta were doing the hard work of growing the Canadian economy, the NDP is on the sidelines calling this pipeline a 'fiction' and an 'energy vampire.'  He chose petulance over partnership, and now BC ...

Kamloops - North Thompson BC Conservative MLA Ward Stamer speaks to Bill 20 — K’ómoks Treaty Act

The following is a condensed version of Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s remarks, to the BC Legislature, on the afternoon of Tuesday May 19th : I rise today to continue remarks on Bill 20, the K’ómoks treaty, and to address what I believe are some of the most important constitutional, democratic and governance concerns facing this Legislature today. At the centre of this debate are two major issues. First, unresolved overlapping territorial boundaries tied to this treaty process. And second, the growing legal and political consequences arising from the provincial government’s implementation of the Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, more commonly known as DRIPA. Much of the government’s defence on DRIPA rests upon references to the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, commonly known as UNDRIP. And this is where we must begin having a more honest and mature conversation in this province. UNDRIP was never originally designed to function ...

Labels

Show more