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

#FraserInstitute: Establishing clear consultation guidelines, recognizing Indigenous property rights, key to providing certainty for pipelines, resource projects


CALGARY—The federal government could provide greater certainty for major resource development projects—such as pipelines—by establishing clear consultation guidelines and recognizing Indigenous property rights, finds a new study released today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

Uncertainty surrounding Indigenous consultations is the biggest impediment to resource development in the country right now, and unless a clear framework for what adequate consultation looks like is established, Canada will continue to lose out on investment,” said Jason Clemens, Fraser Institute executive vice-president.

The study, Assessing the Duty to Consult, was written by Malcolm Lavoie, assistant law professor at the University of Alberta. It finds that the duty to consult, which is a constitutional obligation, creates uncertainty because the specific requirements for consultation are determined on a case by case basis.


The duty to consult Indigenous peoples is a constitutional obligation that applies in relation to a wide range of government decisions that could affect constitutionally protected Aboriginal and treaty rights. It has come to play an important role in determining whether and under what conditions major resource development projects can be built in Canada. This study seeks to assess how the duty to consult has functioned in this role.


This uncertainty — not knowing what adequate consultation requires ahead of time — can significantly raise the cost of a project. And even though the duty to consult doesn’t formally amount to a veto right for groups opposed to resource development, this uncertainty can stop projects from moving forward all together.

(This dynamic is particularly troubling when some affected Indigenous groups support a project, such as a pipeline, while other Indigenous groups oppose it.)

In order to both respect Indigenous rights, and also provide greater certainty necessary for major resource development projects to move forward, the study suggests that the federal government work with Indigenous groups to establish clear consultation protocols and timelines.

Professor Lavoie also recommends that governments recognize well-defined Indigenous property rights and governance jurisdiction to provide even further clarity.

It is possible to respect Indigenous rights and at the same time provide the level of certainty required for major resource projects to move forward in Canada,” said Lavoie.

Governments, project proponents and First Nations would all benefit from greater clarity surrounding the consultation process.”


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH: Without a strong local presence, there is NO reason for anyone to tune in to local(?) radio

LOCAL HOMETOWN RADIO IS DYING … and without serious measures put in place, it will likely never see the light of day again. For well over four decades, the Canadian Radio and Television Commission (CRTC) has presided over its’ demise, and for that I say, “Shame”. Without out a word to say enough was enough, the CRTC has allowed corporate Canada to buy up one radio station after the other, and then allowed them to slash staff to the point where some so-called local radio stations do nothing more than air programming that originates from communities well outside the region in which they are located. Case in point?   On CHNL* 610 in Kamloops, the morning show hosted by Vinnie and Randi, DOES NOT originate from Kamloops -- it doesn’t even originate here in BC. It’s a program that Stingray airs across multiple radio stations in Western Canada. It doesn’t end there. Not only are Vinnie and Rando doing mornings on CHNL, but they also show up on sister station Country 103 … and of course o...

Conservative Economic Team Responds to Urgent Industry Concerns

 " For far too long, the BC NDP has ignored the economic challenges facing British Columbians. Manufacturing jobs are vanishing, forestry is in decline, and private sector employment growth has stagnated. Meanwhile, affordability has worsened for both families and businesses. British Columbians deserve better, and we’re here to deliver real solutions to rebuild our economy and create jobs that support everyday working people and their families ." – Gavin Dew, MLA and Shadow Minister for Jobs, Economy, Development, and Innovation.   December 3, 2024, Vancouver, BC – The Conservative economic team met today with business leaders and stakeholders to tackle critical issues impacting British Columbia’s economy. Attended by 9 critics from the Conservative Caucus, this meeting was convened by MLA Gavin Dew – Shadow Minister for Jobs, Economic Development, and Innovation - as a direct response to an October 30th open letter from seven of the province’s largest industry associations. ...

WARD STAMER -- We need certainly in our markets, and certainly in our fibre supply, before we no longer have a forest industry in this province

Image Government of BC I think we all realize that the threat of Trump’s 25% tariff is like other provocative statements he’s made in the past. That said, we should have reason to be concerned. Tariffs don’t benefit anyone. A tariff of that magnitude – included on our own softwood lumber exports, will make things more expensive for Americans, and cause friction in the supply chain. If imposed, a twenty-five percent tariff will be equally detrimental to the citizens and economy of the United States, as well as the people of BC. There are two things, however, of equal concern to the threat of punitive tariffs by incoming U.S. President-elect Donald Trump. One is our antiquated stumpage fees. It is a legacy from decades ago, and one incapable of responding to changing market conditions. We need to revamp our stumpage system to better reflect market conditions, and our economic costs. Instead, a value-added tax system will be instantly responsive to current market conditions and will encou...

Labels

Show more