If Liberal MPs experience the “long hot summer” of protest that some Aboriginal activist groups have promised in response to the federal government’s new major-projects legislation, they won’t be feeling that heat anywhere close to Parliament Hill.
Politicians were already starting to flee Ottawa, off to their home ridings or vacations for the summer break, before Bill C-5 received its rubber stamp from the Senate and royal assent on June 26. They left behind what could be a ticking time bomb: the Building Canada Act, allowing the federal cabinet to fast-track major infrastructure projects by identifying them as being in the “national interest” and bypassing the normal conditions and approval rules.
How to define “national interest” is shaping up to be an explosive question. The Liberal government, the Conservative Opposition and most business groups see the new law as a major step forward in allowing Canada to build badly needed projects, especially in mining, oil and gas, to improve lagging competitiveness. The legislation is at least in part a response to American tariffs that threaten much of the national economy, and a backlash to years of what seemed like paralysis in getting government approvals under the Trudeau government.
Aboriginal groups are less sure. Some are eager to see more economic growth too, but virtually all agree they need to be properly consulted and treated as partners when a project infringes on their land or their rights. Certain factions objected to the bill before it was passed, and are digging in for a fight. Some are predicting the revival of the 2014 Idle No More Indigenous protests. That movement led to flash mobs and blockades of critical rail lines and highways over the then Conservative government’s attempt roll back environmental regulations.
“Nothing’s off the table,” said Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak, National Chief for the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), referring to options for resistance. Asked if Indigenous activists might rise up forcefully against the bill, she said, “I wouldn’t blame them.”
The legislation has been criticized, including by pro-development advocates, for giving the federal government too much power and discretion — to hurry along projects the cabinet considers important, while leaving behind unfavoured projects. And the Carney government has been trying to convince Aboriginal groups that the legislation in fact includes sufficient provisions to protect their rights, even as it rushed the bill through. It agreed to remove from the bill the initial power for cabinet to override the Indian Act, but the Senate declined to heed appeals from Indigenous representatives to slow the bill for more study, as the government aggressively pushed it through in time for summer.
The question to be answered now is whether the government has done enough to assure Aboriginal groups, or if Canada is weeks away from that “long, hot summer” of protests. What everyone agrees is that an ugly struggle could shatter years of steady progress in the relationships between governments and Indigenous Canadians, while spooking project backers and delaying critical infrastructure projects.
As Prime Minister Mark Carney suggested last week on a visit to Calgary, he can only
approve an oil pipeline if a private company is willing to try proposing one
. The government has the power to promote a project, but “the private sector is going to drive it,” he told Postmedia.
Interviewed last month after her appearance before the Senate in which she pressed senators to slow the bill, Woodhouse Nepinak said the legislation was “rammed through” without reasonable Indigenous consultation. She questioned why a bill backing more pipelines, ports and other projects gets passed in just weeks, while infrastructure needs on Indigenous reserves, such as schools, connectivity and clean water, have lingered for decades.
Alvin Fiddler, the Grand Chief of Nishnawbe Aski Nation, which represents 51 First Nations communities in northern Ontario, has already said the legislation in Ottawa, as well as similar bills in Ontario and British Columbia, has decimated the trust that had been growing in recent years between those governments and Aboriginal communities.
After seeing progress improving life on remote reserves, and a more respectful tone from Ottawa, he said “Canada is going backwards” with the new law.
The Nishnawbe Aski Nation says its land covers about two-thirds of Ontario, including the mineral-rich Ring of Fire area in the northwestern part of the province. That area is often mentioned as a leading candidate to be the site of a big project that could get fast-tracked. But Fiddler has warned that a resistance movement will only unnerve mining investors.
Ontario’s Ring of Fire and Alberta’s oil sands are typically held up as two of the resource bounties that have been held back, or even thwarted, for years under the Trudeau government, whose attitude toward developing resources and infrastructure ranged at times from uninterested to hostile. The story of then environment minister Steven Guilbeault ordering a federal assessment of a planned Ontario highway because of a frog habitat served as a vivid exemplification of the atmosphere: it took a costly, time-consuming court battle to slap back another attempt by the federal government to overreach into provincial jurisdiction.
Plenty of economists agree that Canada needs to export its natural resources, as well as manufactured goods, as easily and efficiently as possible to reach its economic potential. But in many cases, those needed roads, rail lines, ports and pipelines don’t exist, or they’re antiquated and unable to compete, leaving resources in the ground and money and jobs in both native and non-native communities on the table.
The key to the new legislation, the Carney government maintains, is that it will reduce the process time for big projects that can meet all the necessary safety and environmental standards by reducing red tape, namely the assessments, challenges and overlapping regulations. So, in other words, all the regulatory effects without the regulatory runaround that Canada’s system was infamous for.
“Canadian jobs are at risk. Canadians’ livelihoods are at risk and, quite frankly, the prosperity of the country is at risk,” Tim Hodgson, the federal natural resources and energy minister, said earlier this month. “We need to do things that we have not done in a long time, in time frames we have not done since the end of World War Two.”
A lot of Indigenous leaders agree with the urgency of powering up the economy.
David Chartrand, president of the Manitoba Metis Federation, told the Senate that he supports the legislation because the tariffs imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump threaten the Canadian economy, which would cause hardship for his people. “We stand with you,” he said.
Natan Obed, president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, said he’s concerned about the legislation’s ability to limit native rights but he’s also hopeful that big projects could be very good for Far North communities. “There’s an incredible opportunity to really become an Arctic nation,” Obed said.
Whatever acrimony has erupted over the legislation obscures the improved relations between Indigenous groups and Canadian governments, said Shannon Joseph, chair of Energy for a Secure Future, a non-partisan group that focuses on energy policy.
One of the recent trends that had helped improve the relationship is the increase in the number of natural resources projects where Aboriginal communities have taken equity stakes, aided at times by government loan guarantee programs.
“Indigenous peoples are at the heart of this (process),” Joseph said.
Carney is now going to great lengths to show that he sees things that way too, emphasizing that Ottawa won’t deem projects to be in the national interest without first consulting with affected Aboriginal communities. The new office responsible for advancing big projects will include an Indigenous advisory council that he said will be responsible for ensuring that Aboriginal rights are respected.
After the federal bill was passed in Parliament, however, Carney acknowledged that there’s more work to be done and said that he plans to begin consultations with Indigenous groups July 17.
“The first thing we will do to launch the implementation of this legislation in the right way is through full-day summits,”
Carney said a week before the bill was passed
.
The federal legislation has company in its intent and controversy: Recent bills have also passed in Ontario and British Columbia that were designed to fast-track major projects. And both were criticized for inadequate consultation with First Nations. Ontario Premier Doug Ford made things worse when he opened old wounds around trust and paternalism when he boosted his provincial bill by arguing that Aboriginal communities can’t expect to continue to get economic support if they don’t support the infrastructure projects that the economy needs.
“You can’t just keep coming hat in hand all the time to government,” Ford said. “You gotta be able to take care of yourselves.” He soon after apologized.
Fiddler was among several Indigenous leaders who accused Ford of racism. Fiddler’s riposte was that native communities are tired of federal and provincial governments coming “hat in hand” for the resources on Aboriginal land.
Fiddler says it’s not too late to stop the damage to a slowly improving relationship between governments and First Nations. But that would mean slowing down legislation to give Aboriginal communities more time to review and consult with their communities and potentially push for changes. But politicians across Canada are suddenly in a hurry; they’re taking their chances.
National Post
stuck@postmedia.com
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
