Federal government

Fri, 2014-07-18 11:55Derek Leahy
Derek Leahy's picture

U.S. Joins Canada and Oil Industry's Lobbying Offensive To Keep Europe Open to Oilsands Imports

fuel quality directive, lobbying, EU, oilsands

For five long years the federal government and the oil industry have lobbied against the European Union labeling oilsands (also called tar sands) bitumen as ‘dirty oil’ in its Fuel Quality Directive (FQD). A new report released yesterday reveals the recent involvement of the U.S. in the lobby offensive to keep the EU market open for bitumen exports has tipped the scales in favour of oilsands proponents.

The sustained attacks by the U.S. and Canada on the European Union’s key legislation on transport fuel emissions seem to be paying off,” Fabian Flues of Friends of the Earth Europe, the author of the report, admits.

The report shows the EU Fuel Quality Directive, a piece of legislation designed to reduce global warming greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the EU’s transportation sector, is unlikely to acknowledge fuels from different sources of oil – conventional oil, oilsands, oil shale – have different carbon footprints. Instead all oils will more than likely be treated as having the same GHG emissions intensity 'value' in the Directive. This is exactly what Canada, the oil industy and now the U.S. have been pushing for.

Europe is again failing to stand up effectively for its own climate policy,” Flues says.

Mon, 2014-03-17 15:00Farron Cousins
Farron Cousins's picture

Fracking California's Coast: Billions of Gallons of Fracking Pollution Legalized By Feds

If an energy company accidentally spilled 9 billion gallons of toxic waste into the ocean, the media, the public, and the government would be all over the situation.  But when it isn’t an accident, there is no reason for anyone to pay attention.

Such is the case with the fracking industry operating in California’s Santa Barbara Channel.  Federal regulators have given fracking companies the green light to dump as much as 9 billion gallons of waste into the waterway every single year.  This is in the same body of water that was devastated by millions of gallons of crude oil during a spill in 1969 that occurred as a result of a blowout on an oil rig operating in the area.  This environmental catastrophe led to the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Dos Cuadras Offshore Resources (DCOR) has been granted permits for four “mini” fracking exploration projects in the Santa Barbara Channel, all of which have been granted with certain environmental exclusions, as Truthout.org explains:

Fri, 2012-11-09 09:01Carol Linnitt
Carol Linnitt's picture

Heavy is the Head That Wears the Crown: Tar Sands Expansion May Violate Crown's Legal Obligation to First Nations

Today the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) will argue in the Alberta Court of Appeal that Shell Canada’s proposed Jackpine Mine expansion is in violation of their Constitutional rights and represents a failure on behalf of the federal government to uphold their legal duty to consult (DTC). The First Nation, which originally made this argument in a joint federal/provincial hearing on October 1, was told the panel did not have jurisdiction to hear constitutional questions.

When the ACFN applied for an adjournment, in that case, their request was denied. In response the First Nation is claiming they have “no other option but to file legal arguments for the protection of their constitutionally protected rights through the Alberta Court of Appeal.” 
 
The government’s refusal to consider the ACFN’s best defense against the megaproject, which will increase Shell’s tar sands bitumen mining capacity in this one project alone by 100,000 barrels per day, appears out of step with the federal government’s own admission that they must accommodate the rights of First Nations when considering industrial projects that entail irreversible impacts.
 
First Nations rights, especially as defined in the 1982 Constitution and subsequent court decisions, must be accommodated, according to an internal federal discussion paper, released to Greenpeace Canada’s climate and energy campaigner Keith Stewart through access to information legislation.
Fri, 2012-10-26 05:00Carol Linnitt
Carol Linnitt's picture

No Herd Left Behind: Federal Caribou Recovery Strategy On "Collision Course with Industry," Leads to Caribou "Zoos"

This post is a part of DeSmog's investigative series: Cry Wolf.

Five years overdue in a legal sense and ten years after caribou were officially listed as 'threatened' according to the Species at Risk Act, the Canadian government has finally released its controversial Recovery Strategy for the Woodland Caribou. The report, originally released in draft form in August 2011, ignited severe public criticism for emphasizing 'predator control' options like a provincial-wide wolf cull in order to artificially support flagging caribou populations in Alberta. 

The wolf cull garnered wide-spread condemnation from the scientific community, environmental organizations and First Nations who said the province's wolves were not the cause of caribou declines. Instead, Alberta's reckless industrial development in caribou habitat was to be blamed for the near-decimation of one of Canada's most iconic species. The caribou famously adorns the Canadian quarter.
 
The new and improved federal recovery strategy seems poised to remedy that, however, with dramatic improvements made to habitat protection and restoration legislation. Under the current strategy, the oil and gas industry, and the government of Alberta must work together to ensure a minimum of 65 per cent of caribou habitat is left undisturbed for the species to survive.

At least 65 per cent of caribou habitat must be left undisturbed for caribou herds to have a 60 per cent chance of being self-sustaining. Government and industry must make immediate arrangements to remediate caribou ranges that currently do not meet that 65 per cent benchmark within the next five years.
 
But the recovery strategy does not outline how Alberta must accomplish that task, leaving the 'immediate' ground work necessary for such accomplishments undefined. And given the rate at which the tar sands are currently experiencing expansion, Simon Dyer of the Pembina Institute described the strategy as “on a collision course with industry.” 
Thu, 2012-10-25 14:56Carol Linnitt
Carol Linnitt's picture

The Rush to Ratify: BC Rejected International Investment Deal in '98 and Should Do So Again

This past weekend trade investment lawyer, Gus Van Harten, spent his time in his basement, rifling through old files. He knew that somewhere, buried in piles of international investment and legal trade documents, there was the answer to this one nagging question he couldn't shake: hadn't British Columbia already refused an investor-state treaty like the China-Canada Investment Deal once before? And wasn't that rejection because the trade deal was 'unconstitutional?'

And there the answer to his question lay: in a 1998 special legislative report BC published on the OCED's then-proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI). In this document, a BC Special Committee outlines why an investor-state mechanism like MAI - which is essentially the same as the proposed China-Canada Investment Deal - is dangerous for provinces determined to protect their jurisdictional rights when it comes to governmental sovereignty, natural resources, First Nations, environmental protection and human and labour rights. 
 
The legislative committee recommended that “when negotiating the MAI or any future investment treaty, the federal government must ensure that the agreement does not apply to matters within provincial jurisdiction, including local government measures, without the express consent of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia…If the federal government fails to provide for such consent, then the provincial government should explore all means, including legal action, to defend vigorously its own jurisdictional rights and those of local governments to represent the interests of British Columbians.”
 
According to this logic, British Columbians and all of our elected provincial officials should be up in arms over the proposed China deal. 
Thu, 2012-10-25 14:26Carol Linnitt
Carol Linnitt's picture

BC Coastal First Nations Appeal For Help In Enbridge Pipeline Battle

If there was one message that stirred me during Monday's Defend Our Coast action, it was this: First Nations need you to join the fight to protect British Columbia's forests and coast from tar sands pipeline and tanker threats. 

The message came loud and clear from Coastal First Nations executive director Art Sterritt in his speech delivered to thousands spread out on the lawn of BC's legislature building in Victoria. Addressing the crowd he said, “Ladies and gentlemen, today is all about you. Coastal First Nations and all of the tribes of the interior, we've been stating our opposition for a long time now. But we're so happy that 3000 of you have come out to join with us today, 3000 people. And it's your voices that are important today, not ours. It's your voices that we need to join with us.”

Sterritt asked the crowd, “Who is going to lay down in front of the bulldozers?” To which the crowd resoundingly replied, “We will!”

Monday's Defend Our Coast rally demonstrated the extent to which First Nations and other British Columbians are prepared to stand together to protect the province's right to refuse the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline. The overwhelming emphasis during Monday's event was “the people, united, will never be defeated,” a line sung in unison across the crowded square.

Sun, 2012-06-24 11:37Guest
Guest's picture

1812 and All That: the Bicentenary of Dr. Charles Smallwood, Canadian Scientist (1812 - 1873)

This is a guest post by Andrew McLaren

With all the present glorification of the 1812-15 conflict being promoted by Canada’s Federal Government, another important bicentennial is being pointedly overlooked: the birth of Dr. Charles Smallwood (1812-1873), a Canadian physician and scientist who can be credited for the earliest extended research into Meteorology and Astronomy in our emergent Country. His early work included studies into snowflake formation (can any Canadian not relate to this?), many years of observations and research in atmospheric Ozone levels, later founding the Montréal Observatory at McGill University. He even established the National Astronomical Time Standard still used for over a half-century after his death!

Smallwood’s research in Ozone, particularly as relating to atmospheric humidity, was published in Montréal in 1857.  It is sad to note over a century and a half since, present-day Ozone monitoring in the Canadian North has been subjected to terminal funding cuts, even with the shocking discovery of a Polar Ozone Hole for the first time in recorded history (2011). This bears an unfortunate testimony to our current Federal Government’s politically motivated attacks on Science and scientists, particularly those studying the environment. In spite of this “War of 2012” against climate, water, and other environmental scientists, we should commemorate the life and work of Charles Smallwood, and celebrate his massive contribution to science here in Canada and internationally on the occasion of his 200th Birthday.


Sat, 2012-05-12 10:25Ashley Arden
Ashley Arden's picture

Canadian Environmental Groups Black Out to Speak Out Against Government Threats to Nature & Democracy

"THE FUTURE OF OUR LAND, WATER, AND CLIMATE IS AT RISK. AND SO ARE THE VOICES OF

With full page ads in the Globe and Mail and La Presse national newspapers, a major coalition of Canadian environmental non-profits have come together to launch the Black Out Speak Out campaign (Silence, on parle! pour la Francophonie.)

CPAWS, David Suzuki Foundation, Ecojustice, Equiterre, Environmental Defence, Greenpeace, Nature Canada, Pembina Institute, Sierra Club Canada, West Coast Environmental Law, and WWF Canada – groups representing millions of Canadians – are appealing to all who care about nature and democracy to join them in blacking out their websites on June 4th in protest against the federal government's efforts to weaken many of the country's most important environmental protection measures and silence Canadians hard at work defending the public interest.

Canadian environmental non-profits point to changes in the most recent federal budget, which leaves Ottawa playing a much smaller role in protecting people from harmful projects, while at the same time granting politicians the power to overrule the National Energy Board’s experts if powerful industry interests don’t like its decision - irrespective of fish habitat destruction or threats to species at risk.

The coalition argues that the Federal government will now be able to rubber stamp big projects that powerful oil interests want behind closed doors and away from public scrutiny.

Their core contention is that the Federal government has circumvented the usual process of democratic debate by introducing sweeping change by shoehorning the gutting of environmental protections  into the massive budget without discussion.

Subscribe to Federal government