As uniquely Canadian fault lines form around Ottawa’s new major projects Bill C-5, it’s quickly becoming the story of two vetoes — one indigenous, one provincial. As formal “summits” with First Nation leaders get underway, Prime Minister Mark Carney has already promised big: “Being a reliable partner to indigenous peoples isn’t just about the duty to consult, but the creation of long-term prosperity through full equity ownership.” This has major implications for any private company advancing any major project. Not to mention taxpayers. The new “major projects office” also offers “additional funding to strengthen indigenous participation.”In addition, Carney has said that Bill C-5 embraces “free, prior, and informed consent.” This language — direct from the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) — constitutes a de facto veto over any major project. Period. Just ask new federal Minister of Justice Sean Fraser, who recently apologized for saying that First Nations didn’t hold a veto over pipeline and other projects.UNDRIP, an international declaration devised by the non-elected UN, is now embedded in federal legislation — including Bill C-69 (the “no more pipelines bill.”) It’s also a key component of International Protected Conservation Areas, which are being stealthily introduced across Canada as no-go zones for future economic development. Meanwhile, anti C-5 threats are getting louder. “It will be a long, hot summer,” threatened Nishnawbe Aski Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler, as other chiefs vowed court challenges and major blockades. .These have led to violence in the past. In 2022, BC Coastal Gas Pipeline employees and facilities were attacked in a “violent confrontation” by an “unidentified group” with axes, flares and “incendiary-type devices.” Following blockades by the Wet’su’weten First Nations, the federal government quietly entered into an undisclosed arrangement with hereditary chiefs so that the project could proceed. Confusion reigns as to whether provinces can also veto projects under C-5. A reporter recently asked the PM: “If there’s a pipeline project you believe is in the national interest, but Quebec or British Columbia don’t want it, are you going to push it through?” Carney answered, “No, we need to have consensus from all provinces and indigenous peoples.” Subsequently however, the PM said C-5 gives him and certain ministers the “authority” to designate project approvals and set development conditions. In secret? Federal energy minister Tim Hodgson says Cabinet will not discuss what projects are being fast-tracked until the “transactions are finalized.”“This moment in our country’s history lends itself to giving ourselves the ability to approve projects,” Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc recently told Senators. As for provincial vetoes, “Veto is an aggressive word,” he said, adding, “Vito’s is also a restaurant in Moncton.”We know Alberta wants a new pipeline — and BC and Quebec do not. The PM has suggested that the quid pro quo for any new pipeline is “decarbonized barrels.” That’s code for carbon capture and storage (CCS) — specifically, a 400-kilometre pipeline that would transport carbon captured from oil sands facilities to an underground hub near Cold Lake, AB. Oilsands companies first advanced the idea in 2015, when they vowed, alongside NDP Premier Rachel Notley, to decarbonize their operations. Premier Smith has called Carney’s quid pro quo a “grand bargain.” Actually, it’s a grand boondoggle. Everyone knows this CCS project is a “high revenue,” (multi-billion dollar) risk. That’s why oil sands companies have held out for federal funding for years, compromising their pro-energy identity in the process. On behalf of taxpayers, this undertaking should be called out for the science project that it is..The same goes for the proposal by Alberta and Saskatchewan to build a pipeline from Prince Rupert to Hudson Bay and on to a proposed port project in Nunavut. Hudson Bay — not to mention Nunavut! — is under thick ice six to eight months of the year. Icebreakers cost $3 billion each. An entire fleet would be required. Muskeg and other Canadian Shield terrain would also make the path to Hudson Bay, primarily via suspended pipeline, extremely challenging. No private company will undertake it. Shelve it.If we really want to strengthen energy independence and advance our economy, projects must be practical. Among them should be a reboot of Energy East and/or Northern Gateway, with approvals to private companies guaranteed by governments. Northern Gateway in particular — kiboshed by the feds in 2015 — would provide a crucial ‘first-mover’ advantage over other ports, including in Alaska, to reach Pacific markets faster. Last time, of course, the project descended into internecine warfare between hereditary and other chiefs along the proposed route. That’s why a federal executive order — in the name of a “national concern” energy emergency (remember the Carbon Tax?) — is the only real option. Without it, we will descend into typical Canadian process-chaos — and be left with Bill C-5, the “‘trust me’ bill,” as the Fraser Institute recently put it. Or, to quote Bloc Québécois MP Xavier Barsalou-Duval, “the worst piece of legislation I’ve ever worked on. There will be all kinds of bias and cronyism. With this type of legislation, we’re becoming a banana republic.”Good luck, all.Bronwyn Eyre is Saskatchewan’s former Minister of Justice and Attorney General, and of Energy, Education, and Advanced Education.
