A win for Alberta, then..In a reference case, the Supreme Court of Canada strikes down Bill C-69 and does so for the very reason often expounded by Premier Smith — the Trudeau Liberal government was "out of its lane.".Bill C-69, officially known as the Impact Assessment Act but colloquially as the 'no-pipelines act,' suffered a 5-2 defeat this morning.. Danielle SmithPremier Danielle Smith hailed the Supreme Court of Canada decision that ruled Bill C-69 was unconstitutional. .Welcome as the win is, the damage has already been done, of course..Under the legislation that's now been declared unconstitutional, the Trudeau Liberals have already replaced the Calgary-based National Energy Board with the Ottawa-based Canada Energy Regulator, and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency by the Impact Assessment Agency..This ruling does not turn those clocks back. Nor does it do anything to address what Smith said in a statement this morning, the loss of "tens of billions in investment as well as thousands of jobs." .But, that's the way the Trudeau Liberals operate. They knew C-69 was vulnerable to a court challenge, but they passed it and acted upon the powers they believed — obviously without good reason — that it gave them. And the loss to Alberta is exactly as Smith described it, with no way to sue the federal government for damages. No wonder people despise this government.. Environment Minister Steven GuilbeaultEnvironment Minister Steven Guilbeault Addresses C-69 on Friday. .Anyway, in the words of Chief Justice Wagner writing for the majority, “The overbreadth of these effects exacerbates the constitutional frailties of the scheme’s decision-making functions.”.Quite. In plain English, under the Constitution, jurisdiction over energy belongs to the provinces. The Trudeau Liberals just tried to score one on Alberta and the Court said, 'not so fast.'.While it might be a Pyrrhic victory, there are a number of welcome implications..First, this is actually a win for all the provinces..Understandably, Albertans are focussed on pipelines and electrical generation..However, the legislation was national in scope and would have inserted the federal government into environmental assessment processes for major projects of all kinds across the country, wherever Ottawa could argue an admitted federal responsibility was impacted by the provincial exercise of its own..Thus, the environment, inland waterways, wildlife and climate change were all becoming gateways to federal encroachment upon provincial jurisdiction..Bottom line: While it's only a reference decision and has no immediate effect, Ontario miners will be as much encouraged as Alberta energy developers..Second, those of us who despaired of ever having an Alberta-friendly constitutional judgment from the Supreme Court must eat their words..While it is always possible to contrapt a sinister explanation involving court sensitivity to the politics of the situation, the simplest and most obvious explanation for their decision is as reported in the Western Standard by Shaun Polczer; seven judges compared the language of C-69 with the Constitution and concluded it went too far. Maybe the system works after all..Third, when the Sovereignty Act is tested — as it surely will be — we now know that the court is apparently sympathetic to the division of powers between the federal government and the provinces..It would of course be premature to say how any particular argument would go, should Premier Smith put the Sovereignty Act to work to fend off the Trudeau Liberals' absurd plan to achieve net-carbon-zero electrical generation by 2030..However, had the Supreme Court of Canada ruled other than it did, critics of the Sovereignty Act would certainly have mocked it. As it is, those critics must accept Alberta's position has been validated and there exists within the Government of Alberta a reservoir of constitutional understanding that the Supreme Court respects..The Trudeau Liberals have appealed. That was expected and is normal in the circumstances. Also expected was Environment Minister Guilbeault's straw-clutching that this was only a reference and the legislation remains in effect. And by the way, it was all Harper's fault. (That's all they've got, of course. These people are sad little caricatures of themselves.).Bottom line, this was governmental gangsterism..The Trudeau Liberals used legislation they knew was unconstitutional to bring about policy outcomes they could not otherwise have achieved — namely, the substantial reduction of Alberta's energy industry. Now, they have been exposed..In Alberta, we take what good news we can get. This was a good decision. And the wisdom of the Sovereignty Act is all the more obvious.
A win for Alberta, then..In a reference case, the Supreme Court of Canada strikes down Bill C-69 and does so for the very reason often expounded by Premier Smith — the Trudeau Liberal government was "out of its lane.".Bill C-69, officially known as the Impact Assessment Act but colloquially as the 'no-pipelines act,' suffered a 5-2 defeat this morning.. Danielle SmithPremier Danielle Smith hailed the Supreme Court of Canada decision that ruled Bill C-69 was unconstitutional. .Welcome as the win is, the damage has already been done, of course..Under the legislation that's now been declared unconstitutional, the Trudeau Liberals have already replaced the Calgary-based National Energy Board with the Ottawa-based Canada Energy Regulator, and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency by the Impact Assessment Agency..This ruling does not turn those clocks back. Nor does it do anything to address what Smith said in a statement this morning, the loss of "tens of billions in investment as well as thousands of jobs." .But, that's the way the Trudeau Liberals operate. They knew C-69 was vulnerable to a court challenge, but they passed it and acted upon the powers they believed — obviously without good reason — that it gave them. And the loss to Alberta is exactly as Smith described it, with no way to sue the federal government for damages. No wonder people despise this government.. Environment Minister Steven GuilbeaultEnvironment Minister Steven Guilbeault Addresses C-69 on Friday. .Anyway, in the words of Chief Justice Wagner writing for the majority, “The overbreadth of these effects exacerbates the constitutional frailties of the scheme’s decision-making functions.”.Quite. In plain English, under the Constitution, jurisdiction over energy belongs to the provinces. The Trudeau Liberals just tried to score one on Alberta and the Court said, 'not so fast.'.While it might be a Pyrrhic victory, there are a number of welcome implications..First, this is actually a win for all the provinces..Understandably, Albertans are focussed on pipelines and electrical generation..However, the legislation was national in scope and would have inserted the federal government into environmental assessment processes for major projects of all kinds across the country, wherever Ottawa could argue an admitted federal responsibility was impacted by the provincial exercise of its own..Thus, the environment, inland waterways, wildlife and climate change were all becoming gateways to federal encroachment upon provincial jurisdiction..Bottom line: While it's only a reference decision and has no immediate effect, Ontario miners will be as much encouraged as Alberta energy developers..Second, those of us who despaired of ever having an Alberta-friendly constitutional judgment from the Supreme Court must eat their words..While it is always possible to contrapt a sinister explanation involving court sensitivity to the politics of the situation, the simplest and most obvious explanation for their decision is as reported in the Western Standard by Shaun Polczer; seven judges compared the language of C-69 with the Constitution and concluded it went too far. Maybe the system works after all..Third, when the Sovereignty Act is tested — as it surely will be — we now know that the court is apparently sympathetic to the division of powers between the federal government and the provinces..It would of course be premature to say how any particular argument would go, should Premier Smith put the Sovereignty Act to work to fend off the Trudeau Liberals' absurd plan to achieve net-carbon-zero electrical generation by 2030..However, had the Supreme Court of Canada ruled other than it did, critics of the Sovereignty Act would certainly have mocked it. As it is, those critics must accept Alberta's position has been validated and there exists within the Government of Alberta a reservoir of constitutional understanding that the Supreme Court respects..The Trudeau Liberals have appealed. That was expected and is normal in the circumstances. Also expected was Environment Minister Guilbeault's straw-clutching that this was only a reference and the legislation remains in effect. And by the way, it was all Harper's fault. (That's all they've got, of course. These people are sad little caricatures of themselves.).Bottom line, this was governmental gangsterism..The Trudeau Liberals used legislation they knew was unconstitutional to bring about policy outcomes they could not otherwise have achieved — namely, the substantial reduction of Alberta's energy industry. Now, they have been exposed..In Alberta, we take what good news we can get. This was a good decision. And the wisdom of the Sovereignty Act is all the more obvious.
