Ottawa will amend the Impact Assessment Act a second time rather than take an Alberta Court of Appeal opinion that found much of the federal project-review law unconstitutional to the Supreme Court of Canada, Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin’s office has confirmed.
asserted
office → amend → Canada
The government says it will move quickly.
asserted
it → say → ?
It has not said what the changes will contain or when they will be made public.
asserted
they → say → what
That leaves major project proponents working under a law that three appellate opinions have now found oversteps federal jurisdiction.
asserted
opinions → leave → jurisdiction
In a 4-1 opinion released Oct. 9, Alberta’s top court concluded that the amendments Parliament passed in 2024 did not cure the defects the Supreme Court identified in 2023.
asserted
Court → release → 2023
The majority found the act’s “designated projects” scheme and its regulations remain unconstitutional except insofar as they apply to federal undertakings.
asserted
they → find → undertakings
Justice Kevin Feehan dissented and would have upheld the amended act.
asserted
Feehan → dissent → act
The majority found that the act’s definition of “adverse effects within federal jurisdiction” reaches beyond federal powers, notably on migratory birds and on the health, social and economic conditions of Indigenous peoples.
asserted
definition → find → peoples
Parliament had added a “non-negligible” threshold for those effects, but the court said that bar remains low in practice.
asserted
bar → add → practice
Once a project is designated, the act bars activities that could cause such effects.
uncertain
that → designate → effects
A negative federal decision can keep that bar in place indefinitely, even for projects primarily under provincial jurisdiction.
asserted
decision → keep → jurisdiction
By not appealing, Ottawa gives up the chance to have the Supreme Court narrow or reverse it.
asserted
Court → appeal → it
Amy Falkner, Dabrusin’s press secretary, confirmed the plan in a media statement, the National Post reported, as did The Canadian Press.
asserted
Press → confirm → statement
“The details of these amendments will be confirmed in due course.
asserted
details → confirm → course
Canada will move quickly to provide certainty to investors, industry and Indigenous Peoples, so together we can advance major projects and create shared prosperity for all Canadians,” Falkner said.
asserted
Falkner → move → Canadians
No replacement framework yet
No new statute has been proposed, and no date has been given for releasing the amendments.
asserted
date → propose → amendments
Falkner said they will come on top of changes already proposed in Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act.
asserted
they → say → Bill
That bill, tabled Sept. 21, would make the Canada Energy Regulator the sole assessor for pipelines, power lines and certain offshore renewable projects.
asserted
Regulator → table → pipelines
It would also set a one-year target for federal reviews.
asserted
It → set → reviews
It passed second reading 296-26 on Oct. 8, the day before the Alberta ruling, and is now before a Commons committee.
asserted
It → pass → committee
Weeks earlier, on Sept. 3, cabinet had already removed interprovincial and international pipelines and power lines from the act’s project list by regulation.
asserted
cabinet → remove → regulation
That shift does not fully escape the ruling.
asserted
shift → escape → ruling
Ottawa has said the energy regulator will still be bound by the Impact Assessment Act’s provisions when it carries out its reviews.
asserted
it → say → reviews
For now, reviews will proceed case by case.
asserted
reviews → proceed → case
“In the interim, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada will work with proponents to determine the best path forward for their specific project assessments as we finalize amendments to the (act),” Falkner said.
asserted
Falkner → work → act
The Alberta majority accepted that Parliament may be able to build an assessment regime that complements existing environmental regulation.
uncertain
that → accept → regulation
Its objection was to the act as drafted.
asserted
objection → draft → act
The law sets no standards for what a project may or may not do in areas of federal jurisdiction, the majority found, so designated projects could be measured against criteria never spelled out in advance.
uncertain
projects → set → advance
That uncertainty, it reasoned, heightens the risk that a narrow federal interest becomes the justification for a sweeping review of matters belonging to the provinces.
asserted
interest → reason → provinces
The Supreme Court voiced a similar worry in 2023, warning against federal assessment becoming a “constitutional Trojan horse.”
asserted
assessment → voice → 2023
The act, passed in 2019 as Bill C-69, has now lost three times on appeal.
asserted
act → pass → appeal
Alberta’s Court of Appeal first found it unconstitutional in 2022.
asserted
it → find → 2022
The Supreme Court largely agreed in 2023.
asserted
Court → agree → 2023
After Ottawa amended the law through its 2024 budget implementation bill, Alberta sent the revised version back to court.
asserted
Alberta → amend → court
Reaction from both sides
Premier Danielle Smith and Justice Minister Mickey Amery welcomed the decision.
asserted
Smith → welcome → decision
They said it “will necessitate a major overhaul to the legislation that will result in the elimination of all federal interference in intra-provincial infrastructure projects.
asserted
that → say → projects
Environmental lawyers were dismayed.
asserted
lawyers → dismay → ?
Charlie Hatt, climate director at Ecojustice, which had urged an appeal, called the decision deeply disappointing.
asserted
which → urge → decision
“Canadians deserve a federal government that is prepared to defend its jurisdiction to assess the environmental consequences of major projects and ensure decisions are made in the public interest,” Hatt said.
asserted
Hatt → deserve → interest
Writing for The Hub in April, before the latest ruling, Charles Lammam argued that court decisions on project approvals have compounded the regulatory burden facing investors.
asserted
decisions → write → investors
…and 14 more, not listed.
The Aporia
