Author: Drew Yewchuk Page 2 of 19

B.A. (UAlberta) J.D. (UCalgary) LLM (U.B.C.) Drew was a full-time staff lawyer with the University of Calgary's Public Interest Law Clinic from 2018-2022. He is now an PhD student at the Peter A. Allard School of Law. His research focuses on administrative secrecy, access to information law, species at risk, resource law, and environmental liabilities.

Decision Commented On: Song v The Law Society of Alberta, 2025 ABKB 525 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Non-Justiciable War on ‘Woke’ at the Law Society of Alberta

Back in February 2023, a group of Alberta lawyers petitioned for a special meeting of the Law Society of Alberta (LSA) to hold a vote seeking to remove the LSA’s powers to require its members to engage in continuing professional development and specifically, remove the requirement to complete an Indigenous cultural competency program called ‘The Path’. The petition was defeated at that special meeting: 2,609 votes against the resolution to 864 votes in favour of the resolution. See the ABlawg posts about the special meeting: Law Society of Alberta to Hold a Special Meeting to Debate its Power to Mandate Indigenous Cultural Competency Training and Fighting Over History at a Special Meeting of the Law Society of Alberta.

The 2025 Mine Financial Security Program Update: Security Collected for Aging Syncrude Mine Offers a First Estimate of Mine Closure Costs

By Drew Yewchuk

On October 3, 2025

In Energy, Environmental, Natural Resources, Oil & Gas

By: Drew Yewchuk and Martin Olszynski

Documents Commented On: Annual Mine Financial Security Program Submissions 2025 Submissions for 2024 Reporting Year; Mine Financial Security Program – Security and Liability, September 29, 2025.

PDF Version: The 2025 Mine Financial Security Program Update: Security Collected for Aging Syncrude Mine Offers a First Estimate of Mine Closure Costs

This is our annual update post in response to submissions for the Mine Financial Security Program (MFSP) being posted to the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) website. See last year’s post here. The MFSP is Alberta’s troubled system for obtaining financial security to ensure the closure (decommissioning, remediation, and reclamation) of oilsands and coal mines when they stop operating. For a detailed assessment of the weaknesses in the MFSP, see our 2023 paper coauthored with Andrew Leach, “Not Fit for Purpose: Oil Sands Mines and Alberta’s Mine Financial Security Program”. The government conducted a review of the MFSP from 2021-2024 that concluded in February 2025 with minor changes that do not repair fundamental problems with the MFSP – see our post here.

The Orphan Well Association Annual Report 2024/2025: The Sequoia Settlement Hits the Orphan Inventory

By Drew Yewchuk

On August 18, 2025

In Energy, Environmental, Oil & Gas

By: Drew Yewchuk

Matter Commented On: Orphan Well Association Annual Report 2024/2025

PDF Version: The Orphan Well Association Annual Report 2024/2025: The Sequoia Settlement Hits the Orphan Inventory

On July 15, 2025 the Orphan Well Association (OWA) released their Annual Report for 2024/2025. OWA annual reports provide insight into Alberta’s orphan oil and gas site problem and the pace at which the problem is being addressed (see the ABlawgs on past OWA annual reports: 2022/2023 and 2023/2024). The OWA annual report is separate from the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER)’s annual liability management performance reports, which ABlawg covered for 2022 and 2023. This blog summarizes the current state and foreseeable future of Alberta’s current orphan oil and gas site problem.

How Canada’s Federal and Provincial Governments Collaborate Against the Public Right to Access Environmental Information

By Drew Yewchuk

On July 10, 2025

In Access to Information, Environmental, Privacy

By: Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: How Canada’s Federal and Provincial Governments Collaborate Against the Public Right to Access Environmental Information

Secrecy enables government messaging control and defeats democratic accountability. The right to information is foundational to democratic participation in the conduct of public affairs. When journalists and academics cannot access information on an issue, that information is not conveyed to the public, and the public cannot meaningfully participate or assess government decision-making on the issue. This situation is common with environmental damage – the government permits and enables environmental damage but misleads the public into believing that the environment is being protected. This is the worst outcome for the protection of a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, but the ideal outcome for a governing party, who takes credit for the economic benefits of the environmentally damaging project and avoids any criticism by keeping the public unaware of the environmental damage.

The Information Commissioner’s Report on the Government of Alberta’s War on the Public’s Right to Access Information

By Drew Yewchuk

On May 30, 2025

In Access to Information, Privacy

By: Drew Yewchuk

Matter Commented On: OIPC Investigation Report F2025-IR-01, Investigation into the Government of Alberta’s practices respecting access to information

PDF Version: The Information Commissioner’s Report on the Government of Alberta’s War on the Public’s Right to Access Information

On 8 May 2025, Alberta’s Information Commissioner (Commissioner) posted Investigation Report 2025-01 (Report 2025-01). Report 2025-01 is unlike typical Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (OIPC) orders that make decisions about particular records requests under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP). Instead, Report 2025-01 relates to how the 27 government departments that make up the Government of Alberta were handling records requests in general. Report 2025-01 concludes that the Alberta government had been applying incorrect interpretations of three sections of FOIP to improperly reject records requests (at 3).