Author: Shaun Fluker Page 1 of 37

B.Comm. (Alberta), LL.B. (Victoria), LL.M. (Calgary).
Associate Professor.
Please click here for more information.

By: Shaun Fluker and JD Students in the Public Interest Law Clinic

Bill Commented On: Bill 27 Education Amendment Act, 2024, 1^st Sess, 31^st Leg, 2024 (passed second reading Nov 19)

PDF Version: UCP Grievance and Culture-War Politics Enter Schools

On October 31 the Minister of Education introduced Bill 27 into the Alberta Legislature with the following comments: “The bill will provide clarity, consistency, and transparency to education policies in schools across Alberta. Parents across the province want to be more involved and have a larger say in their child’s education, and we are happy to strengthen their involvement through these proposed amendments.” This is a very bland introduction for a Bill that, if passed, will amend the Education Act, SA 2012, c E-0.3, to accomplish three objectives: (1) restrict the ability of schools to implement public health emergency measures; (2) require Ministerial approval of curriculum materials on gender identity, sexual orientation, and human sexuality; and (3) restrict the liberty of youth to use gender affirming names or pronouns in school. Bill 27 also grants a lot more than just a ‘larger say’ to parents – the amendments to the Education Act in the Bill grant parental control over the application of public health emergency measures, the delivery of educational materials on gender identity, sexual orientation, and human sexuality, and the use of gender affirming names or pronouns in schools. Suffice it to say, this is not what governing in the public interest looks like.

The University’s Kafkaesque Direction on Temporary Structures and Overnight Protests: “You are not supposed to see this.”

By Shaun Fluker

On November 5, 2024

In Protest

By: Jonnette Watson Hamilton and Shaun Fluker

Document Commented On: University Direction on Temporary Structures and Overnight Protests, 2024-UC-003-A, revised May 3, 2024

PDF Version: The University’s Kafkaesque Direction on Temporary Structures and Overnight Protests: “You are not supposed to see this.”

Questions about the authority exercised and the process followed by the University of Calgary when it acted on the “University Direction on Temporary Structures and Overnight Protests” (Direction) were raised in an earlier an ABlawg post on “Encampments on Campus Part 2.” As discussed in more detail in that earlier post, the Direction – identified as “2024-UC-003-A, Revised May 3, 2024” – was apparently sent to all U of C students by May 3 and handed out to pro-Palestinian protesters on campus on May 9, the same day the protesters set up their on-campus encampment and the Calgary Police Service (CPS) tore it down and forcibly removed those protesters. The Direction states that failure to follow the university’s Use of University Facilities for Non-Academic Purposes Policy (Facilities Policy) and the Direction “may constitute non-academic misconduct (students), cause for disciplinary action (staff), and/or grounds to be trespassed from the University of Calgary’s premises (all).”

The AER’s Proposed Amendments to Closure Liability Management Directives: Much Ado about Not Much

By Shaun Fluker

On November 4, 2024

In Administrative Law, Energy, Oil & Gas

By: Drew Yewchuk and Shaun Fluker

Matter Commented On: Bulletin 2024-25, Invitation for Feedback on Revised Liability Directives

PDF Version: The AER’s Proposed Amendments to Closure Liability Management Directives: Much Ado about Not Much

On 8 October 2024, the AER issued Bulletin 2024-25, Invitation for Feedback on Revised Liability Directives, announcing the AER is taking public comments on a proposal to restructure AER directives relating to the closure liability management framework. The AER’s description of the changes, and a video presentation describing the changes, are here. At a high level:

Four directives are being amended: Directive 001: Requirements for Site-Specific Liability Assessments; Directive 011: Estimated Liability (previously Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program: Updated Industry Parameters and Liability Costs); Directive 068: Security Deposits; Directive 088: Licensee Life-Cycle Management.
Three directives are being rescinded as their contents are either being reorganized into the four amended directives or are no longer necessary: Directive 006: Licensee Liability Rating (LLR) Program; Directive 024: Large Facility Liability Management Program; Directive 075: Oilfield Waste Liability (OWL) Program.

UCP Grievance Politics Takes Aim at the Law Society of Alberta

By Shaun Fluker

On November 1, 2024

In Administrative Law

By: Shaun Fluker

Matter commented on: Review of Professional Regulators, October 23, 2024

PDF Version: UCP Grievance Politics Takes Aim at the Law Society of Alberta

On October 23, 2024, the UCP government announced it was spending public money to find a solution to a problem that does not exist: aka the Review of Professional Regulators. This exercise of grievance politics includes within its scope the Law Society of Alberta, and as a member of the law society, I received an email invitation to take the government’s survey. This post discloses my answers to the survey.

Alberta Threatens the Independence of its Legal Aid Program

By Shaun Fluker

On September 18, 2024

In Access to Justice

By: Shaun Fluker

Agreement comment on: Governance Agreement Respecting Legal Aid (September 6, 2024)

PDF Version: Alberta Threatens the Independence of its Legal Aid Program

In early September, the Alberta government announced it had signed a new five year (2024 – 2029) legal aid governance agreement with Legal Aid Alberta and the Law Society of Alberta. The government news release emphasized collaboration and a ‘shared understanding’ amongst the signatories on the importance of legal aid for access to justice. I read this narrative with suspicion because collaboration and ‘shared understanding’ are not words that I associate with the funding of public services by the UCP government. Moreover, only a couple of months have passed since the media reported that the Minister of Justice had unilaterally terminated negotiations on a new agreement in May; apparently seeking to impose a new funding structure for legal aid which critics allege would provide the Minister with significantly more control over the funding and operations of the legal aid program. This turn by the Minister from an authoritarian to a collaborative stance in just two months seems very unlikely to me, and my curiosity led to a closer look at the details in this new agreement. These details reveal that the Minister has not backed off plans to restructure legal aid, and the independence of legal aid in Alberta is under attack.