ABLawg - - Page 138

By: Nicholas Konstantinov

PDF Version: Self-Incrimination Immunity and Professional Misconduct

Case Commented On: Toy v Edmonton (Police Service), 2018 ABCA 37 (CanLII)

In Toy v Edmonton (Police Service), the Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed former Constable Elvin Toy’s appeal of a 2015 ruling that led to his discharge from the force. That year, the Law Enforcement Review Board upheld a Presiding Officer’s decision convicting Toy of deceit and misconduct in the course of fabricating evidence at an earlier proceeding. Toy argued that the Board failed to apply the appropriate standard of review to correct the Presiding Officer’s error in law, which resulted in admitting involuntary testimony that offended his privilege against self-incrimination.

A Missed Opportunity to Strengthen Compliance and Enforcement under the Federal Fisheries, Environmental Assessment and Canadian Energy Regulator Acts

By Alastair Lucas, Q.C.

On March 1, 2018

In Environmental, Fisheries Regulation

By: Alastair Lucas

PDF Version: A Missed Opportunity to Strengthen Compliance and Enforcement under the Federal Fisheries, Environmental Assessment and Canadian Energy Regulator Acts

Bills Commented On: Bill C-68, An Act to Amend the Fisheries Act, and Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and make consequential amendments to other Acts

Many expected changes and even new approaches to compliance and enforcement under Bills C-68 and C-69. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

Your Concerns Have Been Noted: Citizen Participation in Pipeline Regulatory Processes Under the Proposed Impact Assessment Act

By Kristen van de Biezenbos

On February 28, 2018

In Environmental

By: Kristen van de Biezenbos

PDF Version: Your Concerns Have Been Noted: Citizen Participation in Pipeline Regulatory Processes Under the Proposed Impact Assessment Act

Bill Commented On: Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

This post continues the Natural Resources, Energy, and Environmental Law group’s series on the proposed legislative changes in Bill C-69 by examining the provisions pertaining to citizen participation in the pipeline review processes outlined in the Impact Assessment Act (IAA) and comparing them to the existing provisions in the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, SC 2012, c 19, s 52, (CEAA, 2012). This post also considers whether the proposed provisions put forth in the IAA effectively address some of the concerns raised about the lack of meaningful citizen participation in pipeline review processes under the existing regime.

Indigenous Engagement and Consideration in the Newly Proposed Impact Assessment Act: The Fog Persists

By David V Wright

On February 27, 2018

In Aboriginal, Environmental

By: David V. Wright

PDF Version: Indigenous Engagement and Consideration in the Newly Proposed Impact Assessment Act: The Fog Persists

Bill Commented On: Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

On February 8, the Trudeau government tabled Bill C-69. This is a complex Bill that aims to overhaul several of Canada’s foundational environmental laws, with a particular focus on the regime for review and approval (or rejection) of major projects such as mines, dams and pipelines. My colleagues have also generated ABlawg posts on this Bill; you can read them here, here, and here (with more to come).

In this post, I focus on Indigenous engagement dimensions of the proposed Impact Assessment Act. First, I offer some introductory comments on the path to this point, then I move on to a high-level inventory of notable Indigenous engagement features in the proposed Act, noting differences from the current assessment regime in places. I then offer some preliminary reflections and comments with respect to the proposed Act in relation to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the duty to consult. While the latter sub-topics could be major research projects in and of themselves, this post simply puts forward starting points for further examination, and, hopefully, further discussion toward improving the proposed legislation before it is finalized. In a nutshell, the proposed Act builds in more authority and avenues for Indigenous engagement, but fails to seize the opportunity to generate much needed clarity around UNDRIP and the duty to consult in the impact assessment realm. This, unfortunately, may serve to thicken a fog that has persisted in this area for some time.

Oversight and Enforcement in Bill C-69 Re: the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act

By Shaun Fluker

On February 26, 2018

In Environmental

By: Shaun Fluker

PDF Version: Oversight and Enforcement in Bill C-69 Regarding the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act

Bill Commented On: Bill C-69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

This post continues the conversation on ABlawg regarding Bill C-69. Martin Olszynski and Nigel Bankes provided an overview of the proposed Impact Assessment Act and Canadian Energy Regulator Act here and here. This post examines some of the oversight and enforcement provisions in the Bill, looking specifically at changes with respect to oversight by the Federal Court and enforcement of project conditions. There are a couple of problems which deserve some attention as Bill C-69 makes its way through the legislative process.