ABLawg - - Page 27

By: Drew Yewchuk

Matter Commented On: “A Made-in-Alberta Failure: Unfunded Oil and Gas Closure Liability” School of Public Policy Paper Series, October 2023

PDF Version: Freedom of Information: Brokering Access for Records on Oil and Gas Liability Management at the AER

This blog post is a companion to “A Made-in-Alberta Failure: Unfunded Oil and Gas Closure Liability”, a research paper Martin Olszynski, Shaun Fluker, and I wrote for the School of Public Policy. The paper describes the decades of regulatory failure in Albertan policy on inactive and orphan oil and gas wells and identifies the core deficiencies in the regulatory approach. This post provides a summary of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP) access brokering process with the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) for the records obtained for writing that paper. Altogether, more than 1,500 pages of records were obtained through FOIP, although that includes a large number of duplicated pages. The documents cited in the research paper are attached to the paper as an appendix.

Original Gender: Mobilizing Charter Section 28 to Defend Trans Rights in Saskatchewan

By Charlotte Dalwood

On October 6, 2023

In Constitutional, Equality

By: Charlotte Dalwood

Matter Considered: Use of Preferred First Name and Pronouns by Students, Government of Saskatchewan

PDF Version: Original Gender: Mobilizing Charter Section 28 to Defend Trans Rights in Saskatchewan

On October 10, 2023, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe wants his government to invoke the notwithstanding clause in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to shield his anti-trans name and pronoun policy from Charter scrutiny.

The policy in question, announced in August, requires Saskatchewan students under the age of 16 to obtain parental permission before changing their names and pronouns at school. Regina-based organization UR Pride is challenging that policy as contrary to sections 7 and 15(1) of the Charter. That case will be argued in November. Last week, the Court of King’s Bench of Saskatchewan granted an injunction to prevent the policy from going into effect until the Charter challenge is heard.

The Legal Status of UNDRIP in British Columbia: Gitxaala v British Columbia (Chief Gold Commissioner)

By Nigel Bankes

On October 5, 2023

In Aboriginal, Indigenous, International Law

By: Nigel Bankes

Case Commented on: Gitxaala v British Columbia (Chief Gold Commissioner), 2023 BCSC 1680 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Legal Status of UNDRIP in British Columbia: Gitxaala v British Columbia (Chief Gold Commissioner)

This is the first of what we anticipate will be a series of posts on this important decision which involved a challenge to the implementation and/or constitutional validity of British Columbia’s hard rock mineral regime under the terms of the Mineral Tenure Act, RSBC 1996, c 292 [MTA]. Other posts will address the substance of the duty to consult and accommodate argument in the context of free entry regimes, as well as the sacred site issues discussed in the decision.

Supreme Court of Canada Will Soon Rule on the Constitutionality of the Federal Impact Assessment Act. Here’s What to Watch for…

By David V Wright

On October 3, 2023

In Environmental, Supreme Court of Canada

By: David V. Wright

Matter Commented On: Forthcoming Supreme Court of Canada reference case in the Matter of 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, SC 2019, c 28 and the Physical Activities Regulations, SOR/2019-285; and the Matter of a Reference by the Lieutenant Governor in Council to the Court of Appeal of Alberta under the Judicature Act, RSA 2000, c J-2, s 26

PDF Version: Supreme Court of Canada Will Soon Rule on the Constitutionality of the Federal Impact Assessment Act. Here’s What to Watch for…

For anyone interested in impact assessment in Canada, this is a suspenseful time. The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) is expected to soon release its ruling on the constitutionality of the federal Impact Assessment Act, SC 2019, c 28 [IAA] and the associated Physical Activities Regulations, SOR/2019-285 (the latter setting out the list of projects that trigger application of the regime). My Environmental Impact Assessment Law seminar students and I are set to dive deeply into the decision as soon as it drops, and no doubt many others plan to do similar. For now, this short post sets out ten things to watch for. (For those interested in deeper dives into this statutory regime and how we got here, see my previous publications here, here and here).

Now 40% Worse: The Mine Financial Security Program in 2023

By Drew Yewchuk

On September 28, 2023

In Energy, Oil & Gas

By: Drew Yewchuk and Martin Olszynski

Documents Commented on: Mine Financial Security Program – Security and Liability (2023); Annual Mine Financial Security Program Submissions 2023 Submissions for 2022 Reporting Year

PDF Version: Now 40% Worse: The Mine Financial Security Program in 2023

This brief post is in response to the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) publishing the annual submissions required under the Mine Financial Security Program (MFSP). We provide an update on the state of Alberta’s system for obtaining financial security for the closure of oilsands and coal mines. Drew last provided an update in 2021, and that post describes the problems with the MFSP. He skipped 2022 because there was not much to say: it was bad news, but the same bad news as 2021. The numbers this year contain some notable surprises.