Alberta is once again taking the federal government to court over Ottawa’s attempt to review and block major infrastructure projects like mines and pipelines on environmental grounds, Premier Danielle Smith said.
The province on Thursday launched a second challenge to Ottawa’s Impact Assessment Act, which the federal government enacted in 2019. The province contested the act from the outset and the Supreme Court of Canada, in a 2023 non-binding opinion, advised that Ottawa overstepped its constitutional authority.
The federal government, under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, amended the act in June, attempting to satisfy the court’s concerns. The changes, however, did little to satiate Alberta. Ms. Smith, on Oct. 4, warned Alberta would revive its legal strategy if Ottawa did not adequately respond to its concerns by Nov. 1.
“The Prime Minister should know better by now than to think that we are bluffing,” Ms. Smith told reporters Thursday. “We’re prepared to fight this time, the next time and any time Ottawa thinks they know what is best for our province.”
The government filed its reference case at the Court of Appeal of Alberta Thursday morning, she said.
Justice Minister Mickey Amery said Alberta asked the federal government to provide clear timelines for project approval; allow for provincial environmental assessments in lieu of federal reviews; and remove the ministerial discretion on project approvals. Ottawa failed on all counts, he said.
“That’s a real problem with the Impact Assessment Act,” he said. “To have a federal minister have the discretion to approve a project that falls within the jurisdiction of our provinces is inappropriate and irresponsible.
“And that’s what prompted us to bring forward this reference.”
The federal Liberals, in a statement attributed to two ministers, said the IAA amendments closely followed the Supreme Court’s opinion that “confirmed the jurisdictional role of the federal government on environmental and Indigenous areas of responsibility.”
Steven Guilbeault, the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change, and Jonathan Wilkinson, the federal Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, accused Ms. Smith of putting 45 projects, including four in Alberta, under threat.
“Once again, Premier Smith is choosing divisive politics over constructive collaboration in the best interest of Alberta’s economy,” the joint statement said. “With the amended Impact Assessment Act, Canada can now get these good projects built efficiently, while protecting the environment and Indigenous rights. We want to ensure as much clarity, certainty, and predictability as possible for projects, which Premier Smith threatens with her reckless political games.”
Alberta has 10 legal challenges against Ottawa under way, including four tied to firearms and one related to the IAA, according to Mr. Amery. He did not provide a price tag for Alberta’s court battles but said the cost pales in comparison to the economic impact.
When asked whether other provinces, such as Saskatchewan and Ontario, are backing Alberta’s latest legal foray, Mr. Amery noted the province only filed the case Thursday. He said he expects some provinces who joined in the last IAA challenge to team up with Alberta on this fight.
Separately, Ms. Smith on Wednesday said U.S. president-elect Donald Trump has “valid concerns related to illegal migrants and drug smuggling” at the border between Canada and the U.S. Her comments followed an emergency meeting Mr. Trudeau and Canada’s premiers held to discuss Mr. Trump’s proposed 25-per-cent tariffs on goods flowing into his country from Canada and Mexico.
Ms. Smith accumulated power in Alberta by vowing to battle Mr. Trudeau and what she considers unconstitutional encroachments on her province’s jurisdiction. On Tuesday, she announced plans to fight Ottawa’s planned emissions cap by deploying the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act, legislation which swaths of constitutional experts consider dubious. Its legitimacy has not been tested in court.
Ms. Smith did not invoke the sovereignty act with respect to the IAA.
Passing a motion under the sovereignty act does little more than elevate awareness around an issue, unless cabinet pursues one of the motion’s suggested remedies through further legislative or regulatory change. The motion relative to the emissions cap, for example, proposes Alberta consider seizing ownership of greenhouse-gas data that energy companies collect from oil and gas operations in the province. The clause states that only Alberta would have the authority to release such information. The motion also says Alberta should consider banning people from oil and gas facilities, save for company employees and contractors, and those authorized by the provincial government.
Ms. Smith first invoked her sovereignty act a year ago, suggesting Alberta could establish a Crown corporation to shield the province from Ottawa’s environmental regulations for Canada’s electricity grid. Alberta has not taken such action.