OTTAWA—The federal government has rejected almost all the changes Conservative senators made to its environmental assessment legislation, defying the dire warnings of certain industries and premiers that the bill will block new resource development and tear at the fabric of Confederation.

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna tabled the government’s response to more than 200 Senate amendments to the bill Wednesday in the House of Commons. She said the government was only open to amendments it felt improved the bill, and so it rejected 90 per cent of the changes proposed by Conservative senators.

These included changes that would have restricted who could participate in the new assessment process and would have meant consideration of potential impacts on gender, climate change and Indigenous rights would merely be optional for the new agency tasked with reviewing proposed projects.

In all, the government accepted 62 changes made in the upper chamber, almost all from Independent senators appointed by the prime minister. It also modified 37 amendments, and rejected 130 that were mostly proposed by Conservatives.

“They want to replace environmental review with a pipeline approval process. They want us to copy and paste recommendations written by oil lobbyists,” McKenna said.

“The Conservatives’ changes would take us backwards, increase polarization and, ironically, make it harder for projects to get build,” she said.

The Liberals introduced Bill C-69 — the Impact Assessment Act — in February 2018. The government framed it as a way to restore trust in the process to approve major infrastructure and resource projects like mines, pipelines, ports and nuclear facilities. McKenna has repeatedly argued it is necessary to overhaul the assessment regime created by the previous Conservative government, which the Liberals contend made worthy resource projects harder to approve by fostering opposition from environmentalists and some Indigenous nations, and opening them to court challenges.

“We know that these new rules will provide investors with the certainty they need,” she told the Commons.

The Conservatives had labelled the bill the “No More Pipelines Act,” arguing wider public participation and the requirement to consider more social and environmental factors will bog down reviews and deter big businesses from pursuing projects.

Conservative MP Shannon Stubbs said the bill will drive capital out of Canada and contribute to a slew of social problems — family breakdowns, suicides, business bankruptcies, increased food bank use — in areas that rely on resource projects.

She said the bill is an example of Liberal legislation that is “outright hostile” to the energy industry.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney has also railed against a bill he warned would foster separatist angst in his province. On Monday, Kenney and the premiers of Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick and the Northwest Territories sent an open letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, urging him to accept the Senate amendments, which were sent to the House of Commons after months of consideration last week.

On Wednesday, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer said he was “surprised” and “disappointed” the government rejected the Conservative-sponsored amendments. He said it is the Liberal government which risks “polarizing Canadians” if it uses its majority to push the bill through over provincial objections — not premiers like Kenney, who warn it would harm national unity.

Scheer also dismissed McKenna’s allegation that Conservatives simply took up amendments written by oil lobbyists, saying the party is looking after the interests of the energy sector and workers who depend on it. He countered that the Liberals are guided by “foreign funded” environmentalist groups who oppose all pipelines.

Meanwhile, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh told reporters his party will support the bill but said it is “hypocritical” of the Trudeau government to have bought a pipeline, made plans to expand it, and plan to put more oil tanker traffic into waterways of the lower B.C. mainland, and yet claim to be concerned about the environment.

The Liberals, on the other hand, say their legislation provides the overhaul needed to address shortcomings in environmental assessment which resulted after the Conservatives “gutted” the review process in 2012. They argue the old system created the problems that have stalled the Trans Mountain expansion project. Delays by court challenges and opposition from the new NDP government in B.C. prompted Texas-based Kinder Morgan to pull out, leading the Trudeau government to buy the company’s pipeline system for $4.5 billion, and to kick-start new consultations with Indigenous peoples. A decision is due in the coming days on whether to proceed with the project to twin the existing pipeline.

“C-69 is all about making sure that we improve the process that failed under the Conservatives, under Stephen Harper,” Trudeau told reporters Wednesday morning.

“We know that by creating a process that gives certainty, that demonstrates working with Indigenous peoples and responding to environmental concerns is an (integral) part of being successful in our resource development.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

McKenna said the bill is meant to include more voices in the process to address divisions and a lack of faith in environmental protections under the previous system.

Among amendments the government accepted is a change that makes explicit the new Impact Assessment Agency should consider how project proposals would contribute to “economic sustainability” among other factors such as the impact on environment and Indigenous rights, said a government official speaking on background.

The government also accepted a change that shifts some responsibilities from the environment minister to the agency, including the authority to appoint review panel members and to suspend time limits for assessments that would normally be capped at 300 days under the new legislation (not including a 180-day planning phase), the official said.

The federal cabinet, however, will maintain the final say on whether to overrule or accept decisions from the new agency.

“We have come up with a package of amendments that reduced timelines, that increased certainty, that depoliticized the process — and people should be happy about that,” said Paula Simons, an Independent senator from Alberta who sponsored amendments to the bill. “It’s a really good day news day for bicameral parliamentary democracy.”

But there were some amendments the government couldn’t stomach, the official said. The Liberals rejected a change that would have made considerations during a review optional, including impacts on the environment, gender, rights of Indigenous peoples and Canada’s efforts to combat climate change. They also shot down amendments that would have prevented judicial appeals of the new assessment agency’s decisions and reintroduced a test to grant “standing” to ensure only members of the public directly impacted by projects can participate in the review process, the official said.

Conservative Sen. David Tkachuk said the bill is now “unsupportable.” Through Bill C-69 and another bill before the Senate that would ban heavy oil tankers from stopping at ports on much of the B.C. coast, Tkachuk said the Liberals will strangle the country’s oil industry.

“This is all about killing the oilsands and making Fort McMurray a ghost town,” he said.

Perrin Beatty, head of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, reacted with dismay to the government’s actions, warning they “will further discourage investment in Canada and threaten the financial security of millions of Canadians.”

Beatty said although most of the attention has been on how the oil and gas sectors are affected, “the proposed legislation will also limit Canada’s ability to create trade-enabling infrastructure that is so desperately needed, including ports, transportation corridors, and modernized energy grids.”

Anna Johnston, staff lawyer with the firm West Coast Environmental Law, was among environmental advocates who said they were happy the government rejected most Conservative changes to the bill. While she said the government made some concessions — including by allowing the heads of regulatory bodies to chair review panels, a key point of contention for many environmentalists — the rejected amendments that would have “weakened” consideration of climate, sustainability and women’s equality “keeps the integrity of the bill intact.”

Read more about: