Co-operation Agreement between Alberta and Canada

Provide a comment

• Co-op Agreement

  by Peter Alberta, about 1 month ago
  Absolutely bloody NOT! Environmental assessment is already a very weakened tool as it is wielded by various governments. It is far too biased toward an unsustainable/broken economic model by political influence and the self-serving influence of industry lobbyists. I know this from 33 years experience of fed service in the environmental protection business with a large portion served in Alberta. The natural environment is THE MOST IMPORTANT element in sustaining health for all life and as such MUST be primary focus for all project assessment. Alberta in particular has demonstrated a near complete lack of concern for environmental sustainability and... Continue reading

  Absolutely bloody NOT! Environmental assessment is already a very weakened tool as it is wielded by various governments. It is far too biased toward an unsustainable/broken economic model by political influence and the self-serving influence of industry lobbyists. I know this from 33 years experience of fed service in the environmental protection business with a large portion served in Alberta. The natural environment is THE MOST IMPORTANT element in sustaining health for all life and as such MUST be primary focus for all project assessment. Alberta in particular has demonstrated a near complete lack of concern for environmental sustainability and YOU FEDS KNOW IT. To abdicate federal responsibility to Alberta is to BETRAY any hope and trust of Albertans and Canadians.

  
  

  
  

  
  

• Completing projects

  by KHoffos, about 1 month ago

  Before any new projects are approved, old ones public and private who have been decommissioned and/or abandoned need to be properly and fully dealt with including monies owed for proper closure of equipment and all land rehabilitation received with inspection that sites have been dealt with and properly completed. Going forward, for future projects, the cost to properly decommission and rehabilitate a site need to be collected as part of the approval process and held in a registered account that will only be accessed when either project is complete and/or company forfeits control with the assurance that if the damage... Continue reading

  Before any new projects are approved, old ones public and private who have been decommissioned and/or abandoned need to be properly and fully dealt with including monies owed for proper closure of equipment and all land rehabilitation received with inspection that sites have been dealt with and properly completed. Going forward, for future projects, the cost to properly decommission and rehabilitate a site need to be collected as part of the approval process and held in a registered account that will only be accessed when either project is complete and/or company forfeits control with the assurance that if the damage is greater than what was foreseen then the company will be held responsible. Current abandoned projects should be dealt with before we take any new risk as companies have been proven to be very unreliable.

• Environmental degradation impacts the health and wellbeing of Albertans; especially Indigenous Albertans

  by Melanie Daniels B.Sc., P.Biol., about 1 month ago

  Environmental degradation is not an abstract policy concern, it is a direct threat to the physical, mental, emotional, and cultural well‑being of Indigenous peoples across Alberta. When lands, waters, and ecosystems are damaged, the impacts are not limited to wildlife or landscapes. They are carried in the bodies, minds, and daily lives of the people whose identities, food systems, and cultural practices are inseparable from the land.

  1. Physical Health Impacts

  Environmental degradation contributes to a wide range of physical health harms for Indigenous communities, including:

  Contaminated air, water, and soil

  Industrial emissions, wildfire smoke, tailings, spills, and cumulative pollution... Continue reading

  Environmental degradation is not an abstract policy concern, it is a direct threat to the physical, mental, emotional, and cultural well‑being of Indigenous peoples across Alberta. When lands, waters, and ecosystems are damaged, the impacts are not limited to wildlife or landscapes. They are carried in the bodies, minds, and daily lives of the people whose identities, food systems, and cultural practices are inseparable from the land.

  1. Physical Health Impacts

  Environmental degradation contributes to a wide range of physical health harms for Indigenous communities, including:

  Contaminated air, water, and soil

  Industrial emissions, wildfire smoke, tailings, spills, and cumulative pollution increase exposure to:

  • Fine particulates
  • Heavy metals
  • Carcinogens
  • Endocrine‑disrupting chemicals
  • PFAS and other persistent contaminants

  These exposures are linked to:

  • Respiratory illness
  • Cardiovascular disease
  • Diabetes and metabolic disorders
  • Cancers
  • Reproductive health impacts

  Indigenous communities often live closer to industrial sites and degraded landscapes, meaning exposure is not theoretical, it is daily.

  Loss of safe traditional foods

  When fish, game, berries, and medicinal plants are contaminated or declining, communities face:

  • Food insecurity
  • Nutritional deficiencies
  • Increased reliance on expensive, low‑quality store‑bought foods
  • Higher rates of chronic disease

  This is not only a health issue, but also a cultural and Treaty issue, it is, indeed, an Honour of the Crown issue!

  2. Mental Health Impacts

  Environmental degradation also harms mental and emotional well‑being in ways that are often invisible in regulatory processes.

  Eco‑anxiety and grief

  Indigenous peoples experience:

  • Grief from watching the land change
  • Anxiety about water safety
  • Fear for future generations
  • Stress from repeated environmental disruptions

  This is sometimes called solastalgia — the distress caused by environmental loss in one’s home territory.

  Loss of cultural connection

  When land is degraded, access to:

  • Ceremony
  • Harvesting
  • Language transmission
  • Intergenerational teaching
  • Identity‑affirming practices

  is disrupted. This contributes to depression, hopelessness, and cultural dislocation.

  Stress from constant advocacy

  Communities are forced into a cycle of:

  • Monitoring
  • Responding to impacts
  • Challenging regulatory decisions
  • Fighting for recognition of rights

  This creates chronic stress and burnout, especially for Elders, land users, and community leaders.

  3. Disproportionate Impacts on Indigenous Peoples

  Indigenous peoples experience environmental degradation differently because:

  • Their cultures are land‑based
  • Their rights are tied to healthy ecosystems
  • Their communities are often located near industrial development
  • Their voices are marginalized in provincial regulatory systems

  Environmental harm becomes cultural harm, health harm, and rights harm simultaneously. This is why environmental degradation cannot be treated as a purely technical issue. It is a matter of justice, equity, and constitutional responsibility.

  4. Why This Matters for the Canada–Alberta Co‑operation Agreement

  Any agreement that relies heavily on Alberta’s regulatory systems must acknowledge that:

  • Alberta’s environmental laws do not require cumulative‑effects assessment
  • Alberta’s monitoring systems are fragmented and often industry‑driven
  • Alberta’s processes do not meaningfully incorporate Indigenous knowledge
  • Alberta’s legislation does not recognize Treaty rights or Indigenous jurisdiction

  Without strong federal safeguards, environmental degradation, and its health impacts, will worsen. Alberta is already facing an overburdened health care system, unfortunately it is often Indigenous Peoples who fall through the Health Care systemic cracks. Canada has made commitments to improve the health and wellbeing of Indigenous peoples by connecting the living conditions they endure to health outcomes, the environmental connection must not be overlooked!

  A “one project, one review” model cannot succeed if it does not address the health consequences of environmental decline, especially for Indigenous peoples who are already disproportionately affected

  5. What Needs to Change

  To protect the physical and mental health of Indigenous peoples, the agreement must include:

  • Mandatory cumulative‑effects and health‑impact assessment
  • Indigenous‑led assessment pathways
  • Recognition of Treaty rights as living, ongoing obligations
  • Stronger federal oversight where provincial systems fall short
  • Requirements for Indigenous knowledge to shape decisions, not sit on the margins

  Environmental protection is health protection.
  Environmental degradation is health degradation.
  For Indigenous peoples, the two cannot be separated.

  The Fort Chipewyan Case: When a Physician Raised Alarms — and Was Silenced

  One of the most well‑known and troubling examples of environmental degradation harming Indigenous health in Alberta is the case of Dr. John O’Connor, a physician who served the community of Fort Chipewyan for many years.

  Dr. O’Connor observed:

  • Unusual rates of rare cancers, including cholangiocarcinoma
  • Elevated levels of autoimmune disorders
  • High rates of respiratory illness
  • Community concerns about contaminated water and declining wildlife health

  He raised these concerns publicly and called for:

  • Independent health studies
  • Toxicological testing
  • A full investigation into possible links between oilsands pollution and community health outcomes

  Instead of being supported, he was:

  • Accused of misconduct
  • Investigated by Health Canada and Alberta health officials
  • Threatened with the loss of his medical licence
  • Silenced for years while the community continued to suffer

  Although he was eventually cleared, the damage was done. The message to health professionals, researchers, and Indigenous communities was unmistakable:
  raising environmental health concerns in Alberta can lead to retaliation rather than action.

  This case is not an isolated incident; it is emblematic of a broader pattern where:

  • Environmental monitoring is inadequate
  • Health impacts are minimized or dismissed
  • Indigenous knowledge is ignored
  • Communities bear the burden of proof while industry benefits from doubt
  • Professionals are discredited and bullied

  For the people of Fort Chipewyan, the consequences have been devastating. Families have lost loved ones. Elders have watched their land and water change beyond recognition. Community members live with fear and uncertainty about what is safe to eat, drink, or harvest. This is environmental degradation as health degradation, cultural degradation, and rights degradation all at once.

  Why This Matters for the Co‑operation Agreement

  The Fort Chipewyan case demonstrates exactly why federal oversight is essential.
  If Alberta’s systems had been solely responsible for assessing and responding to these concerns, the community’s health crisis would have remained invisible.

  A “one project, one review” model cannot rely on provincial processes that have historically:

  • Dismissed Indigenous health concerns
  • Suppressed scientific findings
  • Prioritized industrial interests over community well‑being

  The agreement must ensure that:

  • Indigenous health impacts are taken seriously
  • Independent science is protected
  • Communities are not punished for speaking out
  • Federal oversight remains strong where provincial systems have failed

  Environmental degradation is not just an ecological issue, it is a human health issue, and the Fort Chipewyan experience shows what happens when governments fail to act.

• The UCP government is not trustworthy

  by Annabelle Denson, about 1 month ago
  The current UCP government has shown themselves to be corrupt, undemocratic and duplicitous. Their ideology underpins all decisions to monetize education, healthcare and all natural resources. The blatant manipulation and influence on the office of tge Alberta Energy Regulator by the ministry of Energy Brian Jean is an example of The UCPs hovernments complete lack of ethics in dealing with important designs that will permanently influence the environment. The UCP cannot be trusted to oversee any environmental assessment role in approving industry or land use.

  The current UCP government has shown themselves to be corrupt, undemocratic and duplicitous. Their ideology underpins all decisions to monetize education, healthcare and all natural resources. The blatant manipulation and influence on the office of tge Alberta Energy Regulator by the ministry of Energy Brian Jean is an example of The UCPs hovernments complete lack of ethics in dealing with important designs that will permanently influence the environment. The UCP cannot be trusted to oversee any environmental assessment role in approving industry or land use.

• The Alberta government looks out for their own interest, period.

  by Lucinda Pearce, about 2 months ago

  The draft Co‑operation Agreement Between Alberta and Canada is just another way for Alberta to try and undermine Indigenous Led-Assessments, Knowledge and Rights that would safe-guard the health and longterm cumulative effects of these projects on waters, land, fish habitats, migration species and environmental challenges to come.

  A few examples of this agreement that stood out to me:
  
  1: “AND WHEREAS Alberta has exclusive legislative jurisdiction over the development, conservation and management of non-renewable natural resources in the province…”

  
  

  This is FALSE and does not uphold the reality of Indigenous Rights and Treaty, legally in place with the Crown... Continue reading

  The draft Co‑operation Agreement Between Alberta and Canada is just another way for Alberta to try and undermine Indigenous Led-Assessments, Knowledge and Rights that would safe-guard the health and longterm cumulative effects of these projects on waters, land, fish habitats, migration species and environmental challenges to come.

  A few examples of this agreement that stood out to me:
  
  1: “AND WHEREAS Alberta has exclusive legislative jurisdiction over the development, conservation and management of non-renewable natural resources in the province…”

  
  

  This is FALSE and does not uphold the reality of Indigenous Rights and Treaty, legally in place with the Crown before Alberta was even a province. The point is they don’t recognize and respect this reality. So how would giving them more control make any sense??

  
  

  2: 7. Indigenous Peoples
  (3) For certainty, nothing in this Agreement is intended to limit the ability of either of the Parties to co- operate, or enter into agreements or arrangements, with Indigenous Peoples respecting assessments or incorporate Indigenous-led assessments.
  
  The way this was written creates no enforceable authority, structure or funding for Indigenous-led assessments. Sounds like lip-service, and doesn’t respect the integral support Indigenous Knowledge of this land offers.
  
  
  3: 10. Application of this Agreement
  (2) The Parties acknowledge that Alberta is challenging the constitutionality of the IAA, which is a matter before the courts. By entering into this Agreement, Alberta does not acknowledge the IAA is constitutional.

  
  

  How can Alberta and Canada step into an agreement when Alberta is actively fighting the constitutionality of the federal statue governing the agreement? This shows me that respect and acknowledgement of already placed agreements is not important to Alberta and only creates instability for the environment and Indigenous Nations. Which shows me proof that FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT IS NECESSARY AND SHOULDN’T BE REDUCED.
  
  Alberta’s current government does not respect Treaty, as we are seeing with the space they are giving the separatist conversation and referendum.

  Let’s remember that Treaties are foundational, legally binding, and ongoing agreements between Indigenous nations and the Crown (the legal entity representing the federal, provincial, and territorial governments). The federal government of Canada is constitutionally obligated to uphold treaties signed with Indigenous peoples and the Crown. Alberta shouldn’t be able to reduce this process in any way.

  The fact that the current Alberta government has used the notwithstanding clause to reduce resistance and public collaboration to pass bills that benefit them alone, as well as remove protective policies like the 1976 Coal Policy without public conversation; consistently shows us that they don’t care about a “co-operative” process for anything. Why would this agreement be any different?

  
  

  I see nothing in the way this draft has been written that places Indigenous Knowledge, Rights and Treaties in a position to directly benefit and safe-guard the environment and reduce harmful impact and cumulative effects.

  
  

  
  

• The Alberta Government is Hurting ALL of Canada

  by Humanmegaphone, about 2 months ago

  For decades the Indiginous people of Canada have been raising the alarm about climate change. They have repeatedly warned about the harms of clear cutting, water pollution, animal habitat destruction, and the dangers of carbon emissions.

  Clearly the intent of the current UCP government is to make it as easy as possible for oil and gas companies and mining companies to not only push through projects without prior informed consent, but to allow them to do so while ignoring any regulations designed to protect our environment, and force them to clean up their mess when they are done extracting resources.

  ... Continue reading

  For decades the Indiginous people of Canada have been raising the alarm about climate change. They have repeatedly warned about the harms of clear cutting, water pollution, animal habitat destruction, and the dangers of carbon emissions.

  Clearly the intent of the current UCP government is to make it as easy as possible for oil and gas companies and mining companies to not only push through projects without prior informed consent, but to allow them to do so while ignoring any regulations designed to protect our environment, and force them to clean up their mess when they are done extracting resources.

  
  The province has repeatedly refused to crack down on open wells, and now seeks to try to push through a mine, as well as another pipeline (even though no one wants to fund it). By removing any federal involvement (even a small amount) it allows for more opportunities for the UCP to try to escape accountability.
  
  

  The decisions that Alberta makes affects ALL Canadians as our water supply and air belong to all of us. Full environmental impact assessments need to be done in consultation with any Indiginous voices in the area, and with environmental experts who understand the integration that Indiginous people have with their land.

  I advise all Canadians to see Alberta as the canary in the coal mine If the environment can be swept aside so easily in Alberta, what example does that set for other provinces?

• Weak legislative and regulatory procedure in Alberta

  by Melanie Daniels B.Sc., P.Biol., about 2 months ago
  The Alberta Energy Regulator is riddled with systemic weaknesses. These weaknesses stem from structural conflicts of interest, inconsistent enforcement, lack of transparency and chronic under-performance in environmental protection. The 2024 Premier's Review of the AER has clearly documented these issues.

  Alberta's Ministry of Environment and Protected Areas (EPA) is responsible for environmental policy, monitoring, protected areas, water, wildlife, and climate related matters. The EPA is weak systemically, structurally and in policy; these weaknesses negatively affect environmental protection, cumulative effects management and Indigenous rights. The EPA administers Alberta's flagship environmental statute the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (EPEA) this legislation is... Continue reading

  The Alberta Energy Regulator is riddled with systemic weaknesses. These weaknesses stem from structural conflicts of interest, inconsistent enforcement, lack of transparency and chronic under-performance in environmental protection. The 2024 Premier's Review of the AER has clearly documented these issues.

  Alberta's Ministry of Environment and Protected Areas (EPA) is responsible for environmental policy, monitoring, protected areas, water, wildlife, and climate related matters. The EPA is weak systemically, structurally and in policy; these weaknesses negatively affect environmental protection, cumulative effects management and Indigenous rights. The EPA administers Alberta's flagship environmental statute the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (EPEA) this legislation is meant to "support and promote the protection, enhancement and wise use of the environment." In practice this legislation is outdated, fragmented, weakly enforced and structurally incapable of addressing modern environmental realities, especially cumulative effects, climate change, loss of biodiversity, water management and protection of Indigenous inherent, Treaty and Constitutional rights.

  Alberta will have to make significant amendments to its legislations, regulations, policies and directives well before an agreement such as this is implemented. Alberta does not adequately protect Albertans, our future generations nor the environment.

  
  

  
  

• Cutting approval time and creating jobs

  by Melanie Daniels B.Sc., P.Biol., about 2 months ago

  The Government of Alberta and Canada repeatedly speak of reducing regulatory timelines and processes to attract investment, ensure project certainty and create jobs. Perhaps the solution is not cutting red tape but hiring more Government Officials and private sector professionals to conduct, review, assess, make determinations, draft conditions and monitor for compliance! That would create many more jobs, even within the project, while strengthening and streamlining regulatory processes and environmental protection.

  Additionally, First Nations and Metis should receive increased capacity funding to undertake assessments, meaningfully participate in the duty to consult and provide oversight and monitoring to ensure compliance. First... Continue reading

  The Government of Alberta and Canada repeatedly speak of reducing regulatory timelines and processes to attract investment, ensure project certainty and create jobs. Perhaps the solution is not cutting red tape but hiring more Government Officials and private sector professionals to conduct, review, assess, make determinations, draft conditions and monitor for compliance! That would create many more jobs, even within the project, while strengthening and streamlining regulatory processes and environmental protection.

  Additionally, First Nations and Metis should receive increased capacity funding to undertake assessments, meaningfully participate in the duty to consult and provide oversight and monitoring to ensure compliance. First Nations and Metis contribute to the Alberta economy, the funds they receive do not stay in their communities due to economic leakage. Indigenous oversight and guardianship is the solution to cumulative effects, loss of biodiversity and climate change!

  Who are we Nation building for exactly? Canadians or corporations and their shareholders?

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  

• Concerns over the lack of Environmental Safeguards in the Canada-Alberta “One Project, One Review” Agreement

  by Nicola Marais, about 2 months ago

  When it comes to the environment, jurisdiction sometimes becomes murky. I believe that this uncertainness is what’s causing Canada to be lacking in environmental protection. The Canada-Alberta Assessment Co-operation agreement is yet another policy that will continue putting the environment on the backburner. Canada is one nation and in areas where one province’s action will affect the ultimate success of the country negatively, the environment in this case, the Federal government must have jurisdiction or at the very least have strict policy and regulation along with it, to ensure provinces are placing the environment and Indigenous Rights at a high... Continue reading

  When it comes to the environment, jurisdiction sometimes becomes murky. I believe that this uncertainness is what’s causing Canada to be lacking in environmental protection. The Canada-Alberta Assessment Co-operation agreement is yet another policy that will continue putting the environment on the backburner. Canada is one nation and in areas where one province’s action will affect the ultimate success of the country negatively, the environment in this case, the Federal government must have jurisdiction or at the very least have strict policy and regulation along with it, to ensure provinces are placing the environment and Indigenous Rights at a high regard and working in accordance with Canada’s climate commitments as well as emissions reductions goals.

  In this agreement between Canada and the province of Alberta, there are a couple of holes to be poked.

  • The first cause of concern comes to Alberta taking a lead on Indigenous consultation. When taking into consideration the current relationship between the Alberta Government and Indigenous Leaders (as well as the history of this relationship), it does not instill confidence that consultation will be done diligently. It is the constitutional responsibility of the Federal Government in matters concerning Indigenous Rights, so being involved in the process or adding a clause with very clear verbiage on what Alberta’s duty to consult Indigenous Peoples must look like.
  • Historically speaking, it is clear that Alberta has not prioritized the environment. Without safeguards like the Federal Impact Assessment providing a certain set of guidelines, how can the Federal Government make sure that the commitment and targets that were set for Canada as a nation will be reached if provinces are not held to a certain standard. With these larger climate commitments, the long-term effects of projects will also have to be taken into consideration, meaning Impact assessments will have to be extremely well rounded, possibly meaning scientific review in issues regarding long-term climate impacts.

  However much this might improve efficiency and provide provinces to take accountability for their actions and be the leaders in reducing our negative environmental impact, especially concerning new project proposals, one can unfortunately not be sure, and with the current state of the environment, I would urge the Federal Government to not take chances. Instead of loosening the reins on environmental policy, immediate action should be taken in the opposite direction.

• Concern over weakening Environmental Assesments after Alberta's failure to hold polluters accountable

  by Robert Ng, about 2 months ago

  I am concerned that this proposed agreement significantly shifts practical control of environmental assessments to the Government of Alberta while reducing independent federal oversight.

  
  

  While the agreement states that neither party cedes jurisdiction, several provisions effectively prioritize provincial processes and reduce the likelihood of federal review.

  
  

  For example, clause 1(1) indicates that Canada will rely on Alberta’s environmental assessment processes when projects are primarily within provincial jurisdiction. Clause 6 further states that federal assessment conditions should defer to provincial conditions where duplication exists. Together, these provisions risk creating a system where the federal government largely accepts provincial determinations even when... Continue reading

  I am concerned that this proposed agreement significantly shifts practical control of environmental assessments to the Government of Alberta while reducing independent federal oversight.

  
  

  While the agreement states that neither party cedes jurisdiction, several provisions effectively prioritize provincial processes and reduce the likelihood of federal review.

  
  

  For example, clause 1(1) indicates that Canada will rely on Alberta’s environmental assessment processes when projects are primarily within provincial jurisdiction. Clause 6 further states that federal assessment conditions should defer to provincial conditions where duplication exists. Together, these provisions risk creating a system where the federal government largely accepts provincial determinations even when projects may have broader environmental consequences.

  
  

  This approach raises concerns because Alberta already faces substantial unresolved environmental liabilities. Thousands of inactive and orphan oil and gas wells remain unreclaimed, and the long-term cost of remediation continues to grow. These liabilities illustrate the risks of relying primarily on provincial regulatory frameworks that have historically struggled to ensure timely cleanup and enforcement.

  
  

  Additionally, the agreement allows Alberta to take the lead on consultation with Indigenous Peoples for projects primarily under provincial jurisdiction. While coordination is important, the federal government has constitutional responsibilities related to Indigenous rights. It is not clear that those obligations are adequately safeguarded if federal assessments are frequently deferred. Not to mention the current political climate between the Chiefs and the current Alberta Government.

  
  

  Finally, there are ongoing public concerns in Alberta regarding major resource development proposals that could affect water systems and ecosystems, including proposed coal mining in sensitive watersheds. Many Albertans believe strong independent oversight is necessary to ensure environmental protections and long-term public interests are properly considered.

  
  

  Streamlining regulatory processes and reducing duplication is a reasonable policy goal. However, efficiency should not come at the expense of accountability or environmental protection. Federal environmental assessments exist in part to provide an independent review when projects raise broader national interests or environmental risks.

  
  

  For these reasons, I urge both governments to reconsider provisions that prioritize provincial processes by default. Any cooperative assessment framework should ensure that the federal government maintains a meaningful and independent role in evaluating projects that could have significant environmental, ecological, or Indigenous rights implications.