User:Jademclean/sandbox

Impact of Oil Sands Development on Indigenous groups

Pipeline development poses significant risks to the cultural, social, and economic way of life of Canada’s Aboriginal populations. Historically, many Aboriginal groups have opposed pipeline development for two primary reasons: 1) the inherent environmental risks associated with transporting harmful oil and gas products, and 2) failure by the federal government to properly consider and mitigate Aboriginal groups’ concerns regarding resource development on their lands. For instance, many Indigenous groups along the West coast of Canada rely heavily on marine life and local wildlife for their survival. Increased oil production in Canada requires greater oil tanker traffic to transport oil off of Canada’s coasts, which poses serious threats to the survival and traditional way of life of Indigenous groups, as well as the safety and preservation of the surrounding ecosystems. As well, in many instances resource development may infringe on existing Aboriginal land claim rights.

Aside from environmental concerns, many Aboriginal groups have pushed back against pipeline development due to inadequate consultation processes by the federal government. As per Section 35 of the Canadian Constitution Act (The Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11), Aboriginal peoples in Canada are guaranteed the right to be meaningfully consulted with and accomodated when the Crown is contemplating resource development on their lands - see Duty to Consult. Through a series of Supreme Court of Canada rulings and political protests from Indigenous peoples, see Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), Taku River Tlingit First Nation v British Columbia (2004), and Tsilhqot’in Nation v British Columbia, among others, the courts have attempted to further define the Crown’s consultation responsibilities and give legal recognition to Aboriginal traditional territory and rights regarding resource development.

Contrarily, oil sands development also presents many positive impacts and opportunities for  Aboriginal groups, particularly in Western Canada. In fact, over the past two decades, First Nations participation in the energy sector has increased dramatically; from employment and business opportunities to project approval processes and environmental evaluation. Increased Indigenous participation has been encouraged by numerous collaboration agreements with industry, typically in the form of impact benefit agreements (IBAs), which provide not only employment and business ventures, but also job training and community benefits. Enhanced participation in the energy sector has empowered many Indigenous groups to push for wider involvement by negotiating ownership stakes in proposed pipelines and bitumen storage projects. Perhaps the best example of such partnering in Alberta is the agreement between Suncor and Fort McKay and Mikisew Cree First Nations. The two First Nations acquired a 49% ownership in Suncor’s East Tank Farm Development with shares valued at about $500 million making it the largest business investment to date by a First Nation entity in Canada (Suncor, 2017). Pipeline companies have also extended ownership opportunities to First Nations who may be affected by the transportation of crude or refined oil and gas products through their lands. Enbridge, for example, offered a 10% equity stake at no cost to the First Nations communities along the now rejected Northern Gateway oil pipeline in Alberta and British Columbia. Of the 52 bands along the pipeline right-of-way, 31 bands formed agreements with Enbridge and were granted the opportunity to buy an additional 23% of the project. Rejection was ultimately attributed to lack of consultation by the federal government in 2016 (Tasker, 2016). Support for resource development and desire for direct involvement is further illustrated by the First Nations’ led $17-billion Eagle Spirit Energy Holding Ltd. pipeline and energy corridor between Alberta and the northern B.C. coast (with a back-up plan to site its terminal in Alaska to get around the tanker ban in B.C.), which has secured equity buy-in from First Nations along the proposed route (Cattaneo, 2018).”