Skip to main content

In the overheated political times in which we live, the passage of legislation that will arguably create even greater uncertainty in the country’s resource development sector might be considered poor timing.

Especially if the government responsible for the new law is one viewed as a hostile enemy of the province that most needs energy market roadblocks dismantled, not erected – Alberta. But such is the fractured nature of our federation these days.

Last week, legislation introduced by British Columbia’s New Democratic Party government aimed at implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (or UNDRIP, as it’s more commonly known) passed second reading. It’s expected to receive royal assent in the next few weeks.

Story continues below advertisement

This is landmark stuff. UNDRIP was adopted by 144 countries in 2007. Originally, one of four countries that refused to sign onto the accord, Canada relented and became a signatory three years later. The declaration sets out the minimum standards for the “survival, dignity and well-being” of Indigenous peoples around the world.

It comprises 46 articles, the most contentious of which is No. 32: Governments (or agents) must consult in good faith with Indigenous peoples to obtain their “free and informed consent” prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands and territories.

There are some who have interpreted this section as handing First Nations the right to reject resource development projects that are not to their liking. Former Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall said Article 32 amounts to a “de facto veto of natural resource projects, potential pipelines … for our First Nations.” And that is a common sentiment among business types in Canada, who believe certain governments are doing enough as it is to destroy resource development in this country without bringing in additional measures that could introduce further delays to a much-criticized approval process.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau committed to adopting UNDRIP at the federal level. Legislation was passed by the House of Commons in 2018, but got stalled in the Senate, where it died on the order paper when the recent election was called. Given the current political climate, I somehow doubt Mr. Trudeau will be eager to reignite passage of the bill any time soon.

My guess is there will be other priorities.

It’s worth noting that the Business Council of B.C. has endorsed the provincial legislation. The Opposition Liberals don’t appear to have any interest in thwarting its passage either. The most common refrain I hear from those you’d expect to be most concerned about the law’s impact is: The courts have already said that inherent Indigenous rights and titles exist. This doesn’t supersede that assessment.

I mostly subscribe to that viewpoint. However, I think we all know that the rights imbued in the UN doctrine will at least give First Nations more ammunition. And that ammunition will be used to leverage their power even more. Ultimately, that power will be tested in court.

Story continues below advertisement

Even B.C. Premier John Horgan concedes that.

“We won’t know [the impact UNDRIP will have] until the courts advise us,” the Premier told me during an interview in his office. “There are going to be subsets of nations or clans within houses that will say I don’t like this and they will inevitably test these things in the courts.”

But the Premier told me he has gone through the UN language forward and backward and while the words “free, prior and informed consent” do exist, the word “veto” does not.

“Consent is subjective and that’s where the courts may have an interpretation,” the Premier said.

Ultimately, the question is: How has the current system worked in terms of getting certainty around resource development? The answer can only be it hasn’t, especially when it comes to First Nations involvement. So why not try a different methodology?

Will it be the end of litigation? No. But it will force parties to sit down in a more meaningful way that could help avoid the courts.

Story continues below advertisement

That said, it’s worth remembering that most of B.C. was not settled by treaties as was the case elsewhere in the country. Consequently, ownership to almost 100 per cent of the province is under challenge by more than 200 First Nations.

That, in itself, will always pose the greatest threat to resource development in the province. And all the screaming and foot-stomping by politicians in other parts of the country will never change that.

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter