Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault says that while his government is willing to make changes to its highly divisive Impact Assessment Act (IAA), after the Supreme Court ruled this week that it is largely unconstitutional, any amendments are unlikely to change the outcome of the IAA process itself.
on Friday that the IAA 鈥� also known as Bill C-69 鈥� is too broad in its assessment of environmental impacts, and that portions of it are unconstitutional.
The 2019 law, which was a marquee piece of environmental legislation for the Liberals, changes the environmental review process for designated energy projects to weigh environmental and social issues when approving or rejecting a project.
Supreme Court Chief Justice Richard Wagner said that while environmental protection is 鈥渙ne of today鈥檚 most pressing challenges,鈥� and that it is within the federal government鈥檚 power to put in place mechanisms for environmental assessment, it must also 鈥渁ct within the enduring division of powers framework laid out in the Constitution.鈥�
He also said the law gives 鈥渢he decision maker a practically untrammelled power to regulate projects,鈥� and it oversteps Parliament鈥檚 jurisdiction.
Guilbeault said despite the Supreme Court opinion, 鈥渢he Act still stands,鈥� but his government is open to taking steps to 鈥渞edefine鈥� the portions of the law that were ruled too broad.
鈥淲e will be happy to course correct the Act in the coming months to ensure that we have a more specific definition of public interest,鈥� Guilbeault told CTV鈥檚 Question Period host Vassy Kapelos, in an interview airing Sunday.
The legislation has faced staunch opposition, with some calling it the 鈥淣o More Pipelines鈥� bill, and seven provinces acting as formal interveners against the federal government in the Supreme Court case.
Guilbeault said it鈥檚 鈥渟imply not true鈥� that the IAA was written with the goal of preventing oil and gas projects from being approved, as some critics of the legislation have said.
He said his government will make changes to 鈥渃omply with the spirit鈥� of the Supreme Court opinion, but insisted it has only been applied to projects with the greatest potential impacts on issues within federal jurisdiction.
But when asked whether he believes any future changes to the IAA in light of the Supreme Court ruling will change the outcome of the IAA process for projects, he said 鈥渘o.鈥�
鈥淏ecause we've tried really hard in the application of the Act to ensure that when we would intervene on a project we did so under federal authority,鈥� he said.
鈥淚'm not saying it won't change anything. The Supreme Court is giving us an opinion that we should further refine some elements of the Act,鈥� he added. 鈥淚n the meantime, the Act continues to stand.鈥�
Opponents of the law praised the Supreme Court鈥檚 ruling yesterday, including Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, who said during his leadership campaign that he would repeal the bill if he became prime minister.
"They ignored the provinces. They ignored the Senate, and they ignored the many partners who have opposed this unconstitutional law all along," Smith said, adding Friday was a 鈥済reat day鈥� and that she鈥檚 鈥渆xtremely pleased.鈥�
With files from CTV National News Producer Jordan Gowling
