Company Won’t Appeal Court Ruling Against Northern Gateway

Natural Resources Minister Jim Carruthers said in Ottawa, that the government will not challenge the court judgment.

Jim made the comment after both his company and Ottawa confirmed that neither would appeal a Federal Court of Appeal ruling in June that quashed permits approved in 2014 by the former Conservative government.

In separate announcements Tuesday, both the government and Northern Gateway Pipelines Inc. announced that they will not appeal a July court ruling that quashed an Order in Council approving the project. The Federal Court of Appeal ruling also nullified two National Energy Board certificates for the pipeline.

“We’re not appealing the decision, because we understand what the court has said,” Carr told reporters ahead of question period on Tuesday.
“The court was not critical of Enbridge, it was not critical of the regulator, but was critical of the Harper government that didn’t do its job,” he said. “We’re not going to contradict the court’s judgment in this case.”

The Federal Court of Appeal decided in June that the federal government had not satisfactorily consulted with Indigenous peoples who will be affected by the project, which is upheld by energy company Enbridge, and which would extend from outside Edmonton to Kitimat, B.C.

Presently, there are different alternatives on the table for the government to consider, which incorporate launching full consultations with Indigenous peoples along the pipeline’s route to comply with the court’s decision. At that point, the federal cabinet could dismiss or approve Northern Gateway based on those consultations.

On the other hand, the project could be reverted to the National Energy Board for reconsideration.Another conceivable alternative for Carr and his cabinet colleagues is to dismiss the project outright, something B.C. First Nations opposed to the project are hoping is the ultimate outcome.

Another conceivable alternative for Carr and his cabinet colleagues is to dismiss the project outright, something B.C. First Nations opposed to the project are hoping is the ultimate outcome.”Certainly, for those nations, such as our clients, who have opposed Northern Gateway consistently, they would prefer to see the oil tanker moratorium finalized by the federal government and take this toxic project off the table,” Gavin Smith, an environment lawyer who represents some of eight First Nations part of this case, said in an interview. “It’s been draining their time for many years.”

“Certainly, for those nations, such as our clients, who have opposed Northern Gateway consistently, they would prefer to see the oil tanker moratorium finalized by the federal government and take this toxic project off the table,” Gavin Smith, an environment lawyer who represents some of eight First Nations part of this case, said in an interview. “It’s been draining their time for many years.”Northern Gateway also issued a statement saying it won’t appeal the court ruling, and the company is hopeful Ottawa will soon resume consultation.

Northern Gateway also issued a statement saying it won’t appeal the court ruling, and the company is hopeful Ottawa will soon resume consultation.
“We believe that meaningful consultation and collaboration, and not litigation, is the best path forward for everyone involved,” the pipeline’s president, John Carruthers, said in a statement.
“We believe the government has a responsibility to meet their constitutional legal obligations to meaningfully consult with First Nations and Métis.”The former Harper government gave the go-ahead to the Northern Gateway project in June 2014 after a National Energy Board joint review panel gave its approval subject to 209 conditions. But the government was supposed to meet a constitutional requirement to consult with Indigenous peoples following the NEB’s approval, something the Federal Court said was not properly done

The former Harper government gave the go-ahead to the Northern Gateway project in June 2014 after a National Energy Board joint review panel gave its approval subject to 209 conditions. However, the government was supposed to meet a constitutional requirement to consult with Indigenous peoples following the NEB’s approval, something the Federal Court said was not properly done