Times Colonist

Inuit win battle to stop seismic testing in the Arctic; NEB chided

- MIA RABSON

OTTAWA — The Inuit Hamlet of Clyde River won a nearly six-yearlong battle Wednesday to stop seismic testing in the Arctic that could kill or maim the marine mammals upon which they rely for food and jobs.

The Supreme Court unanimousl­y ruled the National Energy Board had failed miserably at properly consulting the Inuit and didn’t adequately assess the impact on treaty and Indigenous rights of the proposed oil and gas exploratio­n project before approving it in 2014.

The court quashed the NEB’s approval, meaning the testing cannot proceed.

In a separate but related decision, the court upheld the approval granted to Enbridge to reverse the flow and increase capacity of its Line 9 pipeline between Ontario and Quebec.

In that case, also a unanimous decision, the court found the NEB properly consulted the Chippewas of the Thames First Nation in southweste­rn Ontario.

In both cases, the court upheld that the NEB is capable and allowed to fulfil the Crown’s duty to consult Indigenous groups about developmen­t projects in their traditiona­l territorie­s, as long as that consultati­on is robust.

“What an exciting day for us,” said Jerry Natanine, the former mayor of Clyde River. “We’ve been saying justice is on our side because we’re fighting for our life, we’re fighting for our way of life.”

Natanine clutched an eagle feather as he spoke in soft tones of the years-long battle that pitted his tiny, remote hamlet of about 1,100 people against three Norwegian companies seeking to fire air guns into the waters of Baffin Bay and Davis Straight looking for oil.

“We are not totally against developmen­t, but it has to be done right,” Natanine said. “You know whales don’t have to die, seals don’t have to die off, or plankton. There’s a better way to do things.”

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said the government respects the Supreme Court and takes the judgments very seriously.

“For these two specific decisions, obviously we will study them, but what they underline is that Aboriginal communitie­s need to be adequately consulted, have to be partners and be implicated in decisions,” he said at an event in Quebec. “And that’s what I’ve been saying for two years and that’s what we are working on.”

A spokeswoma­n for the NEB said the agency is reviewing the court decision.

Vancouver lawyer and Indigenous legal expert Tom Isaac said the decisions are a good day for Canada because the courts have outlined in some very specific ways what did and didn’t qualify as acceptable consultati­on.

“There isn’t a grey cloud of legal uncertaint­y over Canada on the duty to consult,” said Isaac. “They have filled in the blanks on what good consultati­on looks like and what bad consultati­on looks like.”

He said the decisions in a way form a blueprint for future developmen­t reviews and decisions, said Isaac.

The difference between the two decisions largely stemmed from the fact that in the Clyde River case the NEB looked at the environmen­tal impacts of the testing, but didn’t specifical­ly look at or address the impact on treaty rights.

The court said the Inuit had well-establishe­d treaty rights in the region, including the right to harvest marine mammals. It was also undisputed that the seismic testing could harm mammals such as whales and seals, damaging their hearing, affecting their migration routes or killing them.

That assessment meant the Crown’s duty to consult was “at the highest end of the spectrum,” but the consultati­ons “fell short in several respects,” the court found.

The NEB didn’t hold oral hearings, didn’t provide funding to help the Inuit communitie­s participat­e in the review process and relied on scientific informatio­n from the companies that was delivered in a format the Inuit couldn’t access.

“To put it mildly, furnishing answers to questions that went to the heart of the treaty rights at stake in the form of a practicall­y inaccessib­le document dump months after the questions were initially asked in person is not true consultati­on,” the court wrote.

In the Chippewas case, the court found the NEB consultati­on process was proper, included adequate opportunit­y and funding for the Chippewas to participat­e and specifical­ly addressed the impact on treaty rights.

The NEB found the project posed some risk to the Chippewas territory, but those risks could be mitigated.

As well, Enbridge didn’t need any new land rights. Most work would take place in existing facilities and use its existing right of way.

A Chippewas spokespers­on was not available to comment.

Natanine said he was sad the Chippewas of the Thames were not successful in stopping the Enbridge pipeline expansion in their territory, even going so far as to wear a T-shirt with the words “Chippewas Solidarity” printed on the front.

The court issued a stern warning that the consultati­on process on Indigenous rights has to occur before projects are approved rather than after courts force it to happen. “True reconcilia­tion is rarely, if ever, achieved in courtrooms,” the judgment said.

 ??  ?? Jerry Natanine, community leader and former mayor of Clyde River, speaks at a news conference on Parliament Hill following a ruling at the Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa.
Jerry Natanine, community leader and former mayor of Clyde River, speaks at a news conference on Parliament Hill following a ruling at the Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada