First Nation seeking court ruling on Alberta ending coal mining moratorium
In an application for judicial review filed this week, Siksika Nation says Alberta failed in its duty to consult when in January it lifted its moratorium on new coal mining projects on the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains.
Siksika Nation, 95 kilometres east of Calgary, says the effects of coal mining in the Rockies threaten Treaty rights and the land that supports its livelihood.
It's the second time Siksika Nation has challenged a United Conservative Party government's coal mining decisions.
When Alberta lifted its long-standing coal policy in 2020, Siksika challenged the move in court, but proceedings were discontinued the following year when public outrage spurred the province to reinstate the policy.
That policy flip-flop prompted coal companies to sue Alberta for a combined $16 billion, arguing that the reinstatement and effective moratorium amounted to expropriation of land.
The province recently reached settlements with two companies involved in the lawsuit for undisclosed amounts.
Energy Minister Brian Jean's office didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
-- Jack Farrell
This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 4, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Michael Higgins: Challenge to Saskatchewan pronoun law a waste of time, money and effort
People hold pride flags while attending a rally against the Saskatchewan government's legislation on pronouns in schools, in front of Saskatchewan legislature in Regina, on Tuesday, Oct. 10, 2023. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Heywood Yu It is tempting to dismiss a court challenge over a Saskatchewan pronoun law as a waste of legal resources and time, a squandering of taxpayers' money and a misreading of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors And yet one person interviewed by the CBC said that because of the law she had 'kids come up to me saying they were afraid that they were going to die, basically, because of their homes being unsafe.' Well, clearly, if teenage boys and girls feel they are going to die because parents aren't using their preferred pronouns then obviously no expense should be spared. This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays) By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again On Monday, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decided to prolong this travesty of justice by sending a challenge over the provincial government's pronoun policy back to a lower court. The government passed its pronoun law using section 33 of the Charter (the notwithstanding clause.) Nobody is challenging that the government didn't have the right to do that. Also, the court case started over the government's original policy (before it passed a law.) That policy has been repealed so that part of the case is entirely moot. However, the appeal court said the original judge did have the right to declare whether he thought Charter rights had been limited — but he didn't have to. The judge can use his discretion about whether to make a declaration or not. So the appeal court is saying the Saskatchewan government has done nothing wrong but a judge still has the right to scold it if he believes the Charter has been infringed in some way. No one should be surprised if the headline on this article is: Judges uphold judge's right to chide government. And all this legal brouhaha is because the Saskatchewan government — quite sensibly — believes that schools shouldn't be in the business of allowing young children to impulsively change their pronouns without telling their parents. In 2023, the Saskatchewan government agreed on a policy that teachers and schools must get written consent from parents before using the preferred pronoun of a student under 16. Premier Scott Moe said at the time that the policy was about 'the rights of a parent to ensure they are involved in their child's decision.' When a non-profit group called the UR Pride Centre for Sexuality and Gender Diversity at the University of Regina launched a court challenge over the policy, the government put the pronoun policy into law and coupled it with the notwithstanding clause. UR Pride claimed that the government's policy was infringing students' Charter rights under Section 7 (everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person) and Section 15 (every individual is equal before and under the law.) The group now also claims that Section 12 (everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment) has been infringed.
CTV News
2 hours ago
- CTV News
Forever Canadian group collects signatures
As Alberta awaits a court ruling on an Alberta referendum question, a campaign to keep the province in Canada held a blitz of events on Monday evening. Mason DePatie reports.
CTV News
6 hours ago
- CTV News
China sets temporary anti-dumping duty on Canadian canola
Pumpjacks draw out oil and gas from well heads surrounded by Canola fields near Cremona, Alta., Monday, July 15, 2024. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh The provisional rate will be set at 75.8 per cent, effective from Thursday, the statement said. China, the world's largest importer of canola - also known as rapeseed - sources nearly all of its supplies of the product from Canada. 'This is huge. Who will pay a 75 per cent deposit to bring Canadian canola to China? It is like telling Canada that we don't need your canola, thank you very much,' said one Singapore-based oilseed trader. China's most active Zhengzhou rapeseed meal futures CRSMCV1 slid three per cent, the biggest daily drop since June 26. The policy marks a shift from the conciliatory tone struck in June when China's Premier Li Qiang said there were no deep-seated conflicts of interest between the countries during a phone call with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. The Canadian embassy in Beijing did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. 'This move... will put additional pressure on Canada's government to sort through trade frictions with China,' said Trivium China agriculture analyst Even Rogers Pay. It also provides an opportunity for Australia, Pay added, which looks set to regain access to the Chinese market with a few test cargoes this year after a years-long freeze in the trade. Canadian canola exports to China totalled $5.0 billion (US$3.63 billion) in 2023, the last full year before the investigation began. Separately, China also launched an anti-dumping investigation into pea starch imported from Canada, which will last a year and could be extended for six months, it said in a statement. (Reporting by Ella Cao and Lewis Jackson in Beijing, Naveen Thukral in Singapore; Editing by Christian Schmollinger, Bernadette Baum and Jan Harvey)
