Latest news with #ChignectoIsthmus
CTV News
22-05-2025
- Politics
- CTV News
Chignecto Isthmus case waste of Nova Scotia Court of Appeal's time: federal lawyer
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal heard the second day of arguments in the Chignecto Isthmus case on Wednesday. HALIFAX — Nova Scotia and New Brunswick's attempt to persuade a panel of judges to conclude Ottawa has responsibility for the infrastructure on the Chignecto Isthmus is a 'waste and abuse' of the court's time, a federal lawyer argued Wednesday. Lawyer Lori Ward told a three-member Nova Scotia Court of Appeal panel that 'the ultimate issue despite all protestations to the contrary, is funding.' 'It's clear that Nova Scotia writ large designed this reference as a political pressure tactic to be used as ammunition in the political arena and as such we would argue that it's not just a waste of this court's time, it is an abuse of this court's time,' said Ward. The isthmus has had large dikes since 1671, when Acadian settlers arrived, and there are currently about 35 kilometres of dikes that help protect roads, farms and communities. Nova Scotia has long maintained that the federal government should pay the entire cost of upgrading protections for the isthmus -- currently estimated at $650 million -- but Ottawa has agreed to pay only half of the project. In July 2023, the province asked the court to settle the constitutional question of whether the transportation, trade and communication links across the Chignecto Isthmus are within the exclusive legislative authority of parliament. The question of who should fund any upgrades was not part of the court reference. Nova Scotia was joined in the court case by New Brunswick, while Prince Edward Island was also granted intervener status. Ward pointed out that even if it's decided that Ottawa has sole jurisdiction over the low-lying, narrow strip of land that connects the two provinces, it would have no obligation to fund projects aimed at preventing catastrophic flooding. 'So what is the point of asking you to find exclusive jurisdiction?' she asked the court. 'Practically speaking things are unfolding as they should be, just like they did in the 1940s,' Ward said. 'Canada has agreed to pay 50 per cent of the cost and is working with the provinces.' As she did in a hearing in March, Ward asked the court to decline to answer the question, but she added that if it does decide to rule on the merits of the case it should do so 'in the negative.' The court reserved its decision on Wednesday. The provinces maintain that Ottawa has the responsibility to protect rail, power and communication lines as well as inter-provincial trade from climate-change impacts, but federal lawyer Jan Jensen argued that this does not require Canada to protect the dikes. Jensen argued that there was no evidence that the dikes alone are necessary to protect infrastructure such as the rail line. 'It's not clear at what level of sea level rise that the rail line's own embankments and bridges are not sufficient,' he said. Daniel Boyle, a lawyer for Nova Scotia's attorney general, had argued during a hearing on Tuesday that an eight-metre storm surge would flow over the dikes and submerge the highway and the rail line. At 12 metres, he said 'Nova Scotia would effectively become an island.' During his reply to the court on Wednesday, Boyle was asked by Justice David Farrar how he could 'divorce himself' from previous comments made by Premier Tim Houston, who recently wrote a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney seeking confirmation that Ottawa would agree 'should the court decide that paying for the isthmus is a federal responsibility.' 'Counsel for Nova Scotia have consistently throughout this proceeding maintained and made clear that funding is not at stake,' Boyle said. 'Nova Scotia's position has been that the outcome of this proceeding could advance discussions. This is a reference opinion, it's an advisory opinion.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 21, 2025. The Canadian Press
CBC
21-05-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Money, politics highlighted in Chignecto Isthmus case
Nova Scotia's highest court heard arguments this week about jurisdictional responsibility for the Chignecto Isthmus. Taryn Grant has the story.
CTV News
21-05-2025
- Politics
- CTV News
Nova Scotia takes Ottawa to court, saying federal government must protect land link
HALIFAX — The Nova Scotia government argued in court on Tuesday that Ottawa is solely responsible for infrastructure that protects the low-lying strip of land that links the province with New Brunswick. Nova Scotia says the federal government should pay the entire cost of upgrading the centuries-old dikes that protect the Chignecto Isthmus from flooding, a project expected to cost $650 million. Ottawa has agreed to pay only half the bill. It argues the dikes have long been used to protect farmland, which means they are covered by a section of the Constitution that says agriculture is a responsibility shared by the two levels of government. A provincial government lawyer, however, told Nova Scotia's Court of Appeal on Tuesday that the extensive network of dikes protect much more than just farmland. Daniel Boyle said the land bridge now includes a Canadian National Railway line, the Trans-Canada Highway, buried fibre optic cables and overhead electricity lines. Boyle told the three-justice panel the dikes protect interprovincial trade and communications links, which fall under exclusive federal jurisdiction. He said the federal government has an obligation to protect those links, which are increasingly threatened by flooding caused by fierce and frequent storms and rising sea levels. Isthmus of Chignecto The Isthmus of Chignecto is pictured in May 2025. (CTV Atlantic/Jody Jessome) Boyle, who represents Nova Scotia's attorney general, also noted that a three-kilometre stretch of the railway line is part of the extensive network of dikes, which were built by Acadian farmers in the 1600s. There are now about 35 kilometres of dikes that help protect roads, railways, farms and communities. 'A flood could sever Nova Scotia from the rest of Canada,' he said. Michael Wood, chief justice of Nova Scotia, pointed out that agriculture hasn't disappeared from the area, which he said raised questions about shared jurisdiction. But Boyle said the dikes have 'much broader importance,' stressing that the province can't act on its own to protect what has evolved to become an essential 'trade corridor' that is facing serious risks. The lawyer said an eight-metre storm surge would flow over the dikes and submerge the highway and the rail line. At 12 metres, 'Nova Scotia would effectively become an island,' he said. 'It's a real concern.' That level of catastrophic flooding would effectively cut off $50-million worth of trade every day, he said, adding that the Port of Halifax would be unable to use trains or trucks to ship goods to the rest of Canada. 'Provinces don't have jurisdiction over the railway,' Boyle said, adding that one of the main reasons Nova Scotia joined Confederation in 1867 was a promise that a new national government would build a railway to link the province's economy with other rapidly growing provinces. 'It wasn't just one piece of infrastructure,' he said. 'It was the wider promise of what that infrastructure brought.' At one point, Justice David Farrar asked Nova Scotia lawyer Jeremy Smith to explain why the court was asked to settle what is essentially a political dispute over jurisdiction. Smith said the court's decision would 'provide guidance and some certainty to both levels of government.' During a hearing in March, federal lawyer Lori Ward said rail lines can be raised and transmission lines can be buried, suggesting the dikes are not essential for their protection. She also questioned whether enough was known about 'which dike protects what' on the isthmus, though Boyle argued Tuesday that the dikes represent a large network that is only as strong as its weakest part. Ward characterized Nova Scotia's case as an attempt to 'enlist the court' to aid in what is really a funding dispute, saying the panel should decline to answer the province's question as to what level of government is responsible for protecting infrastructure. The three justices plan to deal with that issue at a later date. New Brunswick and P.E.I. are supporting Nova Scotia's case. The hearing resumes Wednesday. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 20, 2025.
CBC
20-05-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Chignecto Isthmus court case will not determine who should pay
Lawyers for the Nova Scotia government confirmed this week that they're not looking to the province's highest court to weigh in on a funding question that Premier Tim Houston wants answered about the Chignecto Isthmus. There has been a protracted dispute between Ottawa and the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick on the question of who should pay for work to bolster the isthmus against rising sea levels and increasingly severe storm surge caused by climate change. The provinces want the federal government to pay in full for a project that's been estimated to cost $650 million over 10 years, but Ottawa has agreed to pay just half. Meanwhile, the Nova Scotia government has asked the province's Appeal Court to give an opinion on jurisdictional responsibility for the isthmus — a narrow strip of land that connects Nova Scotia to New Brunswick and the rest of Canada. The case is being heard this week. 'Some confusion' "There was some confusion in the minds of the panel on that point," Chief Justice Michael Wood told lawyers at the outset of the hearing, referring to the funding dispute. Wood and two other Appeal Court judges heard some arguments related to the case earlier this year when the government of Canada tried to have the matter dismissed. Lawyers for the province said at that time they weren't looking for an answer on who should pay. Rather, the question is whether Ottawa has "exclusive legislative authority." However, just days after that initial hearing, Houston sent an open letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney — who had recently won the Liberal leadership — in which he contradicted his government's lawyers. "I am seeking confirmation that a government led by you will accept the decision of the court, should the court decide that paying for the isthmus is a federal responsibility," Houston wrote to Carney. Wood brought up the correspondence in court Tuesday. "I appreciate there may be some political aspects to that letter, but that's not the issue that we're being asked to decide in this reference — right?" "That's correct, justice," responded Jeremy Smith, a lawyer representing the government of Nova Scotia. 'A political football' The panel of justices pressed Smith and another lawyer for Nova Scotia, Michael Boyle, about why the province was asking for the court's opinion. Justice David Farrar questioned how useful it might be to determine that Ottawa has the sole ability to legislate on matters related to the isthmus. The lawyers wouldn't say what type of legislation Canada should bring forward or even if any new legislation is necessary. "So are you saying that you're asking this question of us so it can be a political football that you can use against the feds?" asked Farrar. "I certainly wouldn't call it a political football," responded Smith. He continued by saying there is "a certain amount of politics" involved in any provincial-federal dispute. Boyle said earlier in the hearing that the question was framed as "a pure question of law." The lawyers said an answer from the court would help further the dialogue between the two levels of government. Nova Scotia and New Brunswick agreed this spring to split the cost of the project with Ottawa, but Houston said he only did so to "avoid delays," while still hoping that Ottawa would change its position. The arguments Boyle and Smith argued that Ottawa has sole legislative authority over the isthmus because of the importance of protecting the land for the sake of interprovincial trade. One of their core points harkened back hundreds of years to Nova Scotia's entry into Confederation. Boyle said Nova Scotia was hesitant to join the federation and was convinced to do so with the promise of an intercolonial railway. The lawyers said Canada is still obligated by those promises to take responsibility for protecting the CN rail line that runs over the isthmus. They also argued that the dams, dikes and aboiteaux that protect the isthmus from tidal inundation are an interconnected system that crosses Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and can't be managed by either province alone. New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island are interveners in the case. A lawyer for the government of New Brunswick also made submissions on Tuesday, reiterating many of the same arguments made by Nova Scotia. The hearing is expected to continue Wednesday with submissions from Prince Edward Island and the federal government.
CBC
05-05-2025
- Business
- CBC
New Brunswick facing the lowest GDP growth in Canada this year, Deloitte forecast warns
Social Sharing A new report projects that New Brunswick will lag behind the rest of Canada this year on gross domestic product growth in 2025. Deloitte Canada's latest economic outlook forecasts a 0.6 per cent change in GDP for the province in 2025 — tied with Quebec for last in the country. That figure also slashes the last provincial projection nearly in half. In March, the province tabled its own outlook alongside the budget, and it forecast growth of 1.1 per cent this year. The report also projects Canada's economy will see a downturn over two consecutive quarters this year. This would meet the conventional definition of a recession, although the report does not use that term. New Brunswick Finance Minister René Legacy says the forecast is concerning, but he hopes infrastructure projects to begin this year will help offset the estimate. "There's still some major projects that are supposed to begin in New Brunswick this year that potentially could have a positive impact," Legacy said Monday. "I'm not sure if Deloitte factored any of these in, or if they're just looking at the macroeconomic factors. "There's the transmission corridor between Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, we are starting to prep for the Isthmus ... hopefully we'll see these infrastructure projects move the needle." WATCH | N.B. finance minister says 'major projects' could have positive economic impact: Province still confident, despite report's forecast of economic downturn 2 hours ago Duration 2:47 Deloitte Canada predicts an economic downturn across Canada in 2025 because of an unstable trading relationship with the U.S. and a decrease in consumer confidence. The report puts New Brunswick at the bottom of the pack for growth. Construction on the transmission line is to begin this year, while a news release from the province estimates work on the Chignecto Isthmus will take about a decade. Preliminary engineering studies, design and land acquisition are expected over the first five years, with construction to follow after that. Legacy noted the Department of Finance and Treasury Board will soon be preparing the economic update for the quarter that ends in June. Chief economist Dawn Desjardins said in a statement that Deloitte's forecast draws on the current trade environment and economic data. "New Brunswick is highly exposed to trade and not only at risk of being impacted by U.S. tariffs but [it] also exports seafood to China, with much of those goods facing 25 per cent Chinese tariffs," Desjardins said in a statement. "N.B. also faces U.S. duties on its softwood lumber exports." Desjardins noted that aside from tariff concerns, New Brunswick is also seeing weaker immigration and lower sales in the housing market. Consumers showing caution Louis-Philippe Gauthier, Atlantic vice-president of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, said small and medium-sized business owners are feeling the impact. "When you look at consumers being more careful with their dollars, small businesses not necessarily in the mood to invest their money, to grow their business, because of all the uncertainty, what we're seeing is potentially a slowdown on the horizon," Gauthier said in an interview. "It's a time of pressures, it's a time of uncertainty, and unfortunately that's the moment in time." He said it's too soon to know what government interventions might help businesses weather the storm.
