Custom Search
Top Stories
Go to Site Index See "Top Stories" main page
ForestEthics campaigners at an anti-pipeline rally in March  Photo by Alexis Stoymenoff
NEWS RELEASE · 13th August 2013
Ben West - ForestEthics
Last spring, the federal government of Canada, led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, labeled ForestEthics an enemy of the state and tried to shut us down. While they continue to push their toxic tar sands agenda and do their best to bully and intimidate scientists, environmental organizations and citizens into silence, our message is this: We Won't Be Silenced.

Today, ForestEthics Advocacy is doing what we do best – standing up to Canada’s government with a lawsuit challenging laws passed last year that unreasonably restrict the rights of everyday Canadians to have their say on proposed oil projects. This violates citizens' rights to free speech and puts our natural environment at risk.

Read our press release from today's press conference in Toronto announcing our lawsuit:

ForestEthics Advocacy and Donna Sinclair, represented by renowned civil rights and constitutional lawyer Clayton Ruby, are suing the federal government over new rules that restrict citizen participation in public decisions about the energy industry.

The application, filed in Toronto today, calls for the Federal Court of Canada to strike down provisions of the National Energy Board Act that unreasonably restrict public comment on project proposals. ForestEthics Advocacy and Ms. Sinclair are also challenging new rules created by the National Energy Board (NEB), which prevent any discussion of the wisdom of tar sands development at the upcoming Enbridge Line 9B hearings.

The NEB regulates the oil, gas, and electricity industries and approves pipeline construction, coal and uranium mining, liquified natural gas projects, and tar sands development in Canada. Its decisions have massive environmental and health implications. Under the new rules, many Canadians are blocked from participation.

“Through legislative changes snuck into last year’s Omnibus Budget Bill C-38, the Conservative government has undermined the democratic rights of all Canadians to speak to the issues that impact them,” explained Mr. Ruby. “Right now, they cannot question the development of the tar sands itself! We're challenging the legislation and the NEB’s new rules because they violate fundamental free speech guarantees enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

Recent legislative changes mean that many Canadians with something to say about these projects will not have their chance to be heard. The NEB now requires that anyone wanting to submit a letter of comment to the NEB must complete a nine-page application for a chance to speak at NEB hearings. The NEB then decides who can and cannot provide testimony. The NEB reserves for itself the right to exclude anyone except for those that it considers to be “directly affected” by the proposed project.

“The amendments not only restrict who can speak to issues before the National Energy Board, but they also limit what those individuals are allowed to say,” said ForestEthics Advocacy board member Tzeporah Berman. “Canadians deserve a fair public debate about the future of our economy and energy systems. Right now, they aren't getting it.”

Under the new rules enacted by the Harper government, Donna Sinclair’s request to submit a letter of commet at upcoming hearings for the Enbridge Line 9b hearings in Toronto was denied. Sinclair is an author, long-time member of the United Church of Canada and a feature writer for the United Church Observer.

“Tightening the rules around public participation to the extent that any citizen of this country-–regardless of expertise or geographical location-–cannot express their concerns is an extraordinary and profoundly dangerous affront to our democracy. I love my country and my beliefs call on me to respect our environment. That is why I chose to join this lawsuit,” says Sinclair.

Quick Facts

•This is the first time the amendments will be challenged in court.

•This suspension of citizen speech is effective: In 2012, 1544 people spoke at NEB hearings for the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project. Only 175 are permitted to speak at hearings this year for the Enbridge Line 9B reversal project.

•ForestEthics Advocacy was founded in 2012 to stand up for the rights and health of Canadians and the country's natural environment.

For a backgrounder please see PDF icon
Click Here

Ben West of ForestEthics Advocacy

View Website Here
Comment by Gary Edwards on 15th August 2013
I have just donated to this cause. I feel very strongly that the Harperites are eroding our freedoms enshrined in the constitution.
I am a senior on a fixed income and need to watch every penny so I gave up something to make this donation. Please try and give whatever you can. It's important.
Freedom of expression
Comment by Beatnuck on 13th August 2013
Although I support Forest Ethics, I fear they will not win the court case. The job of govts is to create policy. It is not the job of the courts to set government policy. If Canadians don't like the Conservatives' policy, then we should vote them out. That's why we have elections. If the govt was shutting down websites and blocking the publication of anti-pipeline protests, that would be a different story. In that case, freedom of expression clearly would be compromised. But the NEB is not a public venue like a newspaper.

Ironically, if Forest Ethics loses the battle in court, the environmental movement may be much better off in the long run. Why? Because a Liberal or NDP administration would then have a mandate to shut industry players out of NEB hearings and only allow environmental groups and Natives to have a say!

But if Forest Ethics is successful, the Liberals or NDP will be legally barred from shutting out industry from consultation in the future.