Indigenous groups criticize Canada-Alberta draft co-operation agreement to Impact Assessment Agency

By Jeremy Appel, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

(ANNews) – Several First Nations and Metis groups have joined Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation (SLCN) in voicing their opposition to the draft co-operation agreement between Prime Minister Mark Carney and Premier Danielle Smith that critics argue weakens environmental oversight of major infrastructure projects.

Public submissions to the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada include letters from the SLCN, the Confederacy of Treaty 6 First Nations and First Nations Major Projects Coalition, as well as the Athabasca Chipewyan, Cold Lake, Duncan’s, Frog Lake, Mikisew, Montana and O’Chiese First Nations.

The Fort McMurray Metis Nation, which is a member of the Otipemisiwak Metis Government, and the Lac La Biche-based Lakeland Metis Nation, which is not, also made submissions.

The draft co-operation agreement aims to introduce a “streamlined assessment approach that defers, whenever possible, to provincial processes for projects and activities that primarily fall within Alberta’s exclusive legislative jurisdiction.”

“When a proposed project is primarily within provincial jurisdiction, Canada will recognize Alberta as best placed to consult with Indigenous Peoples,” reads section 7(1) of the draft agreement.

For projects that are built on federal land, Carney pledged to incorporate “Alberta’s environmental assessment and regulatory process requirements into the federal assessment,” with a maximum timeline of two years for reaching a decision.

In March, SLCN Chief Sheldon Sunshine wrote a letter to Carney calling the prime minister’s tentative agreement with Smith, which builds on their November 2025 memorandum of understanding, a “dangerous mistake” that represents “appeasement” of Smith’s “separatist agenda.”

The Canadian government has co-operation agreements for environmental reviews with Ontario, B.C. and New Brunswick, but Confederacy of Treaty 6 First Nations Grand Chief Joey Pete argues that the draft agreement with Alberta “is more concerning in several important respects, especially on consultation, clarity, and accountability.”

“Alberta’s confidence in its own system cannot be the measure of whether federal responsibilities have been met where Treaty rights and matters within federal jurisdiction remain engaged,” wrote Pete in a March 27 submission to the Impact Assessment Agency.

“Alberta’s own consultation and regulatory systems remain a serious concern for many First Nations, especially on environmental protection, cumulative effects and the practical consideration of Treaty rights.”

On Friday, Canada’s National Observer reported that Environment Alberta is exempting celebrity businessman Kevin O’Leary’s proposed “Wonder Valley” data centre on Treaty 8 land from an environmental review, despite the amount of water and natural gas its proponents plan to use.

For the proposed Pathways carbon capture and storage hub, also slated for Treaty 8 territory, the Alberta Energy Regulator allowed the Oil Sands Alliance (formerly Pathways Alliance) to submit more than 100 separate applications for each part of the project, enabling its proponents to circumvent a full environmental review.

“In summary, the Confederacy does not oppose coordination between governments. What we oppose is an agreement that risks turning coordination into reduced federal accountability,” wrote Pete.

In its March 27 submission, the First Nations Major Projects Coalition (FNMPC) notes that Alberta isn’t itself a signatory to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which the Canadian government signed into law in 2021.

UNDRIP refers repeatedly to the right to “free, prior and informed consent” (FPIC) for projects on Indigenous lands.

The draft agreement refers to Canada’s support for UNDRIP as “non-binding.”

When Canada is considering using provincial processes, the federal commitment to UNDRIP must be considered alongside the constitutional and procedural requirements of the Crown’s duty to consult,” wrote coalition VP of environmental services, Riannon Ball.

The FNMPC board includes former Fort Nelson First Nation chief Sharleen Gale, Cold Lake First Nations Chief Kelsey Jacko, Gamètì Chief Doreen Arrowmaker and Gitxsan Nation Hereditary Chief Aluuxw Robert Blackstock.

Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation in Treaty 8 argues in its March 25 submission that the draft agreement “departs from constitutional norms by elevating provincial primacy, constraining federal discretion, and weakening protections for Indigenous rights”

“A regulatory approach focused on consolidation, substitution, and administrative efficiency risks prioritizing speed and uniformity over the substantive, rights‑based engagement that FPIC requires,” wrote Athabasca Chipewyan’s executive director of Dene lands and resource management Lori Cyprien.

Fort McMurray Metis Nation warned that “this draft agreement risks eliminating the federal role in regulatory and impact assessment projects in Alberta almost entirely.”

“It is totally inadequate for Canada to hand over jurisdiction and authority for these matters on Alberta’s word and without meaningful oversight and accountability,” reads the community’s March 27 letter to the Impact Assessment Agency.

Lakeland Metis Nation president Linda Power wrote on March 25 that the provincial regulatory framework is “often structured around regulatory efficiency and may not fully reflect federal obligations to Indigenous peoples.”

“A cooperative approach must not result in the downloading of federal responsibilities or reduced accountability to Indigenous Communities,” wrote Power.

Lakeland Metis, the submission notes, isn’t “currently formally recognized by the federal government,” but is undergoing the process of establishing the “credible assertion” of its rights with the provincial government.

Mikisew Cree First Nation (MCFN) in Treaty 8 argues that the draft agreement represents a “nail in the coffin to MCFN’s ability to protect its Treaty and Treaty rights, leaving the Nation at the mercy of impotent and racially discriminatory provincial processes.”

“It demonstrates a willingness to make the public interest ‘the government of Alberta’s interest’  at the expense of First Nations but also the many Albertans who believe in sustainable development and take their Treaty obligations seriously,” reads MCFN’s March 27 letter to the Impact Assessment Agency.

In a March 27 submission, O’Chiese First Nation’s chief and council argue that the draft co-operation agreement was “unilaterally created” by the prime minister and premier “without our consent in our territories.”

“This Draft Agreement does not strengthen impact assessment. It weakens it,” the letter concludes. “This Agreement cannot proceed in its current form.”

The Impact Assessment Agency also received submissions from the Alberta Wilderness Association, No CO2 Pipelines Alberta, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), the Mining Association of Canada, the Oil Sands Alliance, Capital Power and the Government of the Northwest Territories.

The N.W.T. government wrote that it has previously been involved in federal impact assessments for projects in Alberta that could have “transboundary effects” and signed a 2015 agreement with Alberta “to maintain the ecological integrity of the aquatic ecosystem.”

Lorraine Seal of N.W.T.’s Environment and Climate Change Ministry notes that the draft agreement “addresses only projects that physically cross a boundary and does not speak to transboundary effects.”

She added that B.C.’s finalized co-operation agreement requires consideration of transboundary impacts and Ontario’s “goes further by explicitly providing for downstream considerations in the coordination of potential assessment conditions, decision‑making, and permitting.”

While broadly supportive of the agreement, CAPP argued that the federal government should go further in offloading regulatory processes onto the Alberta government.

“Work should be undertaken to ensure that all environmental protections and consultations undertaken by provinces are not duplicated by federal requirements,” wrote CAPP VP, sustainability, external relations and Indigenous affairs Patricia Brady on March 25.

CAPP’s submission included a copy of a February 2026 report the lobbying group submitted to federal Treasury Board President Shafqat Ali, entitled, “Cutting Red Tape to Unleash Canada as an Energy Superpower.”