Hydro-Québec – Affaires Juridiques 4Th Floor 75, Blvd
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Hydro -Québec – Affaires juridiques Courtesy English Translation December 17, 2020 Alexandre -Philippe Avard Lawyer TRANSMISSION BY ELECTRONIC FILING ONLY Hydro-Québec – Affaires juridiques 4th floor 75, blvd. René-Lévesque West Montreal (Quebec) H2Z 1A4 Mr. Jean-Denis Charlebois Secretary of the Commission Tel. : 514 289-2211, ext. 3928 Canada Energy Regulator [email protected] Suite 210, 517 10th Avenue SW Calgary (Alberta) T2R 0A8 Subject : Appalaches-Maine Interconnection Line Project (file OF-Fac-IPL-H141-2019-01 01) Response to the Joint Memorandum from the Innu of Pessamit First Nation, the Atikamekw of Wemotaci First Nation and the Anishnabeg First Nations of Pikogan, Lac Simon and Kitcisakik – AND – the Memorandum from Innu Nation Mr. Charlebois, This is the response from Hydro-Québec , when carrying on electric power transmission activities (“HQT ”) to the comments contained in the following two documents transmitted to the Commission of the Canada Energy Regulator (the “Commission ”) on December 3, 2020 in connection with the evaluation of the permit application (the “Application ") for the Appalaches-e-Maine Interconnection Line Project (the “Project ”): the joint memorandum of the Innu of Pessamit First Nation, the Atikamekw of Wemotaci First Nation and the Anishnabeg First Nations of Pikogan, Lac Simon and Kitcisakik ( filing C10114 ) (the “ Joint Memorandum ”); and the comments of Innu Nation Inc. ( filing C10115 ) (the “ Innu Nation Memorandum ”). For the purposes hereof, the Joint Memorandum and the Innu Nation Memorandum are jointly referred to as the “Memoranda ”. The two Memoranda are the subject of the same response from HQT since they present related positions; the signatories of these two Memoranda have also presented themselves in the media as having “united their voices”. 1 As mentioned in the Application 2, Hydro-Québec pays special attention to strengthening its ties with the various Aboriginal communities potentially affected by the projects it carries out. It is in this spirit, as well as in light of the applicable legal framework and of the Commission's recommendations to project proponents, that HQT has approached its efforts to inform and engage with Aboriginal communities in the present file. Thus, HQT has undertaken various initiatives with the Abenaki communities of Odanak and Wôlinak as well as with the Huron-Wendat Nation, which initiatives are ongoing. These Aboriginal communities were identified as potentially concerned by the Project in the Preliminary Analysis of the Traditional Territory transmitted to HQT by the predecessor of the Canada Energy Regulator, the National Energy Board (the “NEB ”). These communities have entered into “Protocols for Consultation and Accommodation” with the federal government. The territory of application of such protocols includes the Project study area. _______________________ 1 Coalition Politique Innue Anicinabek Atikamekw, "Exportation d’hydroélectricité canadienne aux État-Unis (sic) - au Québec et au Labrador, des Premières Nations s’unissent pour s’opposer à un projet d’Hydro-Québec" (December 3, 2020), available online: Newswire.ca < https://www.newswire.ca/fr/news-releases/exportation-d-hydroelectricite-canadienne-aux-etat-unis-au-quebec-et-au- labrador-des-premieres-nations-s-unissent-pour-s-opposer-a-un-projet-d-hydro-quebec-821104676.html >. 2 See section 4.3.4 of the Application (filing C01914-7). The situation is different for the signatories of the Memoranda. In their case, the Project will not be carried out on the traditional territories that they claim and the Project study area is not frequented by their members. It should be noted that the Project study area is located south of the St. Lawrence River, close to the U.S. border, while the asserted traditional territories are located several hundreds of kilometers away, north of the St. Lawrence River in Mauricie (Wemotaci), Abitibi (Pikogan, Lac Simon and Kitcisakik), Côte Nord (Pessamit) and outside Quebec in Labrador (Innu Nation). 3 Moreover, these Aboriginal communities will not be impacted by, and a fortiori will not suffer any new impact from, the measure currently being considered by the Commission, namely the issuance of a permit authorizing the construction and operation of the proposed power line. Moreover, the Commission and the NEB before it never considered the signatories of the Memoranda as groups potentially affected by the Project. The signatories of the Memoranda were not listed in the Preliminary Analysis of the Traditional Territory , nor were they issued letters when the Commission wrote to the Aboriginal communities potentially affected by the Project on January 3 and October 16, 2020. 4 For the reasons more fully described below in the present response, HQT submits that the Crown’s duty to consult and accommodate Aboriginal peoples, which must be implemented by the Commission, is not triggered with respect to the signatories of the Memoranda and, therefore, the Commission should not grant their requests. In addition, the Memoranda contain allegations and requests that do not relate to “international power lines”, as this concept is defined in the Canadian Energy Regulator Act 5 (the “ Act ”), but rather to electricity generating facilities within provinces. I. The legal framework applicable to the duty to consult and accommodate Aboriginal peoples in Canada Since 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada has repeatedly confirmed the parameters applicable to the Crown’s duty to consult and, in some cases, accommodate Aboriginal groups affected by a government action or decision 6. As was the case with the NEB's regulatory assessment process, the Crown may rely on the Commission’s regulatory assessment process to satisfy its duty to consult where the Commission is the ultimate decision-maker.7 Section 56(1) of the Act provides precisely that: “When making a decision, an order or a recommendation under this Act, the Commission must consider any adverse effects that the decision, order or recommendation may have on the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.” The government’s duty to consult Aboriginal peoples and take their interests into account flows from the honour of the Crown. 8 This principle is a corollary of section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 , the “noble purpose” of which is the “reconciliation of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Canadians in a mutually respectful long-term relationship”.9 _______________________ 3 See map 4-1 presented at page 4-7 of the Application. 4 Filings C03939 and C08957 . 5 Canadian Energy Regulator Act (S.C. 2019, c. 28, s. 10). 6 See notably Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests) , [2004] 3 S.C.R. 511, 2004 SCC 73 [ Haida Nation ]; Taku River Tlingit First Nation v. British Columbia (Project Assessment Director) , [2004] 3 S.C.R. 550, 2004 SCC 74 [ Taku River ]; Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. v. Carrier Sekani Tribal Council , 2010 SCC 43, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 650 [Carrier Sekani ]; Clyde River (Hamlet) v. Petroleum Geo-Services Inc. , 2017 SCC 40, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 1069 [Clyde River ]; Chippewas of the Thames First Nation v. Enbridge Pipelines Inc ., 2017 SCC 41, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 1099 [Chippewas of the Thames ]; Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations) , 2017 SCC 54, [2017] 2 S.C.R. 386 [Ktunaxa ]. 7 See Clyde River and Chippewas of the Thames . 8 Haida Nation at paragraphs 16 to 20; Carrier Sekani at paragraph 32. 9 Beckman v. Little Salmon/Carmacks First Nation , 2010 SCC 53, [2010] 3 S.C.R. 103 at paragraph 10. 2 The duty to consult and accommodate Aboriginal peoples arises when the Crown has knowledge, real or constructive, of the potential existence of an asserted Aboriginal right or title and contemplates conduct that might adversely affect it.10 The purpose of this duty is not to settle historical grievances or to consider past or ongoing impacts resulting from past government actions already in effect. 11 Rather, it is forward-looking and focused on the future effects specific to the proposed new government decision (in this case, the Commission’s decision on the Application). To trigger the duty to consult, the new government decision must have a novel effect on an Aboriginal claim or right 12 , which is not the case here. In addition, Canadian courts have repeatedly confirmed that the duty to consult does not confer a veto to Aboriginal groups that may be affected by the government action or decision at issue.13 HQT respectfully submits that the issuance of a permit authorizing the construction and operation of the proposed power line does not adversely affect any Aboriginal claim or right and, therefore, that the Crown’s duty to consult and accommodate Aboriginal peoples in the context of the Project is not triggered with respect to the signatories of the Memoranda. II. The signatories of the Memoranda allege past or continuous impacts that are unrelated to the Project The Joint Memorandum and the Innu Nation Memorandum essentially contain allegations regarding past or ongoing impacts. Such alleged impacts, even if the Commission were to presume them to be well-founded, cannot trigger a duty to consult. Indeed, in Carrier Sekani , the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously held that “an underlying infringement [in this case the alleged impact of a dam already built and in operation] in and of itself would not constitute an adverse impact giving rise to a duty to consult”. 14 Moreover, in the decision regarding the Quebec-New Hampshire Interconnection (the “Qc-NH Decision ”), which concerned a project comparable to the Project at issue in the Application 15 , the NEB had received comments similar to those made in the Joint Memorandum. The NEB had then concluded: “The Board notes the concerns of the Innus de Pessamit related to the generation of electricity and reservoir management, and the potential impacts of these on its traditional territory, but also notes that the Permit Project as applied for is not dependent on any new upstream facilities.