Canadian Energy Centre
Why Canada’s proposed oil and gas emissions cap goes against UNDRIP and the rights of Indigenous people
Indigenous Resource Network executive director John Desjarlais (centre), with Justin Bourque, president of Âsokan Generational Developments, and Shelby Kennedy, community and Indigenous relations advisor with Enbridge. Photo courtesy Indigenous Resource Network
From the Canadian Energy Centre
Q&A with John Desjarlais, executive director of the Indigenous Resource Network
The Indigenous Resource Network (IRN) is pushing back on Canada’s proposed framework to cap emissions from the oil and gas sector.
IRN executive director John Desjarlais says the proposal directly contradicts Canada’s support for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP).
He says the plan would cap opportunity for Indigenous communities as more take on ownership positions in major energy projects from oil and gas pipelines to liquefied natural gas terminals and carbon capture and storage projects.
Here’s what Desjarlais told CEC.
CEC: From the perspective of Indigenous communities across Canada who are involved in natural resources development, what’s your take on the federal government’s proposed oil and gas emissions cap?
John Desjarlais: There’s a lot of confidence that it will curtail production as well, and obvious concern that it’s going to mean less opportunity.
We’ve heard from communities that are saying we’re involved already in emissions reduction. There are communities that just want to advance their opportunities in that space. And it’s at a time when there’s probably the greatest appetite for Indigenous involvement, not just in ownership, but advanced business development and procurement. [It could] mean less jobs, less procurement, less ownership opportunity, less investment.
There are concerns that these impacts are not being heavily understood, measured, contemplated or considered in terms of the policy development and implementation.
CEC: How does being involved in oil and gas development benefit Indigenous communities?
JD: There’s a suite of benefits that are coming from increased engagement, and it’s much deeper than just jobs.
Communities are now jumping into revenue generating assets where they’re creating immediate cash flow, which is allowing them to start to self-determine and invest back into their community either through economic development or through infrastructure programming.
The other side to it is just the capacity that comes from being involved as an owner. Indigenous business and community leaders are being exposed to the requirements and the acumen needed to successfully participate in the ownership of decision making. That’s accelerating the development of the acumen and capacity of different indigenous communities at greater rates
CEC: How many communities would you estimate are now participating at this level?
JD: There’s probably upwards directly of at least 100 different communities now. There are double-digit communities that are involved in at least four or five different deals that are directly involved in the ownership and the benefit side, and then there’s cascading involvement of all the surrounding communities through procurement opportunities and employment. It’s growing quite quickly.
CEC: Why do you say the proposed emissions cap contradicts the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People?
It’s a policy that’s created to achieve certain goals. Creating those types of targets without Indigenous oversight – not just input, [but] oversight and ownership – is problematic because it contradicts the UNDRIP action plan in terms of stepping out of the way of affording Indigenous peoples and communities the ability to self-determine; to invest where they want to invest, and to grow how they want to grow.
We hear a lot of community leaders say, ‘we know what’s best for our territories.’ To have policy that limits our ability to make the decisions we want to make in regard to environmental and economic sustainability is a challenge.
CEC: What would you like to see happen?
JD: It’s a little hard to roll back and involve communities in a total redesign, but at least if we saw an understanding that there’s certainly going to be an economic impact. If there’s a production cap aspect to it, there’s going to be an economic impact to those Indigenous communities that have established livelihoods and revenue streams.
There’s the sentiment that if the government truly is advancing this in the direction that they are, then would they consider omission of Indigenous activity so they can continue advancing their economic interests and growth?
Ideally, [there would be] a policy that’s created in line with UNDRIP that works for communities, industries and governments in their goals.
Construction of an oil sands SAGD production well pad in northern Alberta. Photo supplied to the Canadian Energy Centre
From the Canadian Energy Centre
The facts about one of Canada’s biggest industries
Alberta’s oil sands sector is one of Canada’s most important industries — and also one of its most misunderstood.
Here are five common myths, and the facts behind them.
Myth: Oil sands emissions are unchecked
Steam generators at a SAGD oil sands production site in northern Alberta. Photo courtesy Cenovus Energy
Reality: Oil sands emissions are strictly regulated and monitored. Producers are making improvements through innovation and efficiency.
The sector’s average emissions per barrel – already on par with the average oil consumed in the United States, according to S&P Global – continue to go down.
The province reports that oil sands emissions per barrel declined by 26 per cent per barrel from 2012 to 2023. At the same time, production increased by 96 per cent.
Analysts with S&P Global call this a “structural change” for the industry where production growth is beginning to rise faster than emissions growth.
The firm continues to anticipate a decrease in total oil sands emissions within the next few years.
The Pathways Alliance — companies representing about 95 per cent of oil sands activity — aims to significantly cut emissions from production through a major carbon capture and storage (CCS) project and other innovations.
Myth: There is no demand for oil sands production
Expanded export capacity at the Trans Mountain Westridge Terminal. Photo courtesy Trans Mountain Corporation
Reality: Demand for Canadian oil – which primarily comes from the oil sands – is strong and rising.
Today, America imports more than 80 per cent more oil from Canada than it did in 2010, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
New global customers also now have access to Canadian oil thanks to the opening of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion in 2024.
Exports to countries outside the U.S. increased by 180 per cent since the project went into service, reaching a record 525,000 barrels per day in July 2025, according to the Canada Energy Regulator.
The world’s appetite for oil keeps growing — and it’s not stopping anytime soon.
According to the latest EIA projections, the world will consume about 120 million barrels per day of oil and petroleum liquids in 2050, up from about 104 million barrels per day today.
Myth: Oil sands projects cost too much
Heavy haulers at an oil sands mining operation in northern Alberta. Photo courtesy Suncor Energy
Reality: Operating oil sands projects deliver some of the lowest-cost oil in North America, according to Enverus Intelligence Research.
Unlike U.S. shale plays, oil sands production is a long-life, low-decline “manufacturing” process without the treadmill of ongoing investment in new drilling, according to BMO Capital Markets.
Vast oil sands reserves support mining projects with no drilling, and the standard SAGD drilling method involves about 60 per cent fewer wells than the average shale play, BMO says.
After initial investment, Enverus says oil sands projects typically break even at less than US$50 per barrel WTI.
Myth: Indigenous communities don’t support the oil sands
Chief Greg Desjarlais of Frog Lake First Nation signs an agreement in September 2022 whereby 23 First Nations and Métis communities in Alberta acquired an 11.57 per cent ownership interest in seven Enbridge-operated oil sands pipelines for approximately $1 billion. Photo courtesy Enbridge
Reality: Indigenous communities play an important role in the oil sands sector through community agreements, business contracts and, increasingly, project equity ownership.
Oil sands producers spent an average of $1.8 billion per year with 180 Indigenous-affiliated vendors between 2021 and 2023, according to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.
Indigenous communities are now owners of key projects that support the oil sands, including Suncor Energy’s East Tank Farm (49 per cent owned by two communities); the Northern Courier pipeline system (14 per cent owned by eight communities); and the Athabasca Trunkline, seven operating Enbridge oil sands pipelines (~12 per cent owned by 23 communities).
These partnerships strengthen Indigenous communities with long-term revenue, helping build economic reconciliation.
Myth: Oil sands development only benefits people in Alberta
The Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) on Bay St. Getty Images photo
Reality: Oil sands development benefits Canadians across the country through reliable energy supply, jobs, taxes and government revenues that help pay for services like roads, schools and hospitals.
The sector has contributed approximately $1 trillion to the Canadian economy over the past 25 years, according to analysis by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI).
That reflects total direct spending — including capital investment, operating costs, taxes and royalties — not profits or dividends for shareholders.
More than 2,300 companies outside of Alberta have had direct business with the oilsands, including over 1,300 in Ontario and almost 600 in Quebec, MLI said.
Energy products are by far Canada’s largest export, representing $196 billion, or about one-quarter of Canada’s total trade in 2024, according to Statistics Canada.
Led by the oil sands, Canada’s energy sector directly or indirectly employs more than 445,000 people across the country, according to Natural Resources Canada.
Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel. The company’s extensive pipeline network transports about 30 per cent of the oil produced in North America and nearly 20 per cent of the natural gas consumed in the United States. Photo courtesy Enbridge
From the Canadian Energy Centre
B.C. tanker ban an example of federal rules that have to change
The CEO of North America’s largest pipeline operator says Alberta’s move to champion a new oil pipeline to B.C.’s north coast makes sense.
“There’s a good reason the Alberta government has become proponent of a pipeline to the north coast of B.C.,” Enbridge CEO Greg Ebel told the Empire Club of Canada in Toronto the day after Alberta’s announcement.
“The previous [federal] government’s tanker ban effectively makes that export pipeline illegal. No company would build a pipeline to nowhere.”
It’s a big lost opportunity. With short shipping times to Asia, where oil demand is growing, ports on B.C.’s north coast offer a strong business case for Canadian exports. But only if tankers are allowed.
A new pipeline could generate economic benefits across Canada and, under Alberta’s plan, drive economic reconciliation with Indigenous communities.
Ebel said the tanker ban is an example of how policies have to change to allow Canada to maximize its economic potential.
Repealing the legislation is at the top of the list of needed changes Ebel and 94 other energy CEOs sent in a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney in mid-September.
The federal government’s commitment to the tanker ban under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was a key factor in the cancellation of Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline.
That project was originally targeted to go into service around 2016, with capacity to ship 525,000 barrels per day of Canadian oil to Asia.
“We have tried to build nation-building pipelines, and we have the scars to prove it. Five hundred million scars, to be quite honest,” Ebel said, referencing investment the company and its shareholders made advancing the project.
“Those are pensioners and retail investors and employees that took on that risk, and it was difficult,” he said.
For an industry proponent to step up to lead a new Canadian oil export pipeline, it would likely require “overwhelming government support and regulatory overhaul,” BMO Capital Markets said earlier this year.
Energy companies want to build in Canada, Ebel said.
“The energy sector is ready to invest, ready to partner, partner with Indigenous nations and deliver for the country,” he said.
“None of us is calling for weaker environmental oversight. Instead, we are urging government to adopt smarter, clearer, faster processes so that we can attract investment, take risks and build for tomorrow.”
This is the time for Canadians “to remind ourselves we should be the best at this,” Ebel said.
“We should lead the way and show the world how it’s done: wisely, responsibly, efficiently and effectively.”
With input from a technical advisory group that includes pipeline leaders and Indigenous relations experts, Alberta will undertake pre-feasibility work to identify the pipeline’s potential route and size, estimate costs, and begin early Indigenous engagement and partnership efforts.
The province aims to submit an application to the Federal Major Projects Office by spring 2026.
Click here to help choose Alberta’s new licence plate design
Is the CFIA a Rogue Agency or Just Taking Orders from a Rogue Federal Government?
Democracy Watch Renews Push for Independent Prosecutor in SNC-Lavalin Case
Disabled Canadians increasingly under pressure to opt for euthanasia during routine doctor visits
-
MAiD2 days ago
Disabled Canadians increasingly under pressure to opt for euthanasia during routine doctor visits
-
Agriculture6 hours agoFrom Underdog to Top Broodmare
-
Brownstone Institute2 days agoThe Doctor Will Kill You Now
-
Carbon Tax1 day agoBack Door Carbon Tax: Goal Of Climate Lawfare Movement To Drive Up Price Of Energy
-
International1 day agoTrump, Putin meeting in Hungary called off
-
Alberta1 day agoCalgary’s High Property Taxes Run Counter to the ‘Alberta Advantage’
-
Digital ID2 days agoToronto airport requests approval of ‘digital IDs’ for domestic airport travel
-
Digital ID1 day agoThousands protest UK government’s plans to introduce mandatory digital IDs