Alberta
Alberta Chiefs demand Ottawa return funding for orphan well clean up
News release from Dennis Burnside, VP & Indigenous Practice Lead, Political Intelligence
Alberta Chiefs and the IRC call on Federal Government to fulfill its environmental obligations and commitments by releasing funding to First Nations
Government of Canada seeking to return $135 million in previously committed funding to federal coffers to use as savings, instead of empowering First Nations to clean up inactive and orphan wells on their lands.
ENOCH CREE NATION, AB, March 11, 2024
Chief Cody Thomas, Enoch Cree Nation, Chief Roy Whitney, Tsuut’ina Nation, and Chief Ivan Sawan, Loon River First Nation, joined with Chiefs from across Alberta today to call on the Federal Government to release unspent funding committed to the Site Rehabilitation Program (SRP) – approximately $135 million –to be utilized by Indigenous people to reclaim additional inactive and orphan wells on their lands. These funds are still in Alberta, but Ottawa is demanding them back.
On December 12, 2023, Chiefs from Treaty 6, Treaty 7, and Treaty 8 territories wrote to Minister Jonathan Wilkinson appealing to the federal government to allow the government of Alberta to place unspent SRP monies into the FNSR Program, providing much needed funding to continue the successful work that has been accomplished by First Nations, for First Nations. Without these funds, governments and industry would be leaving over 2,000 sites to be abandoned or reclaimed on First Nations lands and territories.
Chief Thomas stated: “We still have many inactive wells on our lands that need to be reclaimed properly; we estimate nearly 2,000 sites which will cost over $225 million. We acknowledge the work that has been done under the SRP but there is more to be done. This is a liability of the lessees, and the Alberta Government is holding them accountable through the Well Closure Program. However, time is not on our side. We have a very limited land base and a growing population. We must do the necessary land stewardship immediately”.
Chief Ivan Sawan stated: “Many Alberta First Nations have felt the greatest impacts of natural resource developments which have swept through our lands and ancestral territories for generations, leaving behind environmental wreckage, while being deprived of the opportunity to meaningfully participate or benefit. We are calling on the federal government to do the right thing and release these funds for the environmental and economic purposes they were intended, so that First Nations can create meaningful job opportunities, clean up our lands, and create a healthier and more prosperous future for our people.”
Chief Roy Whitney stated: “Too many oil and gas companies have simply walked away from their obligation to remediate their well sites on First Nation Lands. The SRP was a way for First Nations to have abandoned sites reclaimed. Accordingly, it was with great disappointment when we learned that the Federal Government was not going to release the remaining funds for the SRP. We fully support the request for the remaining funds being held to be released to continue the work to clean up our Lands.”
Under the previous Alberta Site Rehabilitation Program (ASRP) $130 million was allocated to 32 Alberta First Nations and Metis communities to clean up 2,145 sites. First Nations were able to abandon 988 wells and 411 km of pipelines as well as complete 793 reclamations while working on 4,188 projects. The result was a reduction of over $123 million in liability on reserves in Alberta while creating jobs, business development and training, and improving Indigenous community engagement and capacity.
The Indian Resource Council, an advocacy group that negotiated the set aside funding for First Nations, has detailed data on inactive and orphan wells on Indigenous lands. Stephen Buffalo, President and CEO of the IRC stated that the Federal regulator, IOGC, dropped the ball by failing to hold companies liable for their liabilities. He stated that First Nations can no longer depend on IOGC to get this work done.
Mr. Buffalo added: “Under Alberta’s SRP program, the government allocated more than $130 million for cleanup projects for First Nations and the Metis. So, we are doing what we can to keep that program going to maintain the success of the initial FNSRP. About 350 community members received jobs and skills training. By removing the aging wells and pipelines we can free up land to use for housing and other purposes” This is why we need the surplus funds.
A sign, from Alberta’s Orphan Well Association (OWA), identifies a non-producing and abandoned oil well near Carseland, Alberta on Sunday, July 21, 2019. Orphan wells do not have parties responsible for decommissioning or reclamation activities. THE CANADIAN PRESS IMAGES/Larry MacDougal
When SRP funding was earmarked to support Indigenous-led projects in 2021, it was celebrated that this was an area where the federal and provincial governments were in “perfect alignment”. This spirit of collaboration was good news for the environment, for Canada’s fight against climate change, and for First Nations. Alberta Chiefs are continuing to call on the federal government to rekindle this spirit of collaboration, however, Minister Wilkinson has recently stated that the federal government has “no plans to provide additional funding for the clean-
up of inactive and orphan wells.”
Alberta’s government is introducing a new acute care funding model, increasing the accountability, efficiency and volume of high-quality surgical delivery.
Currently, the health care system is primarily funded by a single grant made to Alberta Health Services to deliver health care across the province. This grant has grown by $3.4 billion since 2018-19, and although Alberta performed about 20,000 more surgeries this past year than at that time, this is not good enough. Albertans deserve surgical wait times that don’t just marginally improve but meet the medically recommended wait times for every single patient.
With Acute Care Alberta now fully operational, Alberta’s government is implementing reforms to acute care funding through a patient-focused funding (PFF) model, also known as activity-based funding, which pays hospitals based on the services they provide.
“The current global budgeting model has no incentives to increase volume, no accountability and no cost predictability for taxpayers. By switching to an activity-based funding model, our health care system will have built-in incentives to increase volume with high quality, cost predictability for taxpayers and accountability for all providers. This approach will increase transparency, lower wait times and attract more surgeons – helping deliver better health care for all Albertans, when and where they need it.”
Activity-based funding is based on the number and type of patients treated and the complexity of their care, incentivizing efficiency and ensuring that funding is tied to the actual care provided to patients. This funding model improves transparency, ensuring care is delivered at the right time and place as multiple organizations begin providing health services across the province.
“Exploring innovative ways to allocate funding within our health care system will ensure that Albertans receive the care they need, when they need it most. I am excited to see how this new approach will enhance the delivery of health care in Alberta.”
Patient-focused, or activity-based, funding has been successfully implemented in Australia and many European nations, including Sweden and Norway, to address wait times and access to health care services, and is currently used in both British Columbia and Ontario in various ways.
“It is clear that we need a new approach to manage the costs of delivering health care while ensuring Albertans receive the care they expect and deserve. Patient-focused funding will bring greater accountability to how health care dollars are being spent while also providing an incentive for quality care.”
This transition is part of Acute Care Alberta’s mandate to oversee and arrange for the delivery of acute care services such as surgeries, a role that was historically performed by AHS. With Alberta’s government funding more surgeries than ever, setting a record with 304,595 surgeries completed in 2023-24 and with 310,000 surgeries expected to have been completed in 2024-25, it is crucial that funding models evolve to keep pace with the growing demand and complexity of services.
“With AHS transitioning to a hospital-based services provider, it’s time we are bold and begin to explore how to make our health care system more efficient and manage the cost of care on a per patient basis. The transition to a PFF model will align funding with patient care needs, based on actual service demand and patient needs, reflecting the communities they serve.”
“Covenant Health welcomes a patient-focused approach to acute care funding that drives efficiency, accountability and performance while delivering the highest quality of care and services for all Albertans. As a trusted acute care provider, this model better aligns funding with outcomes and supports our unwavering commitment to patients.”
“Patient-focused hospital financing ties funding to activity. Hospitals are paid for the services they deliver. Efficiency may improve and surgical wait times may decrease. Further, hospital managers may be more accountable towards hospital spending patterns. These features ensure that patients receive quality care of the highest value.”
Leadership at Alberta Health and Acute Care Alberta will review relevant research and the experience of other jurisdictions, engage stakeholders and define and customize patient-focused funding in the Alberta context. This working group will also identify and run a pilot to determine where and how this approach can best be applied and implemented this fiscal year.
Final recommendations will be provided to the minister of health later this year, with implementation of patient-focused funding for select procedures across the system in 2026.
David Clinton
Contrasting the principle of equalization with the execution
Quebec – as an example – happens to be sitting on its own significant untapped oil and gas reserves. Those potential opportunities include the Utica Shale formation, the Anticosti Island basin, and the Gaspé Peninsula (along with some offshore potential in the Gulf of St. Lawrence).
So Quebec is effectively being paid billions of dollars a year to not exploit their natural resources. That places their ostensibly principled stand against energy resource exploitation in a very different light.
You’ll need to search long and hard to find a Canadian unwilling to help those less fortunate. And, so long as we identify as members of one nation¹, that feeling stretches from coast to coast.
So the basic principle of Canada’s equalization payments – where poorer provinces receive billions of dollars in special federal payments – is easy to understand. But as you can imagine, it’s not easy to apply the principle in a way that’s fair, and the current methodology has arguably lead to a very strange set of incentives.
According to Department of Finance Canada, eligibility for payments is determined based on your province’s fiscal capacity. Fiscal capacity is a measure of the taxes (income, business, property, and consumption) that a province could raise (based on national average rates) along with revenues from natural resources. The idea, I suppose, is that you’re creating a realistic proxy for a province’s higher personal earnings and consumption and, with greater natural resources revenues, a reduced need to increase income tax rates.
But the devil is in the details, and I think there are some questions worth asking:
- Whichever way you measure fiscal capacity there’ll be both winners and losers, so who gets to decide?
- Should a province that effectively funds more than its “share” get proportionately greater representation for national policy² – or at least not see its policy preferences consistently overruled by its beneficiary provinces?
The problem, of course, is that the decisions that defined equalization were – because of long-standing political conditions – dominated by the region that ended up receiving the most. Had the formula been the best one possible, there would have been little room to complain. But was it?
For example, attaching so much weight to natural resource revenues is just one of many possible approaches – and far from the most obvious. Consider how the profits from natural resources already mostly show up in higher income and corporate tax revenues (including income tax paid by provincial government workers employed by energy-related ministries)?
And who said that such calculations had to be population-based, which clearly benefits Quebec (nine million residents vs around $5 billion in resource income) over Newfoundland (545,000 people vs $1.6 billion) or Alberta (4.2 million people vs $19 billion). While Alberta’s average market income is 20 percent or so higher than Quebec’s, Quebec’s is quite a bit higher than Newfoundland’s. So why should Newfoundland receive only minimal equalization payments?
To illustrate all that, here’s the most recent payment breakdown when measured per-capita:
 |
For clarification, the latest per-capita payments to poorer provinces ranged from $3,936 to PEI, $1,553 to Quebec, and $36 to Ontario. Only Saskatchewan, Alberta, and BC received nothing.
And here’s how the total equalization payments (in millions of dollars) have played out over the past decade:
 |
Is energy wealth the right differentiating factor because it’s there through simple dumb luck, morally compelling the fortunate provinces to share their fortune? That would be a really difficult argument to make. For one thing because Quebec – as an example – happens to be sitting on its own significant untapped oil and gas reserves. Those potential opportunities include the Utica Shale formation, the Anticosti Island basin, and the Gaspé Peninsula (along with some offshore potential in the Gulf of St. Lawrence).
So Quebec is effectively being paid billions of dollars a year to not exploit their natural resources. That places their ostensibly principled stand against energy resource exploitation in a very different light. Perhaps that stand is correct or perhaps it isn’t. But it’s a stand they probably couldn’t have afforded to take had the equalization calculation been different.
Of course, no formula could possibly please everyone, but punishing the losers with ongoing attacks on the very source of their contributions is guaranteed to inspire resentment. And that could lead to very dark places.
Note: I know this post sounds like it came from a grumpy Albertan. But I assure you that I’ve never even visited the province, instead spending most of my life in Ontario.
Which has admittedly been challenging since the former primer minister infamously described us as a post-national state without an identity.
This isn’t nearly as crazy as it sounds. After all, there are already formal mechanisms through which Indigenous communities get more than a one-person-one-vote voice.
Subscribe to The Audit.
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
Poilievre To Create ‘Canada First’ National Energy Corridor
Biden Administration Was Secretly More Involved In Ukraine Than It Let On, Investigation Reveals
RCMP Confirms It Is ‘Looking Into’ Alleged Foreign Threat Following Liberal Candidate Paul Chiang Comments
Trump says ‘nicer,’ ‘kinder’ tariffs will generate federal revenue
Mark Carney refuses to clarify 2022 remarks accusing the Freedom Convoy of ‘sedition’
Biden’s Greenhouse Gas ‘Greendoggle’ Slush Fund Is Unraveling
London-Based Human Rights Group Urges RCMP to Investigate Liberal MP for Possible Counselling of Kidnapping
-
Automotive2 days agoTesla Vandals Keep Running Into The Same Problem … Cameras
-
Daily Caller2 days ago‘Drill, Baby, Drill’ Or $50 Oil — Trump Can’t Have Both
-
Banks1 day agoWall Street Clings To Green Coercion As Trump Unleashes American Energy
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoLiberals Replace Candidate Embroiled in Election Interference Scandal with Board Member of School Flagged in Canada’s Election Interference Inquiry
-
COVID-191 day ago5 Stories the Media Buried This Week
-
Alberta1 day ago
Is Canada’s Federation Fair?
-
2025 Federal Election23 hours agoPierre Poilievre Declares War on Red Tape and Liberal Decay in Osoyoos
-
Business14 hours agoJury verdict against oil industry worries critics, could drive up energy costs