The federal government is seeking to dismiss a prominent environmental lawsuit, asserting that it is not obligated to revise Canada’s climate plan to align with national emissions reduction goals. They argue that the court should not interfere in climate policy decisions and have requested the case be thrown out before proceeding to full hearings.
In June, a lawsuit was initiated by three young individuals and two environmental organizations, urging the Federal Court to mandate Ottawa to adjust its climate strategy. The Liberal government has removed crucial elements from the plan since its inception in 2022, essential for meeting the 2030 target.
The lawsuit contends that the failure to update the climate plan breaches Canada’s climate accountability act, formally referred to as the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. The government’s initial response on Aug. 14 highlighted that the act allows the Minister to modify emissions targets or reduction plans.
In a legal submission to the court, the government emphasized that the term “may” in the act does not impose an obligation to make amendments. They also emphasized that courts do not establish climate policy and that such issues exceed the court’s jurisdiction.
When asked if this implies the government will not update the 2030 climate plan, a spokesperson for the environment minister stated that the Government of Canada is dedicated to combatting climate change and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, refraining from further comment due to the ongoing legal proceedings.
Despite the lack of clarity on updating the climate plan, the individuals behind the challenge are urging the court to reject any attempts to dismiss it. They expressed concern over the government’s pursuit of fossil fuel expansion and the rollback of critical climate safeguards during a pivotal time in addressing climate change.
Kyle Harrietha, who played a significant role in the passage of the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act and currently operates a parliamentary consulting firm, believes that the government should revise its climate plan. He noted that the act was not designed to allow the government to make substantial policy changes without amending the plan.