The federal government is seeking to dismiss a prominent environmental lawsuit by asserting that there is no obligation to update Canada’s climate plan to align with national emissions reduction goals. They argue that it is not within the court’s purview to dictate climate policy 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 revise its climate strategy. The government has been accused of eliminating essential measures necessary for Canada to meet its 2030 targets since the plan’s inception in 2022.
The legal challenge 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 August 14 highlighted a provision in the act allowing the Minister to amend emissions targets or reduction plans, using this as a basis to dismiss the lawsuit preemptively.
The government emphasized that the term “may” in the legislation does not impose a mandatory obligation to make amendments. They also underscored that the judiciary does not set climate policy, stating that the lawsuit raises broad political and policy matters beyond the court’s scope.
When questioned by CBC about updating the 2030 climate plan, the government’s spokesperson reiterated their commitment to combatting climate change and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, refraining from further comments due to the ongoing legal proceedings.
Despite uncertainties regarding the government’s plan update, the youth challengers are urging the court to reject any attempts to dismiss the case. They expressed concerns over the lack of effective climate strategies amidst the government’s alleged push for fossil fuel expansion and climate protection rollbacks.
Kyle Harrietha, a former government official heavily involved in the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, emphasized the importance of updating the climate plan. Drawing on his experience in the act’s development, Harrietha suggested that the government’s discretion was not intended to permit major climate policy changes without corresponding plan amendments.
