The Canadian Government Has Been Faced With A Decision

The origination of this case study begins on one brisk morning back on the 19th of September in 2008 when TransCanada first submitted their application to the U.S. State Department to build the Keystone XL pipeline. The Canadian based energy infrastructure company proposed a 1,179-mile, 36-inch diameter pipeline that would transport crude oil from Canada, through Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska. Along with transporting oil from producers in Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and North Dakota (Figure 1).

The Keystone XL is a controversial oil pipeline extension that would travel from Alberta, Canada, to the United States Gulf Coast. The Keystone XL should not be built because of the damage it would cause to the environment. The oil would be found within tar sands that contain bitumen. The process of extracting the crude oil uses a lot of energy and causes a large amount of greenhouse gases. Many citizens, in Canada and the United States, are outraged because it can be detrimental to the surrounding land and wildlife. TransCanada, the company building the oil pipeline, has to receive permission from the United States government to begin construction. If the United States does not have the pipeline built and chooses to not use Canada’s oil, then TransCanada will have the pipeline built elsewhere and exported to other countries. There has been a divide between those in favor of the Keystone XL and those who are not. The Keystone XL would be able to provide the United States with a reliable source of oil, but it would also take the risk of faults in the oil pipeline and ruining parts of America’s resourceful soil. The Keystone XL will cause a negative effect on the environment and damage resourceful land; therefore, the oil pipeline should not be constructed.

Experts have calculated that the Indigenous communities have the “means, the motives and the opportunity to significantly impede about $650 billion worth of new investment in natural resource development over the next decade” (Wilson 19). For a government who was relying almost solely on gas and oil to stimulate the economy, this blockade could have been disastrous for the Harper government. Furthermore, many Indigenous people believed Harper’s reluctance to honor to Accord was also due to his military ambitions in the Middle East (Wilson 23). Where the Harper Government increased the yearly federal funding for the military by 1.1 billion for the next five years (“Budget Plan 2006” 127). With money being injected into the military and the Conservative Party reluctant to acknowledge the potential of the Accord, it was hard to imagine that the standing of living of the Indigenous people would improve over the next five-years. Yet, in the 2006 Federal Budget the Conservative Party claimed

Protect the native’s land and the planet! The Dakota Pipeline project is not going to be as beneficial as it’s made out to be. “It’s a 3.7 billion dollar project that would cross four states. The results could be an economic boon that makes the country more self-sufficient or an environmental disaster that destroys sacred Native American sites” (Yan). Construction of the Dakota pipeline does not only violate the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851, but implementing this pipeline will release more pollution, risk contamination of the water supply, and provide temporary jobs.

Since 1532, Native Americans have been subjected to American influence. From engaging in treaties to developing a dependency on the reservations, they have a long history of fighting for political, environmental, and human rights. For instance, the Sac and Fox tribe currently battle the Keystone XL project, a major threat to their right to live peacefully and securely. The lead in this project, TransCanada, a Canadian oil company, plans to insert a 1,661 mile crude oil pipeline that runs from Alberta, Canada to Texas, crossing numerous Indian reservations and threatening their natural resources. While Americans benefit from the additional access to oil, it raises issues of water contamination and disturbance to sacred sites and wildlife habitats. Along with these negative impacts, the tribe also lacks inclusion and representation in this proposal. Therefore, the proposed Keystone XL project is not justified because of its intrusion on the human and land rights of the Sac and Fox tribe, which are

The Energy Transfer Partners wants to install the Dakota Pipeline near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, but the Sioux tribe is fighting to stop the installation of the pipeline to preserve their culture and assert their right to the property. The Dakota Pipeline is an oil pipeline that would transport oil from North Dakota through South Dakota and Iowa into Illinois. The Dakota Pipeline should not be installed because it disrespects the Native Americans’ culture and discriminates against The Sioux, a minority within the United States. The unjust treatment of Native Americans is due to the government’s disregard for Native American property rights and the government’s belief that they can simply take Native American property away because they are

One of Canada’s priorities in regards to Arctic Sovereignty should be to protect the Inuit people not only because they are experiencing a loss in culture, but the Circumpolar Inuit Declaration on Arctic Sovereignty also declares that the Inuit have rights to the resources and the land upon which they live on.

Next, the political sociology approach focuses to centre on groups and societal forces ((Blidook, Cochrane, Dyck, 2017). There are many social cleavages such as regions, economic classes, and ethnic groups that cause differing opinions. Alberta works with Kinder Morgan to benefit their economy however the province does not cater towards the needs of British Columbia. Kinder Morgan does not consider the impact to the First Nations, as they are an ethnic group who value nature. Similarly, the Canadian government does not consider the different economic classes that will be affected by the pipeline, if an oil spill/leak were to occur. Plus, with the expansion of the pipelines there will be no affordable housing, there will be alcohol and drug

Canada is composed of many different regions, each with their own individual characteristic and form of government. There is always a chance of issues potentially rising when provinces have to come together to agree on controversies. One matter arising interprovincial conflict is the Alberta pipeline. Alberta needs to move their stranded oil either to the east or west coast which unfolds many tensions. Going west up brings a major conflict with British Columbia and the coast, where as going east involves passing through multiple provinces each with their own opinion of the pipeline. Most of these provinces also include crossing aboriginal land which is a whole other problem along with the premiers of each province. Reason to believe the pipeline has disadvantages include; the aboriginals protest about their land, the environmental contract with quebec, along with other provinces and transportation, a common dispute. The alberta pipeline causes conflict across the country as it affects its citizens and causes political disagreement. While the pipeline hinders national stability with the aboriginals, and between premiers it does benefit the oil and transportation industry.

Native Americans are being disrespected, harmed, and their homeland is being taken from them. Am I talking about events taken place centuries ago? No, because these unfortunate circumstances yet again are occurring right here, now, in the present. This horrid affair has a name: The Dakota Access Pipeline. This Pipeline is an oil transporting pipeline, which is funded by the U.S Army Corps of Engineers, who have devised a plan for the pipeline to run through the states of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois. However, unfortunately, this pipeline will run straight through the reservation of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. The Standing Rock Sioux tribe, expressing their distress for the pipeline have said, that the pipeline will be “Destroying our burial sites, prayer sites, and culturally significant artifacts,” Arguments for the pipeline however have tried to counter this claim, trying to emphasize that “The pipeline wouldn 't just be an economic boon, it would also significantly decrease U.S. reliance on foreign oil”, and that the pipeline is estimated to produce “374.3 million gallons of gasoline per day.”, which could help the sinking oil economy. (Yan, 2016) However, despite the economical growth it could achieve, the Dakota Access Pipeline could have damaging environmental effects on the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the areas surrounding.

Aboriginal land claims in Canada are often a topic that while commonly debated, is not often seen at the forefront of politics. This was seen in the recent election, as Justin Trudeau was being sure not to make Aboriginal land claims an election issue, in an attempt to keep the public opinion neutral. Recently, however, more is being said about the land claims. Promises are on the line from our leaders in politics, policies are being reviewed, and the public have a lot to say in regards to how the policies for Aboriginal land claims work currently. Due to the politics, policy, and public opinion stream all having been recently opened up, the window of opportunity to make policy changes on Aboriginal land claims has now opened.

These factors result in several issues and challenges. These matters have brought a conflict between the various stakeholders in this industry (Oilsandstruth.org, 2015). This discussion aims to identify the primary issues associated with the Canada oil sands and the involved stakeholders. Secondly, the stakeholders’ political view will be established. Finally, the discussion will recommend policies that can be effective in solving the challenges associated with the issues.

Indigenous people take up a big role in world, in subjects like human rights, governance, cultural and linguistic diversity and environmental protection. Indigenous people in Canada share their knowledge and experiences with other Indigenous groups, states and International organizations around the world. In doing so the Canadian government fully supports these steps. Not a lot of people know there is over “three hundred seventy million Indigenous people in more than seventy countries around the world” (Canada website). The government of Canada has introduced many Indigenous issues or activities to institutions like the United Nations (UN), the Organization of the American States (OAS) and many other multilateral and bilateral institutions. Government of Canada’s goal is to work on a international level to get Indigenous people their rights. To do so the Government of Canada is working with many Indigenous organizations like Assembly of First Nations, the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, Inuit

While there are ample possible solutions to help address the problem at hand, the best of the three aforementioned policies is the expenditure-based approach. This approach would be most beneficial to the government and the First Nations population because it gives the First Nations the finances needed to improve the conditions they are currently experiencing. Moreover, these finances can be another step at attempting to compensate for the treatment that was historically experienced by Canadian Aboriginals at the hands of the federal government.

The Dakota Access Pipeline will cause devastating effects for the Indigenous Peoples. While the economic outputs of the pipeline will benefit the local government, the environmental effects and cultural devastation far outweigh the financial inputs. The systemic racism Native Americans face greatly affects them to this day. The fact that they are Native American plays a significant role in