Arguments were heard in Regina on Friday about whether the case meets the legal requirements to proceed.
A judge heard arguments Friday about whether a court action targeting Saskatchewan’s approach to greenhouse gas emissions and its plans to build new gas-fired power plants should be allowed to proceed.
The case was brought forward in the spring of 2023 by a group of individuals along with a group known as Climate Justice Saskatoon, referred to in this story as “the applicants.”
The action was brought against the Saskatchewan government, SaskPower, and the province’s Crown Investments Corporation (CIC), collectively referred to as “the respondents.”
On Friday, Court of King’s Bench Justice Holli Kuski Bassett heard arguments from both sides of the case that were intended to address two fronts — the government’s application to have the case thrown out, and whether the applicants should be allowed to amend their case.
A copy of the applicants’ proposed amended case lays out that society is “in a time of dangerous climate change, primarily caused by the burning of fossil fuels.”
The case seeks to assert, among other things, that the applicants constitutional rights are violated by “government action that causes and continues to exacerbate the harm and intensity of climate change.”
The respondents’ arguments were centred largely on whether the case and its pleadings were proper in terms of established law and court rules. The respondents argued no.
“We’re not arguing that you can’t raise a constitutional case. We’re not saying that at all. But you have to do it properly,” said Collin Hirschfeld, representing SaskPower and the CIC.
Both he and Elaine Thompson, who was representing the government, made arguments as to why they felt the case was improper and why the court should not allow it to proceed.
The applicants’ lawyers, Glenn Wright and Kaitlyn Harvey, argued their case did meet the requirements. However, Wright told the judge that if their case had deficiencies, they would like permission to amend it in order to bring it in line with what’s required.
“The claim raises political (issues), not legal issues,” Thompson argued.
Harvey acknowledged that the issue of climate change is political, but suggested it’s also part of a “factual environmental issue.”
“We know how it’s being caused, we know what we can do to reduce the degree of change, and we’re not doing it” she said.
Lawyers for the applicants presented impassioned submissions that spoke to the importance of citizens being able to “have their day in court.” That includes the people they represent, whom the lawyers allege are currently experiencing harm at the hands of government.
Harvey said her clients want to hold the government accountable. Wright suggested the case was about addressing misinformation and a “culture of bullying” prevalent in Saskatchewan.
Moe clarified at the time that he felt the metric did not properly speak to the province’s circumstances, including the amount of products it exports. He also said the province should reduce its emissions and has made progress in doing so.
“The citizens of Saskatchewan do care,” Harvey said Friday.
The judge reserved her decision on the matter, setting no date for its delivery.
The Regina Leader-Post has created an Afternoon Headlines newsletter that can be delivered daily to your inbox so you are up to date with the most vital news of the day. Click here to subscribe.
With some online platforms blocking access to the journalism upon which you depend, our website is your destination for up-to-the-minute news, so make sure to bookmark leaderpost.com and sign up for our newsletters so we can keep you informed. Click here to subscribe.