Read on Twitter
Soooo... Commissioner Allan has released (i) rules for procedure & participation and (ii) a ruling on his interpretation of the Alberta Inquiry's Terms of Reference: https://albertainquiry.ca/engagement-process #ableg 1/n
It's late so I will reserve more detailed commentary for later, but 1st impression is that the Commissioner is trying to duck whole parts of his ToR (excerpts below). He's also not planning on public hearings, needs *another* extension (beyond Oct 30), & may need even more $. 2/n
A few preliminary thoughts. Para 7 basically reduces the Inquiry into whether a group opposed "some level" of O&G development in AB. That seems untenable: most -- if not all -- of the controversy has been over the scope & pace of development. 3/n
Para 8 seems to carve out climate change as a motivating factor. Presumably such opposition wld not be "Anti-Albertan" in the "geographic sense" (?), bearing in mind AB's above average GHG emissions. In any event, merely being anti-oil is not anti-Albertan, according to Allan.4/n
Paras 9/10 explain why ToR were changed over the summer: the Commissioner has little interest in verifying whether a group's info was false or misleading. This would require a huge "scientific inquiry" .... like these? (i) https://rsc-src.ca/en/environmental-and-health-impacts-canadas-oil-sands-industry; (ii) https://cca-reports.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/OilSandsExecSummEn.pdf
So the Inquiry has spent 14 months & 
$3 million to get to a point where it may eventually report on the foreign funding of groups opposed to "some level" of O&G dev't in AB and whose position(s) (e.g. that scope & pace of dev't exceeded reg. capacity) may well be justifiable.
$3 million to get to a point where it may eventually report on the foreign funding of groups opposed to "some level" of O&G dev't in AB and whose position(s) (e.g. that scope & pace of dev't exceeded reg. capacity) may well be justifiable.
