Groups held a press conference declaring Prime Minister Carney and his government have gone too far
Media Release: For Immediate Release June 3rd, 2026 – Également disponible en français.
Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People — Leaders of Canada’s largest environmental and conservation organizations united on Parliament Hill today to draw a line in the sand, declaring that Prime Minister Carney and his government have gone too far with their rollbacks of environmental protections and climate policies.
The leaders will be meeting with Members of Parliament and representatives from the Prime Minister’s office to discuss their urgent concerns about the government’s moves to eviscerate environmental laws and procedures and to undermine Canada’s nature, climate and clean energy goals.
In advance of those meetings, members of the group convened in the press gallery to make public statements about the threats posed by the government’s actions.
Those gathered and represented today included leadership from Birds Canada, Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA), Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), David Suzuki Foundation, Ecojustice, Ecology Action Centre, Environmental Defence Canada, Équiterre, Greenpeace Canada, Nature Canada, Pembina Institute, Sierra Club Canada, Stand.earth, Wildlife Conservation Society Canada (WCS), West Coast Environmental Law, and WWF-Canada.
The leaders are available to speak with journalists to provide further details about their meetings with MPs and PMO and to expand on the remarks made below and in the press gallery.
Quotes:
Gretchen Fitzgerald, Executive Director, Sierra Club Canada
“Nature unites all of us. Protecting our shared home is what motivates volunteers and community groups that are already stepping into the breach being created by the abdication of the federal government. I am confident that as we work together, we and our allies will prevail as we have in the past in pushing back against moves to force bad projects on communities — projects like gas plants, fracking, nuclear waste dumps, and offshore drilling. I fear, however, that in its unpopular concessions to the oil and gas industry the federal government is jeopardizing not only the health and safety of Canadians, it is shattering their trust. In doing so, the government will make it harder to build projects we so desperately need right now: things like Atlantic offshore wind, done right.”
Sandra Schwartz, National Executive Director, CPAWS
“You can’t rush development and protect nature like this — if we do both poorly, both fail. I’ve worked on the laws that protect Canadians’ right to a healthy environment, and seeing them weakened while species like caribou are pushed toward extinction is deeply frustrating. Once nature is gone, we don’t get it back.”
Kimberly Shearon, Executive Director, Ecojustice
“By gutting the laws that guarantee fundamental environmental protections, this government will only be fast-tracking preventable — and in some cases irreversible — harms to communities and ecosystems. Ecojustice urges Prime Minister Carney to abandon any legislation that would sacrifice the environment and climate at the altar of political convenience.”
Tim Gray, Executive Director, Environmental Defence Canada
“Canada needs to build — we agree. But this isn’t building. It’s the worst destruction of environmental law in Canadian history, dressed up as progress. This government’s mistakes will ensure Canada is left behind in the energy transition. Canadians will pay the price, and the damages will last for generations”
Daniel Rotman, Executive Director, Équiterre
“Prime Minister Carney seems to be using every excuse under the sun as justification for his attack on the environment. The Prime Minister must stop using the trade war, the U.S. war in Iran or the Alberta separatist movement as excuses to dismantle environmental protections. In Davos, Carney declared that nostalgia is not a strategy. Then why are we missing the boat on the energy transition, rolling back regulation and building a pipeline that won’t be ready until 2036? This is not visionary; it is reactionary.”
Megan Leslie, President & CEO, WWF-Canada
“Wildlife like the southern resident killer whale doesn’t disappear by accident. Extinction is a choice — a choice about what we protect and what we sacrifice. This proposal is not a simple technical adjustment, it’s a decision about what Canada values.”
Key among the threats posed by recent announcements are:
- Proposed Federal Economic Zones where entire regions will be declared areas where federal laws will be suspended are inconsistent with informed planning and decision making.
- Approving big industrial projects before their impacts can be studied assumes, without evidence, that any and all social, economic and environmental impacts will be minor.
- Moving the implementation of impact assessments for nuclear projects from the agency that has been designed to execute them to one that is an advocate for their adoption risks undermining informed decision making concerning project approval for projects with extremely high inherent costs and risks.
- Proposing to allow exemption of federal endangered species law to allow for unacceptable risk to recovery or survival of species at risk is a fundamental departure from commitments made to Canadians and to the world to protect our country’s biodiversity.
- Weakening the federal government’s ability to secure industrial carbon emission reductions by reducing the price and application timeline for price increases. These changes put meeting Canada’s net-zero emissions reduction goals out of reach.
- Weakening the Clean Electricity Regulations will result in more expensive and polluting gas plants being built to supply Canada’s growing electricity needs at the expense of cheaper, cleaner renewable energy and battery systems.
- Weakening the required level of abatement and the timelines for adoption of carbon capture for the oil sands ensures that the emissions produced by any planned expansion of oil production to fill new pipelines will greatly exceed those removed.
- Continued signalling of intent to approve a new oil pipeline to the west coast of B.C. even as any emission reducing provisions of the Alberta-Canada MOU have been severely compromised, and little or no consultation with First Nations has occurred.
-30-
For a full list of media contacts please email: Media@sierraclub.ca
See also: Canadians, including Albertans, wanted a stronger, faster industrial carbon pricing system
“New polling from Abacus Data shows Canadians are more than twice as likely to support increasing Alberta’s industrial carbon price to $130 per tonne by 2030 (47%) than delaying this increase until 2040 (22%). In Alberta, where new rules for carbon pollution are set to take hold under a deal between the federal and provincial governments, more people (43%) supported that 2030 target than a delay to 2040 (33%).
This information comes as the Federal Government failed to negotiate a $130 per tonne by 2030 price and instead gave in to a severely weakened and delayed Industrial Carbon Price – that could “decimate” vital green industries and jobs according to Canada’s Clean50 founder. Canada’s national industrial carbon price was set to rise to $170 per tonne by 2030. Instead, Alberta’s will be delayed to 2040 and the minimum carbon price only reaching $110 as experts from the International Institute on Sustainable Development have confirmed.
The polling also shows that – if a pipeline to the west coast of BC were to go ahead – Canadians say it should be financed privately (39%), with only 28% saying the federal government should finance it. Again, even in Alberta 42% percent say it should be financed privately, while only 34% say it should be financed federally. This also holds true across the political spectrum of voters.
Additionally, the polling indicates in a broader sense strong support for government regulations to limit oil and gas corporations’ greenhouse gas emissions. 7 out of 10 Canadians support such regulations. Alberta also sees a strong majority (62%) in favour of such regulations and only 20% opposed.
