A/HRC/27/52/Add.2 through their own businesses, joint ventures or benefit-sharing agreements. In particular those First Nations that have clarified their aboriginal rights and title can benefit from these potential economic development initiatives. 71. The Supreme Court of Canada has been clear that the protection of aboriginal rights in the Canadian constitution and the “honour of the Crown” together impose a duty to consult aboriginal peoples when their rights – asserted or recognized – may be affected by government action and, where appropriate, to accommodate those rights.30 The Special Rapporteur repeatedly heard from aboriginal leaders that they were not opposed to development in their lands generally and went to great lengths to participate in such consultation processes as were available, but that those were generally inadequate, not designed to address aboriginal and treaty rights, and usually took place at a stage when project proposals had already been developed. There appears to be a lack of a consistent framework or policy for the implementation of this duty to consult, which is contributing to an atmosphere of contentiousness and mistrust that is conducive neither to beneficial economic development nor social peace. 72. The federal Government informed the Special Rapporteur that the duty to consult and accommodate in connection with resource development projects could be met through existing processes, such as the environmental assessment process. Since the passage of the controversial 2012 Jobs, Growth and Long Term Prosperity omnibus legislation, discussed above, fewer projects require federal environmental assessments. When they do occur, they often require indigenous governance institutions – already overburdened with paperwork – to respond within relatively short time frames to what has been described as a “bombardment” of notices of proposed development; the onus is placed on them to carry out studies and develop evidence identifying and supporting their concerns. Indigenous governments then deliver these concerns to a federally appointed review panel that may have little understanding of aboriginal rights jurisprudence or concepts and that reportedly operates under a very formal, adversarial process with little opportunity for real dialogue. 73. Indigenous representatives made the Special Rapporteur aware of a number of proposed or implemented development projects that they felt posed great risks to their communities and about which they felt their concerns had not been adequately heard, or addressed. They include: • The Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline from Alberta to the British Columbia coast • The Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline twinning project • The New Prosperity open-pit gold and copper mine in unceded Tsilhqot’in traditional territory, which was twice rejected by an environmental assessment panel • The Fortune Minerals open-pit coal mine permit, which issued over 16,000 hectares of unceded traditional territory of the Tahltan Nation in British Columbia • The Liquid Natural Gas pipeline and drill wells in northern British Columbia in Treaty 8 nations’ traditional territory • Site C hydroelectric dam on the Peace River affecting Treaty 8 nations • The Athabascan oil sands project, which is contaminating waters used by the downstream Athabasca First Nation • The Platinex project in Kitchenuhmaykoosib Inninuwug (KI) First Nation traditional territory, in which a lack of prior consultation resulted in bidirectional litigation and 30 18 Haida Nation (see footnote 4 above).