A regulatory chill will blow into town when the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement between B.C. and Alberta comes into force on April 1, critics of the accord warn. They say this bodes ill for the environment.

According to Ottawa lawyer Steven Shrybman, an expert in trade and public-interest issues, TILMA will effectively freeze local and provincial governments from enacting regulations to protect the environment.

Shrybman, a former executive director of Vancouver's West Coast Environmental Law Association, is now a partner in the Sack, Goldblatt and Mitchell law firm. He explained that the agreement not only allows business to take government into arbitration for supposedly trade-restrictive policies but will also render the legislative process hostage to corporate interests.

"It's going to allow virtually any environmental regulation to be challenged," Shrybman told the Georgia Straight. "It's going to be very bad news for environmental policy and law. It will tie the hands of government and make them and require them to be always looking over their shoulder to see whether or not some private investor or company is going to take them to arbitration under the agreement."

His 29-page legal analysis of the deal, commissioned by the Ontario Federation of Labour, notes that the agreement puts the onus on the government to prove that any of its measures, whether for the protection of the environment, consumers, public health, or the safety of workers, will have to meet TILMA's three-fold test. As spelled out in the accord, the government involved must prove that a measure will achieve a "legitimate objective". Second, it should be "not more restrictive to trade, investment or labour mobility than necessary". Third, the measure is "not a disguised restriction" against business.

"It will be far easier to establish that a government measure impaired or restricted investment, trade, or labour mobility than it will to establish that any such measure satisfies the three-pronged test," Shrybman wrote.

In the interview with the Straight, Shrybman said that TILMA is a business-driven agenda constituting an attack on regulation."It's government in the business of putting government out of business," he said.

Gwen Barlee, policy director of the Western Canada Wilderness Committee, noted that TILMA will reduce regulatory standards in the guise of reconciling policies.

"The worry is it [regulation] would go to the lowest common denominator, which would have the effect of lowering our environmental laws," Barlee told the Straight. "We're heading down the ladder. Alberta is light years behind us on that initiative."

Colin Hansen, B.C.'s minister of economic development, declined a request for an interview. Hansen and Guy Boutilier, Alberta minister for international, intergovernmental, and aboriginal relations, have written municipal associations advising that TILMA will apply to local governments in April 2009.

When reached for comment by the Straight, Vancouver Coun. Peter Ladner said: "My concern, as everyone's, is about the potential that it could limit our ability to zone and do other things that we absolutely have to do."

Burnaby city council has passed a resolution noting that Victoria negotiated TILMA "without sufficient consultation" with local governments. On January 31, Rick Earle, the city's finance director, submitted to city council a study that stated that the accord could have "far reaching negative impacts on municipal objectives".

Provincial NDP environment critic Shane Simpson says he doubts whether the B.C. Liberal government can follow through with the climate-change initiatives outlined in the recent throne speech. "TILMA may very well impact on the ability of the province to meet those commitments," he told the Straight.

Simpson also said that under a TILMA regime, the only way B.C. can justify its laws is if the provincial government decides to put up a defence. But even if it does, according to Simpson, there are no assurances that the province will win.