[ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
OTTAWA \u2014 A new think-tank report is questioning how the federal and provincial governments\u2019 sprint to build major infrastructure projects might affect Indigenous Peoples\u2019 rights \u2014 and warns that it could end up pitting Indigenous communities against each other.<\/p>\n
The report by the Yellowhead Institute, \u201cBuried Burdens,\u201d takes a look at major projects through a case study of the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission Project and the Ksi Lisims facility in B.C., which are expected to transport millions of tonnes of gas per year.<\/p>\n
Owned in part by the Nisga\u2019a Nation, the project has seen staunch opposition from other First Nations communities that did not approve or consent to it.<\/p>\n
The Yellowhead report, released this week, comes amid a countrywide push to rapidly launch major projects, including pipelines, to shore up the economy against U.S. President Donald Trump\u2019s trade war.<\/p>\n
The recently passed One Canadian Economy Act gives Ottawa the power to fast-track projects it deems to be in the national interest by sidestepping environmental protections and other legislation.<\/p>\n
Governments have been encouraging First Nations leaders to support such projects through loan guarantees and promises of financial incentives. But many First Nations leaders fear their ways of life could be irreparably harmed if governments evade environmental standards.<\/p>\n
\u201cRight now, the narrative is full speed ahead on resource development,\u201d said Hayden King, a member of Beausoliel First Nation who serves as Yellowhead\u2019s executive director.<\/p>\n
\u201cIncreasingly, that includes Indigenous partners, but there\u2019s not a lot of discussion on the dynamics of investing in projects like these, and there\u2019s a risk that has to be considered\u2026<\/p>\n
\u201cFirst Nations are not necessarily the ones merely impacted by these developments, but they\u2019re being encouraged to invest in these projects, to be partners in these projects and grant social licence to enable these projects.\u201d<\/p>\n
Some provinces have enacted laws similar to the One Canadian Economy Act, including Bill 5 in Ontario, now the subject of a court challenge by nine First Nations.<\/p>\n
And in B.C., Premier David Eby\u2019s government passed Bills 14 and 15 \u2014 pieces of legislation meant to ramp up energy and infrastructure development that have come under fire from First Nations.<\/p>\n
Prime Minister Mark Carney has frequently pointed to Indigenous participation in major projects as a means to ensure their success and prevent delays. He has pointed to the $10 billion Indigenous Loan Guarantee Program as proof of Ottawa\u2019s commitment to ensuring Indigenous communities have a meaningful stake.<\/p>\n
The report challenges that argument altogether, calling it an \u201cindustry-driven narrative.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile there are potential benefits from participating in equity ownership when compared to shorter-term impact benefit agreements and service contracts, there are also greater risks,\u201d the report says.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis particular philosophy of \u2018economic reconciliation\u2019 imagines Indigenous communities regaining control of their economies, aiming for self-sufficiency, sustainability, and self-determination. This is an industry-driven narrative that presents resource extraction as the singular pathway to achieve these ends.\u201d<\/p>\n
That narrative, the report says, could also cause rifts between Indigenous communities that support specific projects and those that do not.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile uncomfortable, conflict and disagreement are part of Nation-to-Nation relationships \u2014 and always have been. However, it is equally important to recognize that in true Nation-to-Nation relationships, the self-determining rights of one Nation cannot supersede the inherent rights of another,\u201d the report says.<\/p>\n
King said potential conflicts between pro-development communities and those more hesitant lends itself to conversations about the kinds of development that align with their values.<\/p>\n
But that conversation is also about rights, King said, and how courts will strike a balance among First Nations who don\u2019t see eye-to-eye on project proposals.<\/p>\n
\u201cLet\u2019s not have the courts decide the answers to those questions, but let\u2019s actually work through diplomacy and figure those out on our own terms, using our own Indigenous law,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
King said that discussion should \u201cfeed back into the conversation about what kind of economy\u2026we want,\u201d pointing to the pre-contact economies that once sustained Indigenous Peoples.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe had these economies, and still do to a degree. So what would it look like to reimagine those, and rearticulate them in the face of the narrative that we only have one option, which is resource development?\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u00a92025 The Canadian Press<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n