By: John Chilibeck, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
Source: The Daily Gleaner
September 8, 2026
New Brunswick’s biggest First Nation says it wants the provincial government to stop the construction of the proposed 500 MW gas plant on the Chignecto Isthmus, arguing no preparation work should happen until it reaches an accommodation agreement with the builder.
Elsipogtog First Nation posted a statement from the chief and council on its Facebook page last week about the Holt government’s decision to give the Tantramar gas plant conditional approval.
Their statement expresses concern about the plant disturbing critical moose habitat, a migratory corridor for wildlife and a “documented family trapline and camping area.”
But, it appears, the First Nation is unlikely to get its way, judging by the provincial government’s response.
The Mi’kmaq community is about 100 kilometres north of Centre Village, where the American firm PROENERGY plans to build the gas/diesel plant to generate up to 400 MW of electricity for NB Power and an additional 100 MW for Nova Scotia’s Independent Energy System Operator.
The chief and council consider it part of their traditional Indigenous territory, with a legal title claim for more than 20,000 square kilometres of land that’s still pending.
“Elsipogtog is asking the Province to pause further licences, permits and approvals while the Nation, and the Crown and the project proponent complete consultation and reach agreement on reasonable accommodation,” the Facebook post states.
The “Nation” refers to the Indigenous government, while the “Crown” is the provincial and federal governments, which have inherited the role of the British monarchy in treaties signed between the two sides three centuries ago. The “proponent” is PROENERGY.
“Chief and Council remain open to a constructive path forward, including meaningful benefit sharing, decision-making and the exploration of majority Mi’kmaq ownership,” the statement says.
Arren Sock, Elsipogtog’s chief, and the rest of the 13-member council did not reply to messages from Brunswick News seeking further comment.
Provincial response
A spokesman for the provincial government said last week that the environmental impact assessment, or EIA, the department of environment undertook already considered their concerns.
“The Environmental Impact Assessment process provides an opportunity for the public, including First Nations, to provide input and ask questions,” wrote Bruce Macfarlane in an e-mail to Brunswick News.
“In addition, and in parallel, there is a duty to consult obligation, and the required consultation is considered completed,” he added.
On August 28th, Gilles LePage, the province’s environment minister, announced conditional approval for the project, which NB Power says must be up and running by 2028 or the province risks running short of electricity. Without it, executives with the public utility say, New Brunswickers could face brownouts or rolling blackouts.
Opponents, including the 26 groups that have formed the Protect the Chignecto Isthmus Coalition (PCIC) have condemned the plan, arguing a gas plant, backed up by diesel, shouldn’t be used to supplement wind and solar power when the weather isn’t favourable or during winter peaks. They argue that battery energy storage systems (BESS) would be more cost-effective and environmentally sustainable combined with other measures to reduce the demand for electricity.
The PCIC warns that greenhouse gases from the plant would worsen the climate crisis, emit toxic gases and soot that damage human health and threaten wildlife on the ecologically sensitive Chignecto Isthmus.
LePage, however, argued that a technical review committee, with dozens of experts, carefully reviewed the plan and imposed 45 conditions that address all of these concerns. The site was selected partly because it intersects with NB Power’s main transmission line and a natural gas pipeline from the U.S. that would supply fuel to the plant.
Keeping Elsipogtog informed
One of the provincial conditions requires PROENERGY to keep the First Nation informed.
“The proponent must engage in on-going information sharing with Elsipogtog First Nation throughout the project in relation to any impacts on plant or wildlife, including moose, as identified by monitoring programs.”
Reporters asked LePage why other First Nations weren’t mentioned. The project is closer to Fort Folly First Nation, near Dorchester, which is about 22 kilometres from Centre Village as the crow flies.
Besides Elsipogtog and Fort Folly, there are seven other Mi’kmaq communities in eastern New Brunswick, all with territorial claims to the area.
LePage said Elsipogtog was included because it had raised the most concerns.
There are a series of permits and approvals PROENERGY must meet before and after construction starts.
Those outstanding licences and permits are what Elsipogtog wants paused.
The Facebook post argued that LePage gave conditional approval, “even though consultation with Elsipogtog is not complete. Elsipogtog First Nation has not consented to the project.”
The chief and council say a Mi’kmaq knowledge and land use study hasn’t been completed, and “meaningful accommodation for impacts on our rights and interests has not been agreed upon.”
Government spokesman Bruce Macfarlane, however, pushed back against these assertions.
“The Department of Environment and Local Government will continue to work closely with the proponent to ensure the conditions of the EIA determination are followed,” he wrote.
The chief and councillors insist NB Power chose the site without asking Elsipogtog’s opinion.
“Earlier involvement could have allowed alternatives that reduce impacts on medicines, wetlands, wildlife habitat and the exercise of Aboriginal and Treaty Rights,” their release states.
It also says the chief and council are not opposed to reasonable development.
“Elsipogtog remains willing to work toward solutions, but respect for our rights requires more than being informed after decisions have already been made.”
To read the release from the Elsipogtog chief and council, click here.
This story was written, with additional files from Bruce Wark, by John Chilibeck, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter with Brunswick News.

































Commentary: No Madam Mayor, we’re not dead yet
by Logan Atkinson, Seniors for Climate Tantramar
Tantramar Mayor Debbie Wiggins-Colwell wearing her chain of office
Whatever you may think about municipal politics and local politicians, it’s hard to argue that Tantramar’s new mayor and council have been sitting on their hands.
Finally, it seems, we’re working towards a solution to the problems that have plagued Sackville Fire & Rescue. At long last, the province has promised to replace the Peck’s Cove Bridge in Rockport, and it appears as though a citizen’s committee will soon be struck to recommend what to do about the Wheaton Covered Bridge.
And while the premier was invited to visit Tantramar for months and months, it took our new mayor and council to get her here to listen to their, and our, concerns. Great!
But, oh, now this!
Mayor Wiggins-Colwell’s Facebook post just a couple of hours after the province announced its approval of the Centre Village Gas Plant has raised urgent questions about how committed this council is to the well-being of our community.
To say her post was disappointing is a gross understatement.
It was uncaring, dismissive and patronizing, and may finally demonstrate what many of us have believed all along – that our municipal politicians simply do not understand the perils posed by the NB Power/ PROENERGY gas plant.
In a nutshell, Mayor Wiggins-Colwell said that we must now roll over, accept the gas plant, believe blindly that the province had our best interests at heart by approving it with certain conditions and that besides, such matters fall outside the town’s jurisdiction.
So in response, let me say this loud and clear: No, Madam Mayor. We’re not about to roll over and we’re not dead yet. Not even close.
Let’s go through her post point by point.
First: “On behalf of Council…” she begins. What does that mean really? Where does the mayor get the authority to make public pronouncements on behalf of council? Any deliberative body requires a resolution to authorize the senior officer to speak on behalf of it.
So, where is the resolution? And when was the public meeting that passed it?
We’d like to see a poll. How many members of council agree with the mayor’s statement?
Second: the mayor’s statement says: “…we recognize the significant public interest” in the gas plant project.
No kidding.
Of course there is significant public interest in this brainless project. The Centre Village gas plant is the most consequential proposal to come forward to this community in generations. If built, it would change just about everything about life on the Chignecto Isthmus, for many generations and maybe irrevocably, for humans, for plant life, for birds and animals.
Significant public interest?” We’re not talking about a dog park here.
Third: “…our residents hold a range of perspectives on the project.”
Huh?
Why is this relevant? Is this mentioned as justification for not doing anything? Is the mayor saying, “Our residents hold a range of perspectives, so therefore council can’t take a stand?”
But the council has already taken a stand by passing resolutions opposing the gas plant not once, but twice. Residents held a range of perspectives then, just as they do now.
Besides, there’s “a range of perspectives” on every issue that comes before council. A bylaw on open fires? A new dog park? A slaughterhouse in the industrial park? What about changing the Mixed Use Zone to allow seven stories in our downtown? Didn’t take long for that change to get approved, despite a demonstrated “range of perspectives.”
Every issue generates debate.
We elect our mayor and council to consider all viewpoints, determine the best interests of the community, and act accordingly. Their job is to show leadership.
Fourth: “…we must move forward with the expectation that all public concerns are reflected in the conditions” attached to the environmental approval.
Madam Mayor, have you read the conditions? Do you realize that many of them are mere window dressing, requiring PROENERGY to follow the law, for example, when of course, it’s required to follow the law in any case, whether it’s spelled out in a fancy list of conditions or not?
In the last 14 months, the arguments in favour of the gas plant have been thoroughly debunked by those of us resisting it.
We’ve enlisted economics experts, climate change experts, energy experts, ecologists, medical doctors, environmental scientists, lawyers. We’ve submitted bundles of documents to provincial officials refuting the proponents’ arguments, and in virtually every case we have received bland non-responses or none at all. Instead, NB Power, PROENERGY and provincial politicians continue to trot out the same tired arguments, over and over, as if our arguments were never made or held no weight at all.
Have you read the list of conditions Madam Mayor? Have you considered how embarrassingly vague they are? How ambiguous? How jam-packed with the apparently unfettered discretion of bureaucrats in Fredericton who, so far at least, seem impervious to anything like logic, caring, or concern for our shared future?
I ask again: Have you really read them?
Fifth: “As the development moves forward, Council’s role is to consider matters that fall within municipal jurisdiction.”
This sounds so much like former Mayor Black’s position, publicly stated more than once, when he said words like “We have no levers to pull,” or just as limply, “We must stay in our lane.”
“As the development moves forward…?” No Madam Mayor, we’re not dead yet.
Councillor Butcher famously suggested at a council meeting that we can’t tell the province what do do, akin to a child telling a parent what to do or an employee telling the boss how to run the company.
Well, let’s get this on the table in the hope that any uncertainty about this subject can be removed: We know that the town is not in a position to veto the Centre Village gas plant. No one has asked council to do this. No one expects such a miracle.
But what do we expect? What is within council’s jurisdiction?
Section 5 of the Local Governance Act sets out the purposes of the municipality. Pretty basic stuff. The fundamentals. The genesis, really, of everything that’s done at our town hall. What does section 5 say?
It says that one purpose of the municipality is to foster the social and environmental well-being of its community. Notice use of the word “foster.” This is an active verb, it requires action, it suggests that the council must identify what is consistent with social and environmental well-being, and then take steps to achieve it.
This is not about passivity, it’s not about staying silent so as not to offend the boss. It’s about having a vision for the future, about the environmental and social well-being of the community, and then about developing a plan to actively foster that well-being.
But what to do if social and environmental well-being is jeopardized? What if the very purpose of the municipality is threatened by an outside force?
Don’t you fight with everything you have?
Don’t you pound your fist on the table and on the doors to the legislature?
Don’t you find every possible forum to advocate for the well-being of your constituents?
Don’t you demonstrate, over and over and over again, in solidarity with your constituents, that you recognize the threat, that you understand your responsibilities, that you will insist time after time that the well-being of your community must be protected and advanced?
Sixth: In her post, the mayor “…encourages residents to rely on official sources of information for updates regarding the process.” At every meeting of council, and in keeping with the meeting protocols set out in the Meeting Procedures By-Law, we sit on our hands, we leave our signs and banners at home, we keep our mouths shut. We are very patient, respectful of those who appear before council, deferential to the rulings of our municipal leadership.
But relying on official pronouncements for information on this debacle? Really? When all we’ve received so far through official channels is bafflegab, doublespeak and mumbofudge? Non-answers to our questions. Deflection. Disingenuous clap-trap.
Are we being encouraged to abandon the organizations we have consulted and recruited across the country on this crazy project? Many of Canada’s (and the world’s) leading thinkers on environmental health and climate change? Some of the top experts on energy economics? Many physicians and ecologists and environmental scientists? In favour of what? Are we being asked to trust the very authorities whose schemes would destroy the Chignecto Isthmus and the futures of our families along with it?
Did you really think this through Madam Mayor? Do you realize what you’re asking us to do?
No, Madam Mayor, we’re not dead yet.
The very essence of life in Tantramar is at stake here, to say nothing of the wider implications for the environment and climate change. The very essence of our community is in jeopardy.
If you don’t think this is something worth fighting for, something sufficiently important for each and every one of us to continue to raise our voices in opposition together, insistently and continuously, then I’m afraid we’ll understand why our municipal leaders avert their eyes when we meet them on the street.
Logan Atkinson, Seniors for Climate Tantramar scantantramar@gmail.com