‘Marketing material’ on Sisson mine needs to be scrutinized: critic

Posted on September 15, 2026 by brucewark

Sisson Mine in last year of operation with approximately 145-hectare open pit, 370 metres deep and tailings pond of over 350 million cubic metres. Figures from Conservation Council of New Brunswick. Illustration: Northcliffe Resources Ltd.

by John Chilibeck, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter.
Source: Telegraph-Journal
September 13, 2026

Groups opposed to a big new mine in central New Brunswick are demanding that the provincial government scrutinize the project’s latest plans, including changes to a tailings pond and massive earthen dam that would hold back toxic wastewater.

Northcliff Resources, a firm in Vancouver, recently published a summary of a new feasibility study that showed the $1.5-billion Sisson mine would be a big money maker.

The open-pit mine, which would dig up the critical metals tungsten and molybdenum, is supposed to create 500 jobs during construction and 300 jobs when it’s up and running in 2030.

Over the span of 27 years, the mine about 60 kilometres north of Fredericton, would generate taxes and royalties of just under $14.5 billion, the study suggests. For investors, there’s the lure of payback within less than two years.

“I don’t consider this much more than marketing material,” said Tom Cheney, the executive director of the Atlantic Salmon Federation, in an interview last Friday.

“The government should be asking bigger questions about the trade-off. Even if we do take some of this feasibility study at face value, these claims about jobs and royalties, etc., is this worth it? I mean, it is an insane risk.”

Cheney said it wouldn’t be just a few thousand people in the Nashwaak Valley who would be affected if the tailings pond failed. The Nashwaak River drains into the St. John River, home to the cities of Fredericton and Saint John.

“Do you know how many property values would be damaged? It’s a whole third of the province that lives downstream of this mine,” Cheney said.

Advantages of location

Northcliff’s CEO Andrew Ing has promoted the project for a similar reason – proximity. With Fredericton and other nearby communities, such as Juniper, Napadogan and Stanley, within easy driving distance, there would be no need to build a work camp, and it would be easier to lure workers and executives to the area.

The updated feasibility study, which will be released in full on October 15th, also states that a special fund would be created – a bond – that would be worth $210 million by the time the mine closes in 2057 that would pay for ongoing water treatment and other reclamation in perpetuity.

“With the positive results released, I think that de-risks this project even more, which should increase the appetite for investors to participate in the building of this mine,” Ing told Brunswick News last week.

An opponent had a more skeptical view.

“Essentially, the document that Northcliff Resources released is a tool for the company to get it what it desperately needs – investors,” said Allyson Huestis, the executive director of the Nashwaak Watershed Association, in an interview on Thursday. “It highlights the positive aspects to drum up investment for them.”

Lawn sign distributed by the Coalition to Stop Sisson Mine

Huestis and Cheney are part of the Coalition Against the Sisson Mine, which includes several organizations and individuals.

They have an uphill battle: both Prime Minister Carney and Premier Holt have thrown their support behind the project. The premier plans on pushing Sisson to private investors at a Toronto summit this week as one of eight major New Brunswick projects they should back.

Still, the mine’s opponents say the provincial government has a responsibility to scrutinize Sisson. They want it to conduct an independent, third-party study of the updated feasibility study, the same way it examined Northcliff’s first feasibility study in 2013.

That culminated in a report in April 2015 by the consulting firm Amec Foster Wheeler, which concluded that Northcliff had badly underestimated the cost of building a wastewater treatment plant – by 50 per cent.

The old report also said the firm had low-balled the cost of maintaining the site once the mine closed, when the open pit is supposed to slowly fill with water.

An updated review, Huestis said, would likely cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, money a nonprofit like hers just doesn’t have.

“We need the province to hire independent experts who can really look at it in depth,” she said.

Provincial response

Brunswick News asked the provincial government whether it would conduct such a study. A spokesperson for the Department of Natural Resources wrote in an e-mail on Monday that a review would be undertaken, without saying if it would be done by civil servants or outside experts.

“The feasibility study is a business document prepared by the company for its shareholders and potential investors,” Nick Brown said. “As part of the mining lease application process, departmental staff will conduct a thorough review of the study to assess it against the requirements set out in the Mining Act and its general regulation.”

Mayor David Sweeney. Photo: Nashwaak Rural Community

David Sweeney, the mayor of Nashwaak Rural Community, said his council would reserve comment until the full report is released. However, he told Brunswick News they still expected Northcliff and the provincial government to prove the mine wouldn’t pollute the Nashwaak and Tay rivers.

“We welcome jobs but not at any cost,” he said.

The Atlantic Salmon Federation, meanwhile, has embarked on a study of its own, an economic one for the Nashwaak Valley. The organization is paying $20,000 to the Pond-Deshpande Institute at the University of New Brunswick, which should deliver the research by late fall or early winter.

It will examine some of the economic consequences of the mine, including “local people whose businesses could be ruined if there’s a catastrophic breach, such as people working in the outdoors industry,” Cheney said.

The study will also include an inventory of economic assets in the region and the drivers of prosperity.

“And then finally, the study will chart a path for alternatives that work with the ecology rather than against it.”

Cheney doubted Sisson would create anywhere near 300 jobs.

The first version of the feasibility study from 13 years ago also said the mine would need 300 employees, a figure that hasn’t changed.

The updated version mentions the company would optimize operations by using autonomous haul trucks and electric shovels in the open pit.

“We have to keep in mind that these are highly mechanized, highly automated processes,” Cheney said. “It just doesn’t require that much human labour.”

This story from Brunswick News was written by Local Journalism Initiative Reporter John Chilibeck.

Posted in economic development, Environment, LJI stories, New Brunswick government | Tagged , | 1 Comment

First Nation demands stop to construction of Tantramar gas plant

Posted on September 11, 2026 by brucewark

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 on September 2nd 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

Environment Minister Gilles LePage. Photo: Government of New Brunswick

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

Sign posted on Rte. 940 across from the entrance to the proposed gas plant site

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.

Posted in climate change, Environment, Indigenous affairs, LJI stories, NB Power | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Tantramar MLA Megan Mitton running for NB Green Party leadership

Posted on September 10, 2026 by brucewark

Mitton delivers her victory speech on Sept. 24, 2018

Megan Mitton’s announcement this week that she is running for the leadership of New Brunswick’s Green Party rekindled memories of that suspense-filled night on September 24th, 2018, when her provincial political career officially began with a razor-thin, 11-vote victory over her Liberal opponent in her second try at winning a seat in the legislature.

“My Dad’s not here, but he inspired me to do this,” she told a roomful of supporters at her Sackville victory party that night as she wiped away a few tears.

“I grew up in a Liberal household,” she said, adding that her father once ran for the provincial Liberals.

“And I remember when I first told him I was running in 2014, and he said, ‘Well, which party?’ And I said, ‘The Greens.’ And he went, ‘Oh, really? But don’t you want to win?'” Mitton said as the room erupted in laughter and then loud cheers.

Reminded of that moment and her late father’s comments Wednesday during an interview with Warktimes, Mitton wiped away tears again before she said: “You know, my values are clear and consistent, and I don’t align with how the Liberals run their party.”

“Why not?” I asked.

“Well, what do the Liberals even stand for?” she answered.

“Their values are basically non-existent except wanting power and paying attention to what the polling is saying. Whereas as Greens, we do have consistent values of wanting fairness in our economy, for example, we listen to people, we bring their voices to the legislature rather than just relying on polling data and focussing on that,” she said.

Building the party

Megan Mitton holds a victory bouquet presented to her by her then eight-year-old daughter Quinn after her third election victory in Tantramar in 2024

Mitton says her main task if she wins the leadership, will be to build more support for the party so that Greens win more seats than the two they hold now.

“So, part of the plan in concrete terms is to get out across the province, talk to people and even more importantly, listen to people,” she says.

“Obviously, recruit excellent candidates. And so these are some of the things that if I’m chosen to be leader of the party, that I’ll be getting to work on,” she adds.

Mitton is married, the mother of two children, one, five the other almost 10, but says she’s used to balancing family life with the demands of politics.

“A lot of people who work have different types of challenges,” she says. “So, we’re going to figure it out like we have for the last 10 years.”

In fact, before she gave birth to her second child in 2021, Mitton pushed for changes at the legislature to make it more accommodating for MLAs who have babies including installing changing tables in the building’s bathrooms and altering the rules for parental leave.

“One of the reasons I’m running for the leadership is really because of my kids,” she says.

“What kind of province and what kind of world are we leaving them to grow up in and to live in right now?” she asks.

“The path we’re on is really dangerous and we need leaders who are going to prioritize the health and safety of New Brunswickers.

“And that means taking the climate crisis seriously. And that means not fracking and not building gas and diesel plants and not building hyperscale data centres, but rather investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency and local food and education and health care and things that are really going to ensure the well-being of New Brunswickers,” she says.

Learning from local issues

Megan Mitton at the entrance to Sackville’s Waterfowl Park on Wednesday

Mitton acknowledges that some voters still see the Green Party as one focussed exclusively on climate change and environmental concerns, but argues those issues tie in directly with other main ones.

“It’s true that the climate crisis is a priority for us,” she says, adding that climate change also affects people’s health, food production and the economy.

“When we look at the economy, there are supply chains and agriculture and all kinds of things that get disrupted by wildfires and floods and droughts and heat waves — all of these extreme weather patterns that are being caused by climate change, so we can’t really separate these things out.

“One of the key reasons that I did get into politics and run in 2018 was health care. And that remains a top priority for me,” she says, adding that as the MLA for Tantramar she’s been campaigning for the restoration of 24-hour emergency room services as well as basic improvements to the area’s deteriorating roads.

“It’s kind of an endless battle,” she says.

So far, Mitton is the only declared candidate for the Green Party leadership. The deadline for other candidates to file their papers is noon on Saturday.

If there is more than one candidate, Green Party members will vote for their new leader on December 5th.

To read more about Megan Mitton’s background, click here.

Posted in climate change, Health care, New Brunswick Election 2018, New Brunswick election 2024, New Brunswick politics | Tagged | 8 Comments

Tantramar council dismisses Code of Conduct complaint against Mayor Wiggins-Colwell with little discussion and no debate

Posted on September 9, 2026 by brucewark

Bill Steele outside his Dorchester jail bed & breakfast in 2023

In a 6-2 vote Tuesday, Tantramar council summarily dismissed a code of conduct complaint against Mayor Wiggins-Colwell for the statement she posted on the town’s Facebook page a few hours after the province announced its approval of the proposed 500 MW gas/diesel plant near Centre Village.

Among other things, the complaint, filed by Dorchester resident Bill Steele, accused the mayor of issuing the statement on behalf of the whole council without consulting its members.

“This was not merely a personal comment by the mayor,” the complaint said.

“It was published as an official municipal communication through an official Tantramar account and represented to residents and the media that Council had collectively accepted the provincial decision and agreed that the municipality ‘must move forward.'”

Steele cited sections of the code that prohibit “false or misleading public statements” and that call for members of council to “foster respect for the democratic decision-making process and work toward the implementation of positions or decisions made by Council.”

“Presenting a position as Council’s decision before Council had an opportunity to discuss or decide the matter bypassed the democratic decision-making process and denied individual councillors the opportunity to state their positions,” his complaint states.

“The timing and subject matter make this conduct particularly serious,” it adds. “The statement was issued almost immediately following a major provincial decision involving substantial pubic concern.”

Council discussion

Deputy Mayor Josh Goguen

After Mayor Wiggins-Colwell had left the council chamber, Deputy Mayor Josh Goguen indicated that according to the code of conduct bylaw, council had to determine whether the complaint was frivolous, vexatious, made with an improper purpose or filed within the required three-month time period and whether it fell within the scope of the code of conduct.

“We already know that it was filed within the proper time,” Goguen said.

“So we just have to determine if we want to proceed with the complaint or if we want to dismiss the complaint. We’re not talking about merit or anything like that.”

“Do we talk about this or are we supposed to just come up with our answer and that’s that, or do we discuss what we think?” asked Councillor Tori Weldon.

Goguen said he would defer that question to the assistant clerk, but then said: “It says council should not assess the substantive merits of the complaint at the screening stage.”

“I’d just like to say, ‘I dismiss it.’ I vote to dismiss it as frivolous,”  said Councillor Barry Hicks who was attending the meeting online.

Goguen then canvassed the councillors around the table before holding a formal, recorded vote:

Councillor Haidee Robertson: “Dismiss.” Councillor Weldon: “Dismiss.” Councillor Wayne Wells: “Dismiss.” Councillor Alyssa Greene: “Dismiss.”

Councillor Allison Butcher: “Proceed.” Councillor Kristen LeBlanc: “Proceed based on each one of the sections that are laid out.”

“And I would vote to proceed,” Goguen said.

Council then held a formal vote on a motion to dismiss Steele’s complaint with no further discussion. Councillors Butcher and LeBlanc were the two who voted against the motion to dismiss the complaint.

Old bylaw vs. new bylaw

Centre Villlage resident Terry Jones has filed a similar complaint against the mayor that will be discussed later this fall

The discussion of Steele’s complaint took only nine minutes and was held under rules set out in an amended Code of Conduct bylaw that was passed on March 10, 2026. Amendments were needed because the old bylaw had required council discussions to be held behind closed doors.

The newly established Local Governance Commission had ruled that since members of council are not town employees, complaints against them cannot be considered personnel matters and therefore, must be discussed publicly.

Although the amended Tantramar bylaw now requires code of conduct discussions to be held in public, it also substantially weakened the original one passed a year earlier on May 13, 2025.

The original version, which is still posted on the town’s website, required council “to determine if the complaint does or does not have merit,” while the new version prohibits council from considering merit at all when it first reviews the complaint.

“Council shall not assess the substantive merits of the complaint at the screening stage,” it says.

That means that councillors who believe a complaint has merit are prohibited by law from saying why they believe it has merit, but can only vote to consider it further preventing  the kinds of discussions that used to be held behind closed doors from being conducted in public.

Later this fall, council will be required to go through this procedure again when it considers a similar code of conduct complaint filed by Centre Village resident Terry Jones against the mayor for the controversial statement she posted on Facebook after the province approved the proposed gas plant.

To read Bill Steele’s code of conduct complaint, click here.

Posted in Town of Tantramar | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Tantramar outlines requirements for $50,000 review of its fire services

Posted on September 6, 2026 by brucewark

New $5.6 million Dorchester fire hall nearing completion

The Town of Tantramar is seeking proposals from outside consultants for a comprehensive review of its fire service, which operates three fire halls in Dorchester, Sackville and Pointe de Bute.

The review will include the development of a 10-year plan identifying the level of fire service residents can expect, with recommendations based on community risks and National Fire Protection Association standards.

“Tantramar’s project budget for the entire project is $50,000 + H.S.T.,” says the municipality’s 21-page Request for Proposals (RFP), issued last Wednesday.

The RFP says the three fire stations have a current roster of 54 volunteer firefighters, compared with a potential complement of up to 80. It requires consultants to evaluate options for composite staffing—a combination of full-time career firefighters and volunteers.

As Warktimes reported in August, several other New Brunswick municipalities, including St. Stephen, Woodstock and Oromocto, have already adopted composite staffing, with varying ratios of career firefighters to volunteers.

Role of full-time fire chief

Tantramar is currently hiring a full-time chief for Sackville Fire and Rescue, with an annual salary ranging from $73,860 to $98,480. The job posting closed on August 28.

The RFP asks consultants to recommend an organizational structure for Tantramar Fire Service, including the place of the full-time chief within it, and the number of firefighters needed to provide safe and sustainable service.

The review will also examine whether Tantramar has the right fire stations, vehicles and equipment in the right places; the costs of individual services; mutual aid arrangements with neighbouring departments; and the department’s role in providing medical first response services.

It will include a one-year plan for beginning to implement the recommendations.

Consultants are also being asked to examine firefighter training, workload and morale, as well as recruitment, retention and the risk of burnout.

The RFP says the successful consultant should, ideally, interview the fire service’s members and officers.

The RFP closes on September 28th.

For earlier coverage, click here.

Posted in Sackville Fire & Rescue, Town of Tantramar | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Mayor’s controversial gas-plant statement survives tied Tantramar council vote

Posted on September 4, 2026 by brucewark

Tantramar Mayor Debbie Wiggins-Colwell

In a tied, 4-4 vote, the motion to rescind Mayor Wiggins-Colwell’s controversial statement about the proposed Tantramar gas plant was defeated Thursday after a 35 minute council debate that revealed sharp divisions of opinion.

Councillors Alyssa Greene, Wayne Wells and Haidee Robertson joined by the mayor herself voted to uphold her statement issued on behalf of council last week shortly after Environment Minister Gilles LePage announced the province had given the gas plant its conditional approval.

Mayor Wiggins-Colwell’s statement called on the town to move forward in the expectation that the 45 conditions the province imposed would address all public concerns about its potential health, safety and environmental effects.

It also suggested council should stick to matters within municipal jurisdiction and let federal and provincial regulators take responsibility for the gas plant.

Councillors Allison Butcher, Kristen LeBlanc, Tori Weldon and Deputy Mayor Josh Goguen voted in favour of revoking the mayor’s statement mainly on the grounds that it did not reflect council’s official opposition to the 500 MW plant on the ecologically sensitive Chignecto Isthmus.

Councillor Barry Hicks was absent.

During the debate, the mayor said she issued her statement after she and Tantramar CAO Jennifer Borne attended an online meeting the day before with Minister LePage and his officials.

She also promised that NB Power Vice President Brad Coady and PROENERGY Canada President John MacIsaac would soon appear before council to bring everyone up to date on the gas plant project.

‘Angry comments’

Deputy Mayor Josh Goguen

Deputy Mayor Josh Goguen said he asked for the meeting so council could discuss where to go from here.

“We need to be able to advocate for our municipality,” he said, adding the mayor could have waited a few days to consult council before issuing her statement.

“We could have probably saved a lot of angry comments and vocal people being really, frankly, pissed off, online,” he said.

“So yes, maybe you’re right there, Deputy Mayor Goguen, that maybe I should have went back and maybe let the council know,” Wiggins-Colwell replied, but then defended her statement.

“That’s not unusual for a mayor to sign these statements and put them forward to the public, because that’s our first interest is our public, how they perceive things, and I thought this may help them with understanding how this was going to be, and (how) this is going to be followed all the way through the project,” she said.

Council not consulted

Councillor Kristen LeBlanc

Councillor Kristen LeBlanc pointed out that this council and the last one had voted twice to oppose the gas plant and the mayor’s statement did not reflect council’s position even though she said she was speaking on behalf of council.

LeBlanc also expressed concern that council was not consulted.

“I do have an issue when I’m not provided the opportunity to participate in a democratic process that I’ve signed up for and I feel that was taken away from most of the councillors up here that may have a different opinion,” she said.

LeBlanc added that the mayor’s statement should be removed from the town’s Facebook page.

‘This is not a war’

Councillor Alyssa Greene said she agreed with the mayor that the municipality does not have jurisdiction over regulating the plant.

“This is not a war. We have to ensure as a council that what happens for the community is what’s best for the community,” she added.

Councillor Alyssa Greene

Greene suggested the town would benefit financially from the project and that fighting the province on it could have negative ramifications. Better, she said, to ensure that the company building and operating the plant was following the conditions the province imposed.

“I understand that you feel badly about it,” she said addressing people in the audience who were muttering in disagreement.

“We’ve had people coming in here using the word ‘bomb’ repeatedly during their presentations,” Greene said.

“That’s unsettling as a council member that there are members of the community talking about that, speaking that this is the next Oka going to happen here,” she added referring to the 78 day standoff in 1990 between First Nations, police, the Canadian army and government authorities that resulted in two deaths.

“I don’t want that kind of action in our community. I want to make sure that things work out well and that we have a peaceful movement through this, because that really is the best option for our community,” Greene said.

Peaceful protests

“I just want to put a little statement out there that Councillor Greene did say that people are referring to bombs and things like that,” said Deputy Mayor Goguen.

“I just want to say that everything that I’ve seen as protests have all been peaceful,” he added.

“I know you have the assumptions that it might get ugly, but I have to applaud. People have been very peaceful and have been very respectful, especially in the council chambers,” Goguen said.

“So, I don’t think you can paint the whole group as that. And to me, that comment doesn’t sit well with the municipality or myself and is not a representation of the citizens in this municipality.”

Councillor Greene responded that the assistant clerk had also heard the word ‘bomb’.

“And the threats, which I would define them as that, that this will be the next Oka, I did report those concerns to the RCMP as well,” she said.

“Because yes, they have had peaceful protests. They can change quickly and we need to ensure that that does not happen,” she added.

“If people get very upset about a concern or an issue in our community, people can be incited by even a single invidual to behave in an inappropriate fashion and we want to ensure that we have good, clear headings moving forward on this and any other issue,” Greene concluded.

‘Official sources’

Councillor LeBlanc also took issue with the mayor’s statement last Friday encouraging Tantramar residents “to rely on official sources of information for updates” on the gas plant.

“A lot of information, unfortunately, that was provided way back at the beginning of announcement of this project, specifically from the proponent, was questionable,” LeBlanc said.

“So I’m not sure how we can ask the public to continue to rely on that information when it’s always been challenged,” she added.

“I know there’s a lot of groups that have done their research,” she said, referring to residents’ meetings with Premier Holt, Minister LePage and their presentations at Energy & Utilities Board hearings.

“They’ve just been there to present factual information and always have been there to challenge and present it to council to make sure that we have it.”

Baffled & disappointed

Pam Novak of AWI and PCIC

After council adjourned, members of the audience opposed to the gas plant expressed their concerns over how things had gone, including the tied vote against rescinding the mayor’s original statement.

“I’m baffled,” said Pam Novak of the Atlantic Wildlife Institute who also speaks for the Protect the Chignecto Isthmus Coalition.

“I think there should have been a clearer goal of what this meeting was supposed to be about,” she added.

Novak said the mayor’s statement last Friday was premature and its wording insulting to those who had pushed for the town to oppose the gas plant, especially since she issued it without the backing of town council.

She said she was shocked by Councillor Greene’s assertion that opponents were threatening violence over the project.

“I’m very taken back by who is it that she’s referring to, and why was it brought up in such a meeting that it seemed to be like a blanket type of statement meant to [include] everybody who apparently has been vocal about opposing this project from the beginning.”

“I’m disappointed that there wasn’t more resolve around the council table about how inappropriate the mayor’s statement was that she posted on Facebook,” said Logan Atkinson of Seniors for Climate Tantramar.

He added that the Local Governance Act gives the mayor the authority to speak on behalf of council.

“That means she can speak to the world about council’s position,” Atkinson said. “But there has to be a position and she misrepresented it.”

Peter Higham, also of Seniors for Climate Tantramar, said the council vote essentially meant nothing.

“Except that, well, I think the mayor understands now that she cannot do that again. She cannot issue a statement that is purportedly on behalf of council, when it clearly was not,” he added.

Centre Village resident Terry Jones

Centre Village resident Terry Jones,  who lives next to the gas plant property, was ruled out of order when she stood up during the council meeting to ask why Councillor Greene was using the word “bomb” in referring to opponents of the gas plant.

“It was very insulting and very degrading to our plan,” Jones said.

“Our plan is peaceful resistance, not bombs and dangerous situations in people’s lives and the reference to Oka made no sense,” she added.

“After the meeting, I spoke to the clerk and he denies he heard the word bomb,” she said.

“I’m not sure where she came up with that.”

Jones said Greene mentioned things that had nothing to do with the mayor’s controversial statement.

“And then she threw the bomb thing out, and I think that’s now on the public record, and that is inappropriate. I think she needs to send a retraction.”

To read the mayor’s original statement, click here.

CORRECTION: The Town of Tantramar has asked for the following statement to be added as a correction to this story: “Following the special council meeting, Tantramar’s Assistant Clerk Chris Hill did confirm to Terry Jones the word “bomb” had been used in a presentation from community to Council.”

The Town’s statement adds: “We can confirm as well that, as you have noted in your story’s comments section, this usage of “bomb” occurred in a presentation to council on July 14, where the word was used as an analogy.”

My comment in the comments section that I added on September 5th reads as follows:

OK, so I went back and did find the use of the word “bomb” during a presentation to council on July 14, one year to the day after NB Power announced its plan for a 500 MW gas/diesel plant near Centre Village. The presentation was by Meredith Fisher of Seniors for Climate Tantramar and here’s what she said:

“Exactly one year ago today, a virtual bomb was dropped on Tantramar. Most of us remember the shock and disbelief of the announcement of the RIGS project contracting an American company to build and operate for 25 years of fossil fuel burning with shale gas, also from the U.S. out here.

“To many of us in New Brunswick right now, it seems like there are other of these bombs being dropped on our environment and on our lives in our dear province. The worst part of it is that the bombers are employed by us as leaders to make sound decisions…Our trust in NB Power, our Crown Corporation, is badly eroded. In a few years, the bombers will no longer be responsible for the flawed process they created. They will be gone. Potentially, we will be here in Tantramar. We will be left holding the proverbial bag of an environment that has been irreversibly damaged forever.”

Fisher went on to say: “We can come up with a reasonable option to the RIGS Centre Village project. We do not really wish to take legal action…let’s be partners in decisions about our environment and our energy needs. Let’s do our best as a province to reduce the burning of fossil fuels.”

Posted in NB Power, Town of Tantramar | Tagged , , , | 11 Comments

Coalition vows to fight on despite provincial approval of big, Isthmus gas plant

Posted on September 2, 2026 by brucewark

Pam Novak & Barry Rothfuss speak for the PCIC

The Protect the Chignecto Isthmus Coalition (PCIC) is calling on Tantramar Town Council to pass a resolution calling on the federal minister of the environment to review the environmental, health and social effects of the proposed 500 MW gas/diesel plant near Centre Village.

“That would be my only request to Tantramar Council to help us take the message to the federal government to ask the question, why isn’t this project being reviewed on the federal level?” says Barry Rothfuss, executive director of the Atlantic Wildlife Institute and spokesman for the PCIC.

He adds the project review should not be left to what he calls “an antiquated” provincial environmental impact assessment with much weaker standards than either the federal ones or standards set by the World Health Organization.

“Tantramar council is a public body and the federal minister can’t ignore them, but she can ignore private organizations like ours,” Rothfuss adds.

The 26 organizations that are members of the PCIC

Rothfuss and his partner Pam Novak say they’re also hoping to persuade Amherst Town Council and the Cumberland Regional Municipality to ask for a federal review because northern Nova Scotia would be directly affected if the gas plant gets built.

Rothfuss says research by Stantec, the consulting firm hired by the American company PROENERGY to conduct air quality assessments, shows that Amherst and a large area around it would be directly affected by emissions from the gas plant

He points to a Stantec table showing levels of nitrogen dioxide that are nearly three times higher than federal air quality standards and levels of fine particulate matter or microscopic soot particles that also exceed federal standards.

Gas plant emissions would also exceed Nova Scotia air quality standards, he says.

PCIC graphic showing prevailing winter winds that blow over the provincial border and the areas in both provinces most directly affected by gas plant emissions

Rothfuss and Novak say the 45 conditions New Brunswick imposed when it approved the gas/diesel plant last week are completely ineffective because most defer compliance until after the plant is actually built.

They point out, for example, that condition #37 authorizes the project to proceed without a liquid waste disposal plan deferring the requirement to secure a signed contract from a receiving treatment facility until an unspecified date “prior to the operational phase of the project.”

NB Power Vice President Brad Coady told Tantramar council in July that plans call for the wastewater to be trucked across the border into Nova Scotia for possible disposal in the Halifax area raising an additional transboundary environmental issue that Rothfuss says calls for federal review.

‘Disappointed, frustrated & angry’

“I am completely disappointed, frustrated and actually angry that they’re labelling this as an approval of the project when so many of the conditions don’t have to be met beforehand,” Novak says.

“Whether it’s the environmental management plan which includes the fire safety plan, the air quality monitoring plan, all of these are significant to how this facility would be operating and the province is giving a basic approval without having those plans in place,” she adds.

Novak and Rothfuss say they’re especially concerned that final approvals will be left to the director of the EIA branch of the department of environment and local government without any public scrutiny.

They note that in its latest newsletter, PROENERGY is promising to establish a six-to-eight member community liaison committee (CLC) to provide a forum for discussion, but predict its members will be handpicked by the company.

“The only information the members will be getting is what PROENERGY is going to feed them,” Novak says. “So now, we’re at the point where the box has been closed for any public input, and any information going forward is only going to come from the company.”

More hours of operation

Rothfuss and Novak also note that PROENERGY and NB Power have said repeatedly that the gas plant would burn fuel only about 6 to 7% of the time because it would be operating 93% of the time in synchronous condensing mode which does not need fuel.

The province, however, in condition #11 permits the gas plant to burn fuel up to “17% of total operating hours calculated on a rolling 12-month basis.”

Rothfuss points out that amounts to 1,489 hours per year for this plant, while NB Power has said it has plans to build a second plant in the Scoudouc industrial park if it is needed.

“So, how can they say they’re committed to more renewable generation when the numbers of hours for this facility keep increasing?” Novak asks.

“This battle is far from over,” Rothfuss says, referring to the PCIC’s court case challenging the fairness of the Energy & Utility Board hearings that will be heard in November.

(The EUB approved the project in May.)

The federal Competition Bureau is also reviewing PCIC complaints alleging, among other things, that NB Power and PROENERGY used deceptive marketing in claiming an Indigenous financial or equity partnership in the project that did not exist.

“We have a lot of both public and legal avenues to pursue,” Rothfuss says, “and I think we’re on the right side of this issue.”

Posted in NB Power, Town of Tantramar | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Commentary: No Madam Mayor, we’re not dead yet

Posted on August 31, 2026 by brucewark

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

Posted in Commentary, Environment, NB Power, New Brunswick politics, Town of Tantramar | Tagged , | 7 Comments

New banners, new book as Tantramar honours its military veterans

Posted on August 30, 2026 by brucewark

Master of ceremonies Garth Zwicker handed out two delectable prizes at this year’s veterans banner unveiling

“I thought I’d start off with a couple of door prizes,” Garth Zwicker said as he kicked off this year’s ceremony for the unveiling of 10 more military veterans’ street banners.

“You’ve got to be quick and you’ve got to know your stuff,” he warned the 65 people in attendance, adding that hundreds of pounds of a certain product were supplied to troops during World War II.

“Lobster?” someone called out. “Sugar?” “Rum?”

“OK, I’ll give you a hint. It’s not an unwanted message on your computer,” Zwicker said.

“Spam,” called out Logan Atkinson, past president of Tantramar Heritage Trust who won himself a shiny can of the luncheon meat and then a couple of minutes later, a box of Kraft Dinner, apparently another staple of military rations “but not necessarily in the same format,” Zwicker explained.

“So, we all know what Logan Atkinson is having for supper,” he said before thanking Graham Mesheau for designing the banners and the town for putting them up on street poles in Sackville and Dorchester every year.

Book of banners

Zwicker announced that, aside from unveiling the street banners this year, he was inviting people to pre-order a book he had compiled containing about 250 banners along with the family stories that go with them.

The book will be available later this fall. To pre-order it, click here.

The $35 book, published by Tantramar Heritage Trust, is expected to be launched in November.

One of the stories in the book is about the late Harold Johnson who served in the Royal Canadian Navy for 11 years and for three in the Royal Canadian Engineers.

“He joined in 1957,” said his wife Eleanor who attended this year’s banner ceremony with her nephew Lee from Alberta.

“Harold served on both coasts, BC and Halifax,” she said, adding that serving in the navy gave him the chance to see the world.

“He was to Australia and Fiji and New Zealand, Hawaii, Great Britain, all over the world,” she said.

“Then he became a truck driver after that.”

“I joined him in 1995 when I got my trucker’s license. We drove in all 10 Canadian provinces and in 46 of the 48 continental United States,” she added.

They were living in Sackville where she grew up when Harold Johnson died of cancer on June 3rd, 2025.

“It was just five days shy of our 41st wedding anniversary,” Eleanor said sadly.

Eleanor Johnson attended the unveiling of her husband’s veterans memorial banner with her nephew Lee Johnson

Trained boxer

The Belliveau brothers, Rod and twins Mark and Marcel attended the ceremony to witness the unveiling of their uncle Raymond Martin’s banner.

“He served in the 3rd Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment,” Rod said.

“He was the son of my grandmother and grandfather, Henry and Lil Martin of Mount Whatley and Aulac,” he added.

“He served mainly throughout the Cold War and did tours in Cyprus and Germany.”

Belliveau said his uncle was underage, actually only about 16 when he enlisted and that the military stretched things to let him in because they needed a trained boxer for regiment competitions.

“In fact, Bob Edgett trained him,” he said, adding his uncle won championships competing against the British army.

“He’s named after our great uncle, Raymond Ashe, who is from Springhill,” said Mark Belliveau.

“Raymond Ashe died in the Allied invasion of Sicily in the Second World War and there’s a plaque honouring him at Monte Cassino Cemetery in Italy.”

He added that his uncle Raymond Martin was working for a manufacturing company in London, Ontario when he died in an industrial accident in 1992.

“I was actually serving overseas, in Africa in the Congo at the time, or Zaire when I got the notice that he was killed,” Mark said.

Rod said he and his brothers served in C Squadron of the 8th Canadian Hussars (Princess Louise’s) based for many years in Sackville.

“Our cousin Greg Martin, was a sergeant major who was part of town council some years ago, and was one of the people that swore my twin brothers into the squadron, into the regiment,” he said.

The Belliveau brothers witnessed the unveiling of their uncle Raymond’s banner. L-R: Mark, Rod and Marcel Belliveau

Banner history

Garth Zwicker says he began thinking about installing street banners back in 2015 and the first ones went up the next year.

“The project has gone from 16 banners in the first year and then we went to 38 and we thought we were done,” he says.

“Then we went to 75 and 100 and 125 and 150,” he adds.

“Nobody ever expected it to hit that number.”

“There are almost 250 banners now,” Zwicker says.

“Each banner tells a story and represents sacrifice, courage and dedication,” Tantramar Mayor Debbie Wiggins-Colwell told the families attending the unveiling ceremony.

“It’s more than a display of banners. It’s a lasting commitment to remembering the men and women who served our country.”

Delicious door prize dinner

Tantramar Heritage Trust Past President Logan Atkinson displays the delicious ingredients he won for Saturday night’s supper. Sadly, Warktimes was not invited to partake in that feast

Posted in Heritage, Town of Tantramar | Tagged | Leave a comment

Province approves 500 MW gas/diesel plant in Tantramar with 45 conditions

Posted on August 28, 2026 by brucewark

Topaz Generating Station near Houston, Texas is similar to the one that PROENERGY wants to build near Centre Village. Photo: PROENERGY

The New Brunswick government has approved construction of a 500 MW gas/diesel plant near Centre Village subject to 45 conditions that require the U.S. company PROENERGY to monitor air and water quality and submit a net zero greenhouse gas emissions plan after one full year of operation.

Other conditions require the company to:

  • engage in on-going information sharing with the Elsipogtog First Nation throughout the project in relation to any impacts on plants or wildlife, including moose.
  • work with the Tantramar Fire Department in the preparation of an Emergency Management Plan and Fire Safety plan that specifically addresses the provision of a water supply for firefighting purposes for potential fires at the facility. Those plans must be submitted to the government before construction begins.
  • investigate any complaints from local residents about negative effects on the quality and quantity of the water in their private wells. If it’s determined that PROENERGY is responsible for any negative effects, the company would be required to provide a temporary water supply for short-term impacts or to repair, remediate, or replace any permanently affected wells which might include deepening a well or drilling a new one.

PROENERGY would also be required to operate the generating plant using natural gas as the primary fuel and notify the government when it is using diesel and for how long.

Although the conditions state that PROENERGY must operate the plant primarily in synchronous condensing mode that does not require burning fuel, it will be allowed to burn fuel to generate electricity up to 17% of the time calculated on a yearly basis.

Human health

Environment Minister Gilles LePage. Photo: Government of New Brunswick

During a 30-minute news conference, Environment Minister Gilles LePage said he is satisfied with the 45 conditions.

“Some of the concerns addressed in the conditions included potential risk to human health,” LePage said in his opening statement.

“A human health risk assessment concluded that risks are negligible to minimal. Air quality monitoring will be conducted to maintain compliance with regulatory standards during operations,” he added.

“I’m very confident that this project will minimize the impact on human health.”

When asked about local opposition to the project, LePage said he would reassure residents in Tantramar that the 45 conditions will address all of their concerns.

He also pointed out that one condition requires PROENERGY to inform the public regularly about construction activities and the project’s progress.

Indigenous support

When asked how the government could continue to support the project if there is no Indigenous investment in it or approval for it, LePage pointed to the requirement to share information with the Elsipogtog First Nation.

“So, it is not a condition or essential to the project that there be Indigenous investment or buy-in or approval?” a reporter asked.

“No, my role and our role as an EIA process is to evaluate a project on the environmental impacts on a proposed project on a certain site,” the minister answered.

“The business case, the financial part, we are not engaged in that aspect,” he said, adding that the question should be directed to PROENERGY.

‘Bad, expensive, polluting idea’

Tantramar MLA Megan Mitton says she’s not surprised the Holt government has approved the gas plant.

“It’s a bad, expensive, polluting idea,” she said in a telephone interview with Warktimes.

Tantramar MLA Megan Mitton at an anti-gas plant rally last spring

“PROENERGY is the proponent, but NB Power has invited them here and the Holt government is backing this up,” she adds.

“Certainly there’s a list of conditions and I think they tried to make it look like a really long list, but a lot of it is basically saying that the company must follow the law,” Mitton says.

She mentioned what she sees as the negative effects on air, water and human health.

“It’s extremely dangerous for them to move forward with these things, these projects, when we know we have other options and we are in a climate crisis and I didn’t even talk about the cost. $3.5 billion. Think of what else we could do with that.”

Mitton points to the premier’s announcement that the moratorium on fracking is under review, now combined with her government’s approval of the gas plant.

“It’s becoming very clear where Holt really stands on these things. And it’s very clear that the Greens are the only ones who are fighting for the right to a healthy environment, are fighting for a real energy transition, and are the only ones that really have progressive views and want to make sure we have a fair economy and a fair energy system,” she says.

“Unfortunately, the other old parties are stuck in their old ways and are continuing to really just crank out the same ideas from previous centuries.”

Mayor’s statement

Meantime, Mayor Wiggins-Colwell issued a carefully worded statement on Facebook.

“Both the former and current council of Tantramar opposed this project, but we must move forward with the expectation that all public concerns are reflected in the conditions attached to the certificate approval,” her statement says before encouraging residents “to rely on official sources of information for updates regarding the process.”

To read the mayor’s statement, click here.

For New Brunswick government’s complete list of 45 conditions for the project, click here.

To read the story by John Chilibeck, Local Journalism Reporter with Brunswick News, click here.

Posted in Environment, NB Power, New Brunswick government, Town of Tantramar | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Tantramar council divided over proposed Wheaton Bridge committee

Posted on August 27, 2026 by brucewark

Interior shot of the Wheaton Covered Bridge showing holes in the roof and the closure sign that the provincial department of transportation & infrastructure erected in July 2024

Tantramar town council spent more than 35 minutes Monday discussing the membership and terms of reference for a committee that would investigate ways of saving the Wheaton Covered Bridge, but could not come to a consensus on how to proceed.

Councillors were considering a report from Matt Pryde, director of active living and culture, listing the names of nine Tantramar residents who had expressed interest in joining the committee.

The previous council voted to establish the committee on January 13th when it passed a motion directing town staff to “investigate options for preservation and long-term protection of Wheaton Covered Bridge and create an ad-hoc committee for funding sources, preservation, and recommendations on the structure.”

Committee too big

“The nine members seems a little bit large to me for a committee of this nature,” said Councillor Alyssa Greene.

“I think they may get bogged down. I think five members is perhaps a better option for us,” she added.

Councillor Alyssa Greene

Greene said there are people on the proposed committee she doesn’t know and asked for more information such as their letters expressing interest and their CVs.

“I’m sure they’re great community members, but it would be important that we be able to have informed decisions on approving who the committee members are,” she said.

Greene also questioned the committee’s terms of reference including its three year term and its requirement to report to council at least twice a year.

“In three years if we were waiting that long, there won’t be a bridge. So there won’t even be a conversation,” she said, adding later that the committee could be required to report to council in three months.

CAO Jennifer Borne said the committee’s terms of reference, including its three-year term and its requirement to report to council at least twice a year, are pretty standard ones. She added the terms can always be tweaked later both by council and the committee itself.

Borne said that bigger committees can also work well as the much larger Climate Change Advisory Committee has shown and that larger volunteer committees can more easily share the work among their members.

Options needed

Councillor Tori Weldon suggested the committee could be required to provide various options.

Councillor Tori Weldon

“Like what do we do if we want to save the bridge and what do we do if it’s determined that’s not what we’re going to do,” she said.

I just want to make sure we don’t have one thing on the table,” she added.

“I don’t know if this should just be exclusively how to save the bridge, but sort of how do we deal with the situation.”

Councillor Greene agreed that the committee’s terms of reference should spell out what council wants it to examine.

“Are we looking to make sure that the spirit of that portion of heritage is always commemorated, or are we actually looking to commemorate the actual physical structure?” Greene asked.

“We need to have very clear terms within this of what we want them looking at,” she said.

‘Consent agenda’

Councillor Barry Hicks

Councillor Barry Hicks said he would be voting against the motion to send the proposal to form a committee and adopt its terms of reference to council’s regular meeting next month.

In technical terms, the motion said the matter would be placed on council’s “consent agenda” which would mean it would be voted on with no further discussion or debate.

“I’d like to have more options than just saving the bridge or maybe a way that we make a replica or whatever,” Hicks said.

“I’d like to see the options before I vote for this.”

Urgent action needed

Councillors Allison Butcher and Kristen LeBlanc stressed the need to move ahead quickly.

“I think the group that we have right now listed here are very proactive individuals,” LeBlanc said referring to the nine people who expressed interest in joining the committee.

“I’ve known the majority of them most of my life,” she added.

Councillor Allison Butcher

“I feel like we really should be moving forward,” Butcher said.

“Our bridge is falling apart, it has been for a long time,” she added.

“We can’t take two, three months just to figure out who’s on our committee. We need to get moving with it, and I respect that these people have put their name forward, and they have been chosen or pointed out by staff who have the skill level to look through and see if someone has the ability to do this or not,” Butcher said.

“I think we need to put it onto the consent agenda and get moving with the hope of fixing our bridge.”

In the end, council voted 5-3 in favour of sending the matter to its consent agenda on September 8th.

In favour: Mayor Wiggins-Colwell, Councillors Kristen LeBlanc, Tori Weldon, Allison Butcher and Haidee Robertson.

Against: Councillors Alyssa Greene, Barry Hicks and Wayne Wells.

Deputy Mayor Josh Goguen was absent.

Posted in Heritage, Town of Tantramar | Tagged | 4 Comments