PROENERGY slide on display during two public information sessions this week in Sackville claiming that Indigenous investors already hold an ownership stake in the proposed gas plant project
PROENERGY, the U.S. company hired to build and operate a gas/diesel generating plant on the Chignecto Isthmus, was unable to back up its claims that the project has Indigenous support during a public question and answer session Wednesday night at the Tantramar Civic Centre.
After Sackville resident Shelley Chase questioned why an Indigenous representative was not at the front of the room to answer questions, Tristan Jackson came forward to discuss his involvement in the proposed RIGS Energy Atlantic gas plant.
Tristan Jackson, Facebook photo. Cameras and audio recorders were banned from last night’s meeting
Jackson is chief executive officer of Nikutik Limited Partnership, a newly created Indigenous Sovereign Wealth Fund that works with industry on clean energy projects to create economic independence for the seven First Nations that are members of the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council.
The Amlamgog (Fort Folly) First Nation is one of those members.
Jackson revealed that the seven chiefs who govern the council have not yet agreed to invest in the project.
He said Nikutik has secured an option for 2.5% of the equity and a further option to acquire 33% at a later time, but he stressed those options have not been exercised in spite of the U.S. company’s claim that the gas plant “will be owned by PROENERGY and the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council.”
“I can’t speak for the First Nations,” Jackson said, adding that the option to invest does not mean that they endorse it.
“My job is to secure them opportunities,” he added.
Earlier in the day, he told Warktimes that he does not know what the seven chiefs will decide.
“They may invest in the project and then again, they may not,” he said.
‘Deceptive & misleading’
Later during last night’s question and answer session, someone from the audience said he had been speaking with local MP Dominic LeBlanc’s executive assistant who said he had the impression that the gas plant project had Indigenous support.
“Now, we hear that they haven’t decided whether to be stakeholders or shareholders,” the audience member said.
“It seems deceptive and misleading to say that they are.”
John MacIsaac, President PROENERGY Canada. Photo from Nalcor Energy via CBC & Halifax Examiner
John MacIsaac, president of PROENERGY Canada, replied that the company aims to be transparent suggesting that identifying the First Nations as “equity partners” was simpler than saying there is an options agreement.
He also blamed the media for misinterpreting the ownership situation.
“We’re potentially partners moving forward,” MacIsaac explained.
Tantramar MLA Megan Mitton also questioned why both PROENERGY and NB Power were claiming that the Tribal Council was a minority equity partner.
She added she had just learned that Elsipogtog Chief Arren Sock had written to NB Power to oppose the project.
“We will see what other First Nations decide,” she said.
Note: Warktimes has been unable to reach Fort Folly Chief Rebecca Knockwood. And, an assistant who answered the phone at Elsipogtog First Nation said Chief Arren Sock would not be available until September.
On August 12th Angie Pitre, a member of the Elsipogtog First Nation, submitted this comment opposing the project to the federal Impact Assessment Agency.
This is the first of two reports on the public Q&A session hosted by PROENERGY Canada.
My concerns are:
First Nations sounds like it’s just about making more money at the end of the day.
Not a word about the environment -just more money opportunities for “natives” quote unquote. Corruption at its finest.
I understand that you are likely a regular reader, but I did want to be certain to call this later article to your attention:
https://warktimes.com/2025/08/18/migmaq-chiefs-say-big-gas-plant-cant-proceed-without-indigenous-led-impact-assessment/
Thank you for reporting on this, and most of all on the duplicity in assuming a project has 1st nations support before it is official. That this practice continues calls into question all the Carney gov’t is claiming about Indigenous support. The land claims have to be settled first. Thanks to Angie for pointing that out.
Are we not boycotting America because they want to punish Canadians with Donald Trump’s ridiculous tariffs? Why are we letting an American company come to our country and tell us what to do? This American company retains most of the ownership, completely foolish on our part. New Brunswick can not sign off on this deal, this reminds me how Joey Smallwood in Newfoundland signed off supplying power to Quebec with practically free power and no benefit for Newfoundland. Those Americans must figure we are complete idiots!
I guess we see why last night’s meeting was not allowed to have people record anything. And while I’m “so sure” (please, note the snark) that those who were with the PROENERGY and NB Power ‘group’ did their recording of comments and answers ‘faithfully’, the rest of us were left with either having to memorize the information or note it down (if we did bring materials to do such; considering it wasn’t known beforehand – that I’m aware of – that there was a prohibition to recording the evening, I think many did not come as prepared as they might have otherwise).
They did themselves no favours by lying from the get go and backpeddaling so hard I’m surprised no one tripped. The rest of the night didn’t go well either.
Dear Bruce,
(and this is as a friend and not necessarily intended for public posting, but if you think it’s relevant please do so).
As a settler individual employed by a First Nation education authority that is at arms’ length from its Chief & Council, I’d encourage you to reconsider the approach to this reporting.
The North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council (NSMTC) is a jointly funded organization (funded by its member First Nations) to administer to the needs of its collective members. Its constitutive members are smaller FNs who have decided to pool their resources to look after files like economic and social development, education, etc. As I understand it, NSMTC operates at arms’ length from its funding Band Offices.
This individual’s claim that he cannot know if the individual Chief & Councils of the **9** FNs that fund NSMTC would ultimately agree to the project is NOT nefarious. It is HONEST. There is no way he can know the answer to this question. Let me explain.
First it’s because of the arms’ length relationship, and second because he has no idea what NSMTC will do with his recommendation at a later stage (even though it seems that at this point they’ve endorsed it).
For example, I’m employed by the Elsipogtog First Nation Education Authority to coordinate a university partnership program. EFNEA is funded by Chief & Council (and the feds), but operates at arms’ length from C&C.
C&C funds EFNEA, EFNEA funds our program and does not answer to C&C.
If you were to ask me today if Elsipogtog Chief & Council would agree to our program offering 3 courses in Spanish, 3 in Journalism, 2 in Great Books, etc., etc. this academic year, I would say that I have no way of knowing, and I’d be being honest. But I know that EFNEA does though. You see the relationship?
It seems like this Tristan fellow is employed on contract by NSMTC, likely doing his best under what he understands his mandate to be.
Implying that this Tristan guy is ventriloquizing Indigenous voices plays into stereotypes of Indigenous peoples, groups, governments, etc. as hapless victims without agency and easily taken advantage of. In other words, it’s problematic.
All this said, I wasn’t there. Maybe the guy was a jackass and invited this kind of scrutiny. If that’s the case, hopefully NSMTC shows him the door.
Hi Rob.
I was at the meeting Wednesday night. Placards stated that the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council (NSMTC) not only supports the project, but is a minority equity partner (as the placard image states above).
However, when asked about this, Tristan Jackson said that at the moment, the NSMTC had not made any decisions on the project and that he was only there to represent the interests of the Limited Partnership (LP) that was formed to promote Indigenous participation in clean energy projects.
The issue was raised – why does their own placards say that they support and are a partner, yet their “LP representative” said they haven’t made a decision yet. This was only after the question of why no one from the Indigenous community was actually present to show the allegedly Indigenous Support that we were not only told Wednesday, but in the preliminary Zoom meeting as well that was held in July (I attended that one as well and it was a claim made then too, which did surprise myself and others who I spoke to after the meeting).
Tristan admitted he was not there to represent Indigenous people, just the LP and even then he wasn’t expecting to even be asked any questions.
It wasn’t really about who knew what, it was that they weren’t telling the whole truth about Indigenous support when there is none as of yet. That was the first issue raised and it became one of “lies of the night”.
I wonder, what do you imagine Indigenous support looks like? Can you describe it? What and/or who does it involve? Where is it located? Who pronounces on its authenticity? Can it change? Be ambiguous?
NB Power and ProEnergy’s press releases describe the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council (NSMTC) as “partners” in the project, implying that the First Nations members of the organization already support this project. Now we learn that they simply have an option to invest in this project, which none of them have decided to exercise yet.
CBC has reported that the project includes a minority equity investment from the NSMTC and the proponents of this project have not corrected them.
We don’t think that Tristan has been nefarious because he claims that he cannot know if the Band Councils will ultimately agree to the project. We think Tristan has been nefarious because they have muddied the waters so much with their terminology that community members, the media, and our MP’s office all have the misconception that the members of the NSMTC already support this project. The proponents of this project, including Tristan, allowed this misinformation to spread and chose not to clarify.
Dear Bruce, Its not helpful watching you censor my commentary over the years.. I have been saddened to see your efforts to control the narrative in Tantramar. Bruce Pardy’s article here for discussions purposes:
https://financialpost.com/opinion/canadians-legal-rights-should-not-depend-indigenous-lineage
Well it would depend on what you said whether it’s “controlling the narrative” or preventing issues (aka problems).
Pretty sure Bruce doesn’t control the narrative in Tantramar.
Interesting opinion article and there is some truth to it even.
So are you suggesting that the Canadian Government and Crown break the contracts they made with the Indigenous? If so, are you willing to be okay with paying them fair price for the land we live on just so we can all be ‘free’ (which we are still, don’t get me wrong). Or are you interested in learning more about the depths of why there is this issue still of needing to speak to the Indigenous peoples of this land before doing anything major to it?
Pardy says “We need to get back to a Canada where everyone has the same rights” but such a Canada never existed. There have always been differences in the rights of various groups.
It would have been more accurate for him to say “We need to get back to the IDEAL of everyone having the same rights.” We’ve lost that ideal to identity politics.
Hi Rob,
“I wonder, what do you imagine Indigenous support looks like? Can you describe it? What and/or who does it involve? Where is it located? Who pronounces on its authenticity? Can it change? Be ambiguous?”
I imagine Indigenous support to “look” like any other support. An actual consensus agreement presented that publicly states “We support this Project”, whether on paper or via social media/video. As for who/what it involves – the people that were claimed to be involved (ie the Chiefs that represent their bands) but also said not to have made any decisions yet (as reported, the Chiefs who have not said they agree to this project yet).
Where is it located? Well hopefully from the website that represents the Council which last I looked in their News section made no mention of this at all.
Who pronounces on its authenticity? Again, the Council.
Can it change? Anything can change; they could meet and agree tomorrow to support the project – but you are missing the point, by FAR.
Be ambiguous?
I’m sorry… what? Are you trying to claim that the agreement that PROENERGY and this project claims to have but it does not have… is ambiguous?
Unless you have some insider information that can show otherwise, nothing about any of this was ambiguous. It was just downright lying.
They said they had the backing.
They do not.
Pretty simple really.
Were you there, Rob? Did you attend any of the meetings about this project? Just curious, and if you did, am I right to assume you think it’s a good project and the Indigenous should back it?
As a side question – your response did come across as if you have issue with what I said – why is that? Do you doubt that what I said was true? Do you doubt what is reported by Bruce is true? What Kevin said is true? What is it about what we stated that comes across as false to you? Do you have problems with the belief I have that the Indigenous SHOULD be consulted for projects like this and should have their backing BEFORE we even reach the part of the process we’re at now?
“They said they had the backing. They do not. Pretty simple really.”
Is it that simple?
Like this question, my other questions were intended to be rhetorical, and cause reflection. I probably should have stated that. But I think your reply is demonstrative of the overall point.
It’s heartening to see such community spirit, but instrumentalizing Indigenous “support” (however it’s imagined) is a colonial act by whoever does it.
As inarticulate and unprepared as this person seems to have been the other night does not provide license for the assembled (including Kevin, Bruce, or anyone else) to imply that a First Nation organization funded by nine First Nations has allowed itself to be somehow “duped.” This notion is just plain racist, really.
There are plenty of reasons to oppose this project, as there are are to support it. It’s a dilemma, and one requiring vigorous debate.
But playing rhetorical games with the economic and political agency of First Nations is unnecessary and harmful regardless of which “side” is doing it.
Yes, perhaps you should have stated that the questions were rhetorical.
As for “causing reflection” – there’s no reflection needed when they are just a lie, period. Unless of course the reflection was to point out that lying doesn’t help the case for people trying to push something through.
As for “instrumentalizing” support – excuse me?
Being supportive of Indigenous rights is “a colonial act”?
Claiming racism because people dared be concerned about the legitimacy of the Indigenous supporting the project?
Wow… oh WOW.
Well, at least you answered one of my questions. Two, really, at this point.
I’m sure you’re very well meaning Elaine, but the settler demand to “bring me the Chief” has a long and ugly history in this country.
In 2025, First Nation communities have certainly earned the ability not to be forced to capitulate to this demand when pursuing courses of action that may have long (or short) term benefits for their communities. Well-meaning settler people with nebulous and romantic ideals of “Indigenous rights” complicate this.
NSMTC reserves the right to take an ambiguous role in a project that would seem (to those same well-meaning settler people) to be counter to what (those well-meaning settler people understand to be) “Indigenous rights”.
Economic and political self-determination is an Indigenous right.
If you don’t want to call undermining that colonial, then don’t. But at least acknowledge it’s paternal.
Wow… again. Just… wow.
For someone who was not at the meeting, you have a lot of incorrect opinions about what happened.
Clearly you are trying to push buttons or instigate things with your continued assumptions and derogatory remarks. And since you aren’t even bothering to read any comments about this issue and just want to spout off untruths and nonsense, it’s obvious this discussion means nothing to you.
Unfortunate ad hominem and talking past. Having not attended the meeting doesn’t obviate the broader issue raised. But I guess we should leave poor Bruce alone and not continue this here. He’s generous enough to allow comments on his stories as it is. Thanks Bruce, for all you’ve done to keep us informed since moving to town.