Elsipogtog First Nation and the Indigenous rights-defending organization called Kopit Lodge have filed a comment with federal regulators noting that they and the broader Mi’kmaq community were not consulted about the proposed gas/diesel generating plant on the Chignecto Isthmus.
“This [lack of consultation] must be remedied as part of the ongoing Impact Assessment process as a requirement of the Crown’s duty to consult and the need for meaningful reconciliation efforts,” their seven-page submission states.
It was filed with the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada on August 19th and appears on the regulator’s website.
The comment contradicts assertions in documents filed by the U.S. company PROENERGY with the federal Assessment Agency that NB Power undertook “engagement” with Indigenous First Nations and other groups between July 2024 and May 2025:
The project description, filed by PROENERGY, also asserts that as an partner in the project, the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council “was supportive of the site selection approach and identified Centre Village as the preferred location, having fewer environmental impacts from a rights-holder perspective.”
It has since been revealed that the Chiefs of the Tribal Council did not sign onto the project as an equity partner and have yet to decide whether to invest in it.
Elsipogtog First Nation, which is not a member of the Tribal Council, says in its submission to the Impact Assessment Agency that the gas/diesel plant lies within its “Sacred Traditional Territory, where our people have lived, hunted, fished and gathered since time immemorial.”
It goes on to point out that the Mi’kmaq have never surrendered, ceded or sold Aboriginal title to any of their lands and therefore hold the right “to make decisions over, care for, and generate economic benefits from our title lands.”
Environmental concerns
The Elsipogtog comment notes that the project would use high-emitting fossil fuels.
“These pose significant threats to air quality, local waterways, wildlife habitats, and traditional food and medicine sources,” it says, adding that the project increases the risk of fuel spills and flaring along with the long-term degradation of land.
“The project involves long-term contracts with a U.S.-based energy company during a period of rising cross-border economic tension and trade disputes. This is viewed as tone-deaf and irresponsible, especially for a Crown Corporation.”
The comment says that if the project has any merit, its economic benefits should flow to Canadians and First Nations and that Elsipogtog and Kopit Lodge must be involved in consultation that is financed by both the Crown and the proponent.
To read the full comment, click here.
Crown’s duty to consult and the need for meaningful reconciliation efforts
Give me a break. They are NOT a stakeholder in any way at all in this project. Just trying to grab more power and more MONEY.
Thank you Bruce Wark for keeping us so well informed about this proposed Chignecto Gas Plant project. Without you and your investigative journalism, Tantramar residents would truly be in the dark about what’s really going on behind the scenes. Our NB government, NB Power (and the American plant builder) do not seem to be operating in good faith.
If you are 100% anti-fossils in general it seems to me that you would find every single development of this type of project to be in “bad faith” which is unfortunate because as Charles Langlois states at this comments section there are many of us in the silent majority who do not share your views and are pro-oil and gas and their development in Canada for the benefit of all.. we are often confused because we support people and their right to EV cars but don’t understand why they don’t see it as a choice for individuals to make.. I don’t even have a car, haven’t since 2016, but I see the value in owning and operating a vehicle running on gas and not “tied to the electric grid”. We never have a voice though.. we are maligned as “uninformed” in this university town of green cultists who go along to get along.
You’ve got people who are pro gas going all out on the fear mongering of “they’re taking away your right to choose!” and you’ve got the pro EV all out going “If you don’t go EV you’re against the environment”.
The reality is, while gas and gas vehicles are going to be around for a while, people should have the option to go EV or hybrid if they so choose without backlash from either side.
As for the “Silent majority who are pro oil and gas” great for them. But to say it’s “For the benefit of all” is absolute nonsense. It’s the benefit for those involved with the industry and those who ARE the industry. The reality is anyone claiming that oil and gas development is for the benefit of all have put up blinders to the reality of the world and the fact that an all or nothing reliance on gas and oil for Canada won’t benefit us at all.
Why?
Because other countries we look to trade with are moving away from such things, and are making it part of THEIR trade parameters that other countries need to at least be somewhat on side with the reality that oil and gas do need be phased out and not part of the equation anymore.
Supporting oil and gas solely right now means that you want Canada to fail, or be dependent on places like the US or Saudi where oil is king. And I, for one, am okay with not being tied to regimes that are controlled by Dictators (regardless of how it’s disguised).
If there were cars that released cyanide or radiation, using them would not be “a choice for individuals to make” it would be a matter of public safety. The same is true of fossil fuels. Their use is so prevalent that they will have to be gradually phased out, not suddenly stopped, but they do have to stop being used eventually.
It’s a fact that fossil fuel carbon emissions are damaging the environment, health, and the economy. People shouldn’t be stigmatized for still relying on fossil fuels, they should be encouraged to make better choices, given incentives to change, and given practical options. But we will either change or suffer more and more wildfires, droughts, failed crops, coastal erosion, species extinction, failing fisheries, economic losses, larger storms, etc etc. No amount of “green cultist” slurs are going to change the reality that pumping fossil carbon into the air is disruptive, damaging, and causing global warming.