How Haisla Nation’s Cedar LNG Project is a New Dawn for Indigenous Peoples

Written by Estella Petersen for Canada Action

Who formed the partnership between Haisla Nation and Cedar LNG, and why? Who benefits from this project? Is there First Nations support for this project, and if so, what can we learn from it?

Into the Water

The Haisla Nation and Pembina Pipeline Corp. Cedar LNG first proposed this project to the government in 2019. Since then, this partnership has proven to be successful in achieving the details of the project, such as government approval and recently B.C.’s Environmental Assessment Certificate.

Plans for the $3 billion floating export terminal in Kitimat is to start shipping to places like Asia by 2027. There is a market for Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) worldwide, which is expected to grow dramatically over the next several years.

Dwellers Down River

It’s not hard to see the pride in the faces of people from Haisla Nation as this project has evolved. Particularly Chief Councillor Crystal Smith and former Chief Councillor Ellis Ross as they tirelessly negotiated to have their people as partners in the project from the conception through to the operational stage.

Despite being Indigenous, I am not from the Haisla Nation but I consider this a positive step forward for all Indigenous people in Canada. Additionally, to see a female Indigenous Chief so passionate about making change in her community while implementing their cultural values and maintaining responsible social and environmental priorities into this major project is undeniably inspiring.

The impact this project will have on Indigenous people may begin with the Haisla people, their community, and the region surrounding them. But it also includes those families and businesses involved with this project, whether that be BC Hydro to supply renewable power, or smaller companies that are providing goods and services in the area.

Our country and the world stand to benefit immensely from Cedar LNG, as it will ship some of the lowest GHG-emitting LNG globally and be a go-to source of natural gas as the world looks to transition to renewables.

There Will Always Be Naysayers

Realistically, there will always be people who do not want someone or something to succeed, I call this the glass half empty mentality. The same seems to ring true for energy projects in Canada.

Let us just say that anti-oil and gas protestors don’t go unnoticed. When First Nations stand up to support energy projects in Canada, the backlash from these opponents seems extreme. Stating those of us who encourage Indigenous partnerships with energy companies are “colonialized” misunderstand that partnerships create economic reconciliation. It is also a bit insensitive, as we have the right to choose to support the responsible development of natural resources in Canada if we want to.

The opportunities for Indigenous communities to improve their quality of living through housing, drinkable water, proper education, modern healthcare, and social programs like mental health counselling are essential to our people.

Who Are We Becoming?

“We” Indigenous people are becoming educated, business-oriented, partners in large energy projects, owners of businesses, independent of government dependence, and breaking away from negative stereotypes of Indigenous people. We are regaining our culture, languages, and spirituality, while remaining stewards of the land – that will never change.

What we learn is that Haisla Nation and the Cedar LNG project will change history in regards to how oil and gas projects work with Indigenous people. Involving Indigenous people from the beginning stages of a project, throughout the project, and for generations to come is how you can build better relationships with local communities, advance economic reconciliation with First Nations, protect the environment, and perhaps get some new major energy projects built while at it.

About the Author

Estella Petersen is a heavy machinery operator in the oil sands out of Fort McMurray. Estella is from the Cowessess Reserve and is passionate about Canada and supporting Canadian natural resources.

Canada Action

www.canadaaction.ca

Follow Author

How Haisla Nation’s Cedar LNG Project is a New Dawn for Indigenous Peoples

Energy / 3 years ago

Majority of Canadians Support Canada’s Role as Responsible Energy Producer & Exporter: POLL

Alberta / 4 years ago

Canada’s Forestry Sector is World-Class. Here’s Proof.

Business

The great policy challenge for governments in Canada in 2026

Published on January 1, 2026

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Ben Eisen and Jake Fuss

According to a recent study, living standards in Canada have declined over the past five years. And the country’s economic growth has been “ugly.” Crucially, all 10 provinces are experiencing this economic stagnation—there are no exceptions to Canada’s “ugly” growth record. In 2026, reversing this trend should be the top priority for the Carney government and provincial governments across the country.

Indeed, demographic and economic data across the country tell a remarkably similar story over the past five years. While there has been some overall economic growth in almost every province, in many cases provincial populations, fuelled by record-high levels of immigration, have grown almost as quickly. Although the total amount of economic production and income has increased from coast to coast, there are more people to divide that income between. Therefore, after we account for inflation and population growth, the data show Canadians are not better off than they were before.

Let’s dive into the numbers (adjusted for inflation) for each province. In British Columbia, the economy has grown by 13.7 per cent over the past five years but the population has grown by 11.0 per cent, which means the vast majority of the increase in the size of the economy is likely due to population growth—not improvements in productivity or living standards. In fact, per-person GDP, a key indicator of living standards, averaged only 0.5 per cent per year over the last five years, which is a miserable result by historic standards.

A similar story holds in other provinces. Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Quebec and Saskatchewan all experienced some economic growth over the past five years but their populations grew at almost exactly the same rate. As a result, living standards have barely budged. In the remaining provinces (Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick, Ontario, Manitoba and Alberta), population growth has outstripped economic growth, which means that even though the economy grew, living standards actually declined.

This coast-to-coast stagnation of living standards is unique in Canadian history. Historically, there’s usually variation in economic performance across the country—when one region struggles, better performance elsewhere helps drive national economic growth. For example, in the early 2010s while the Ontario and Quebec economies recovered slowly from the 2008/09 recession, Alberta and other resource-rich provinces experienced much stronger growth. Over the past five years, however, there has not been a “good news” story anywhere in the country when it comes to per-person economic growth and living standards.

In reality, Canada’s recent record-high levels of immigration and population growth have helped mask the country’s economic weakness. With more people to buy and sell goods and services, the overall economy is growing but living standards have barely budged. To craft policies to help raise living standards for Canadian families, policymakers in Ottawa and every provincial capital should remove regulatory barriers, reduce taxes and responsibly manage government finances. This is the great policy challenge for governments across the country in 2026 and beyond.

Ben Eisen

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute

Business

Land use will be British Columbia’s biggest issue in 2026

Published on December 31, 2025

Todayville

By Resource Works

By Geoff Russ

British Columbia will talk about Donald Trump’s tariffs in 2026, and it will keep grinding through affordability. But the issue that will decide whether the province can build, invest, and govern is land use.

The warning signs were there in 2024. Land based industries still generate 12 per cent of B.C.’s GDP, and the province controls more than 90 per cent of the land base, and land policy was already being remade through opaque processes, including government to government tables. When rules for access to land feel unsettled, money flows slow into a trickle.

The Cowichan ruling sends shockwaves

In August 2025, the Cowichan ruling turned that unease into a live wire. The court recognized the Cowichan’s Aboriginal title over roughly 800 acres within Richmond, including lands held by governments and unnamed third parties. It found that grants of fee simple and other interests unjustifiably infringed that title, and declared certain Canada and Richmond titles and interests “defective and invalid,” with those invalidity declarations suspended for 18 months to give governments time to make arrangements.

The reaction has been split. Supporters see a reminder that constitutional rights do not evaporate because land changed hands. Critics see a precedent that leaves private owners exposed, especially because unnamed owners in the claim area were not parties to the case and did not receive formal notice. Even the idea of “coexistence” has become contentious, because both Aboriginal title and fee simple convey exclusive rights to decide land use and capture benefits.

Market chill sets in

McLTAikins translated the risk into advice that landowners and lenders can act on: registered ownership is not immune from constitutional scrutiny, and the land title system cannot cure a constitutional defect where Aboriginal title is established. Their explanation of fee simple reads less like theory than a due diligence checklist that now reaches beyond the registry.

By December, the market was answering. National Post columnist Adam Pankratz reported that an industrial landowner within the Cowichan title area lost a lender and a prospective tenant after a $35 million construction loan was pulled. He also described a separate Richmond hotel deal where a buyer withdrew after citing precedent risk, even though the hotel was not within the declared title lands. His case that uncertainty is already changing behaviour is laid out in Montrose.

Caroline Elliott captured how quickly court language moved into daily life after a City Richmond letter warned some owners that their title might be compromised. Whatever one thinks of that wording, it pushed land law out of the courtroom and into the mortgage conversation.

Mining and exploration stall

The same fault line runs through the critical minerals push. A new mineral claims regime now requires consultation before claims are approved, and critics argue it slows early stage exploration and forces prospectors to reveal targets before they can secure rights. Pankratz made that critique earlier, in his argument about mineral staking.

Resource Works, summarising AME feedback on Mineral Tenure Act modernisation, reported that 69.5 per cent of respondents lacked confidence in proposed changes, and that more than three quarters reported increased uncertainty about doing business in B.C. The theme is not anti consultation. It is that process, capacity, and timelines decide whether consultation produces partnership or paralysis.

The legal layer

Layered on top is the widening fight over UNDRIP implementation and DRIPA. Geoffrey Moyse, KC, called for repeal in a Northern Beat essay on DRIPA, arguing that Section 35 already provides the constitutional framework and that trying to operationalise UNDRIP invites litigation and uncertainty.

Tariffs and housing will still dominate headlines. But they are downstream of land. Until B.C. offers a stable bargain over who can do what, where, and on what foundation, every other promise will be hostage to the same uncertainty. For a province still built on land based wealth, Resource Works argues in its institutional history that the resource economy cannot be separated from land rules. In 2026, that is the main stage.

Resource Works News