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 / 2 years ago

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

Alberta / 3 years ago

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

Business

Canadians should expect even more spending in federal fall economic statement

Published on November 13, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro

The Trudeau government will soon release its fall economic statement. Though technically intended to be an update on the fiscal plan in this year’s budget, in recent years the fall economic statement has more closely resembled a “mini-budget” that unveils new (and often significant) spending commitments and initiatives.

Let’s look at the data.

The chart below includes projections of annual federal program spending from a series of federal budgets and updates, beginning with the 2022 budget and ending with the latest 2024 budget. Program spending equals total spending minus debt interest costs, and represents discretionary spending by the federal government.

Clearly, there’s a trend that with every consecutive budget and fiscal update the Trudeau government revises spending estimates upwards. Take the last two fiscal years, 2023/24 and 2024/25, for example. Budget 2022 projected annual program spending of $436.5 billion for the 2023/24 fiscal year. Yet the fall economic statement released just months later revised that spending estimate up to $449.8 billion, and later releases showed even higher spending.

The issue is even more stark when examining spending projections for the current fiscal year. Budget 2022 projected annual spending of $441.6 billion in 2024/25. Since then, every subsequent fiscal release has revised that estimate higher and higher, to the point that Budget 2024 estimates program spending of $483.6 billion for this year—representing a $42.0 billion increase from the projections only two years ago.

Meanwhile, as spending estimates are revised upwards, plans to reduce the federal deficit are consistently pushed off into later years.

For example, the 2022 fall economic statement projected a deficit of $25.4 billion for the 2024/25 fiscal year, and declining deficits in the years to come, before reaching an eventual surplus of $4.5 billion in 2027/28. However, subsequent budgets and fiscal updates again revised those estimates. The latest budget projects a deficit of $39.8 billion in 2024/25 that will decline to a $26.8 billion deficit by 2027/28. In other words, though budgets and fiscal updates have consistently projected declining deficits between 2024/25 and 2027/28, each subsequent document has produced larger deficits throughout the fiscal outlook and pushed the timeline for balanced budgets further into the future.

These data illustrate the Trudeau government’s lack of accountability to its own fiscal plans. Though the unpredictable nature of forecasting means the government is unlikely to exactly meet future projections, it’s still reasonable to expect it will roughly follow its own fiscal plans. However, time and time again Canadians have been sold a certain plan, only to have it change dramatically mere months later due to the government’s unwillingness to restrain spending. We shouldn’t expect the upcoming fall economic statement to be any different.

Authors:

Jake Fuss and Grady Munro

Daily Caller

Climate Change Fanaticism Was The Big Election Loser

Published on November 13, 2024

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Stephen Moore

A few days before last week’s election, Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders issued a dire warning to voters. If Trump won, “the struggle against climate change will be over.”

He had that right.

Climate change fanaticism was effectively on the ballot last week. That green energy agenda was decisively defeated.

It turns out the tens of millions of middle-class Americans who voted for Trump weren’t much interested in the temperature of the planet 50 years from now. They were too busy trying to pay the bills.

The result shouldn’t be too surprising. Polls have shown climate change ranks near the bottom of voters’ concerns. Jobs, inflation and illegal immigration register much higher on the scale of concerns.

But if you asked the elite of America in the top one percent of income, climate change is seen as an immediate and existential threat to the planet. Our poll at Unleash Prosperity earlier this year found that the cultural elites were so hyper-obsessed with climate issues, they were in favor of banning air conditioning, nonessential air travel and many modern home appliances to stop global warming. Our study showed that not many of the other 99 percent agree.

Wake up, Bernie and Al Gore.

Climate change has become the ultimate luxury good: the richer you are, the more you fret about it.

Among the elite, obsessing about climate change has become a favorite form of virtue-signaling at the country club and in the faculty lounges. There is almost no cross that the green elites — the people who donate six figures or more to groups like the Sierra Club — aren’t willing to make lower income Americans bear to stop global warming.

Herein lies the political curse of the climate issue. A millionaire doesn’t care much if the price of gas rises by $1 a gallon or if they have to pay another $100 a month in utility bills. But the middle class hates paying more.

It wasn’t just economic concerns that turned the voters against climate crusaders like President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. Workers weren’t too thrilled with the heavy fist of government commanding them to buy an electric vehicle — whether they wanted one or not.

It hasn’t helped the greens’ cause that the same progressives who are out to save the planet with grandiose transformations and global government, seem to have no problem with the garbage polluting the streets of our major cities or the graffiti or the feces and urine smell on the street corners of San Francisco and New York. That’s real pollution. And it’s affecting us here and now.

The good news is this year’s voter revolts against the radical green agenda are not a vote for dirtier air or water. The air that we breathe and the water we drink is cleaner than ever — a point that President Donald Trump correctly made. We will continue to make progress against pollution.

To try to sell middle America on the climate-change agenda of abolishing fossil fuels, the greens peddled bogus arguments that climate change would hurt poor communities most. In reality the financial costs of the climate policies and the paychecks lost were felt by the non-elite.

Democrats forgot to visit the steel-mill construction sites or the auto plants or the oil patch and ask those workers what they thought.

Well, now we know the reality. Americans think their shrinking paychecks and the higher price of gas they pay at the pump is the real clear-and-present danger. If Democrats don’t start to get that, they too will go to bed worrying about their jobs.

Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and a co-founder of Unleash Prosperity. His latest book is titled: “The Trump Economic Miracle.”