Economy
“Ownership is Reconciliation” Indigenous Resource Network rebrands to emphasize shift in focus

News release submitted by the Indigenous Resource Network
Indigenous Resource Network Launches Ownership is Reconciliation
The Indigenous Resource Network (IRN) is proud to unveil its latest “Ownership is Reconciliation” Campaign, marking a transformative shift in focus and rebrand from its original “Ownership Changes Everything” campaign.
This new initiative aims to convey the compelling story of Indigenous ownership in resource projects, resonating with a diverse audience including social media, supporters, and fellow Indigenous organizations. “We initiated the ‘Ownership Changes Everything’ campaign to showcase the positive impact of Indigenous ownership in resource projects. The response has been overwhelming, with strong resonance among policy makers, industry, and Indigenous communities” shared John Desjarlais, Executive Director of IRN.
Central to the campaign’s mission is enlightening Canadians about the pivotal role Indigenous ownership plays in advancing the path to reconciliation. As part of this campaign, IRN advocates for the formation of a National Indigenous Guaranteed Loan program, empowering Indigenous communities with crucial access to capital required for equitable participation in major projects nationwide. Desjarlais elaborated, stating, “While it may not be a cure for all of the issues we see in our communities, it is an essential step in revitalizing funding opportunities for Indigenous development. We are heartened by the industry’s resounding support for a national program, as it de-risks projects and facilitates the vital capital Indigenous communities need to pursue ownership.”
IRN invites all stakeholders, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, to join forces in promoting a future where reconciliation and resource development harmoniously converge, generating sustainable employment opportunities and fostering shared prosperity for all.
Most Indigenous people support resource development: poll
In the polarized “environment versus economy” debate we’re having, there’s often an assumption, or an assertion, that Indigenous peoples are mostly against resource development. This is manifested in blockades, protests at legislatures and university campuses, and cries from activists that they stand in solidarity with Indigenous people when they stand against mining, oil and gas,
commercial fishing, hydro, and forestry projects.
For those familiar with the matter, this has always been a bit puzzling. Resource development is often the biggest economic driver of Indigenous communities, since it provides revenues for nations and well-paying jobs closer to home. Indigenous businesses are 40 times more likely to be involved in the extractive industry than Canadian ones.
There are absolutely cases where Indigenous nations have had disputes with resource companies, and when their rights have been disrespected. But this is not the same as being against resource development in principle. The public discussion of the issue has failed to grasp that key distinction: Indigenous peoples are not generally opposed to development; they are opposed to not being included, and they are against assuming risks without reaping any of the rewards.
To test that assumption, the Indigenous Resource Network, a platform for Indigenous workers and business owners involved in resource development, commissioned a poll by Environics Research. A total of 549 self-identified First Nations, Metis, and Inuit people living in rural areas or on reserves across Canada were interviewed by telephone between March 25 and April 16.
The poll found that a majority, 65 per cent, said they supported natural-resource development, while only 23 per cent were opposed. When asked how they’d feel if a new project were proposed near their own community, supporters outweighed opponents 2 to 1 (54 to 26 per cent). Not surprisingly, support was higher among working-age (35- to 54-year-old) respondents (70 per cent) than younger ones (18- to 34-year-olds, at 56 per cent), while Indigenous men were more likely to oppose resource development (28 per cent) than Indigenous women (19 per cent).
When asked more specifically about types of resource development, most supported both mining (59 per cent in favour versus 32 per cent opposed) and oil and gas development (53 per cent for, versus 41 per cent against). The main reason they cited was the “urgent priority” of access to health care that comes with economic development and jobs. They said other issues, such as governance, education, traditional activities, and federal transfers, were less important.
All this indicates a path toward greater social licence by Indigenous peoples to develop resources. For many respondents, their support hinges on the likely costs and benefits to them and their communities, as it does for most people. Respondents were more likely to support a project if it used best practices to: protect the environment (79 per cent), ensure safety (77 per cent), and benefit the community economically, such as by providing jobs and business opportunities (77 per cent). Interestingly, community consultation (69 per cent) and consent (62 per cent) were not as important, even though the public discourse tends to emphasize them.
Perhaps the most important finding was that the more a respondent thought he or she knew about the issue, the more he or she was likely to support resource development. Those who work in the industry or who discuss it beyond social media have a much better understanding of what’s needed for a project to get approved, the standards that must be adhered to, and the reclamation that must occur when a project is complete or decommissioned. For them, it’s more than saying yes or not to resource development; it’s about ensuring projects meet the highest possible standards.
The relationship between the resource sector and Indigenous communities isn’t perfect. But it’s economically important, and we would be well served by improving, not severing it. It’s high time we pushed the discussion about Indigenous peoples and resource development past polarizing and simplistic slogans. We hope this poll does just that. Most Indigenous peoples support resource development when high environmental standards are applied and good jobs and economic benefits follow. Let’s ensure that’s the case with every project.
Canadian Energy Centre
Cross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project

From the Canadian Energy Centre
Billions in government revenue and thousands of jobs across provinces
Announced in 2006, the Northern Gateway project would have built twin pipelines between Bruderheim, Alta. and a marine terminal at Kitimat, B.C.
One pipeline would export 525,000 barrels per day of heavy oil from Alberta to tidewater markets. The other would import 193,000 barrels per day of condensate to Alberta to dilute heavy oil for pipeline transportation.
The project would have generated significant economic benefits across Canada.

The following projections are drawn from the report Public Interest Benefits of the Northern Gateway Project (Wright Mansell Research Ltd., July 2012), which was submitted as reply evidence during the regulatory process.
Financial figures have been adjusted to 2025 dollars using the Bank of Canada’s Inflation Calculator, with $1.00 in 2012 equivalent to $1.34 in 2025.
Total Government Revenue by Region
Between 2019 and 2048, a period encompassing both construction and operations, the Northern Gateway project was projected to generate the following total government revenues by region (direct, indirect and induced):

British Columbia
- Provincial government revenue: $11.5 billion
- Federal government revenue: $8.9 billion
- Total: $20.4 billion
Alberta
- Provincial government revenue: $49.4 billion
- Federal government revenue: $41.5 billion
- Total: $90.9 billion
Ontario
- Provincial government revenue: $1.7 billion
- Federal government revenue: $2.7 billion
- Total: $4.4 billion
Quebec
- Provincial government revenue: $746 million
- Federal government revenue: $541 million
- Total: $1.29 billion
Saskatchewan
- Provincial government revenue: $6.9 billion
- Federal government revenue: $4.4 billion
- Total: $11.3 billion
Other
- Provincial government revenue: $1.9 billion
- Federal government revenue: $1.4 billion
- Total: $3.3 billion
Canada
- Provincial government revenue: $72.1 billion
- Federal government revenue: $59.4 billion
- Total: $131.7 billion
Annual Government Revenue by Region
Over the period 2019 and 2048, the Northern Gateway project was projected to generate the following annual government revenues by region (direct, indirect and induced):

British Columbia
- Provincial government revenue: $340 million
- Federal government revenue: $261 million
- Total: $601 million per year
Alberta
- Provincial government revenue: $1.5 billion
- Federal government revenue: $1.2 billion
- Total: $2.7 billion per year
Ontario
- Provincial government revenue: $51 million
- Federal government revenue: $79 million
- Total: $130 million per year
Quebec
- Provincial government revenue: $21 million
- Federal government revenue: $16 million
- Total: $37 million per year
Saskatchewan
- Provincial government revenue: $204 million
- Federal government revenue: $129 million
- Total: $333 million per year
Other
- Provincial government revenue: $58 million
- Federal government revenue: $40 million
- Total: $98 million per year
Canada
- Provincial government revenue: $2.1 billion
- Federal government revenue: $1.7 billion
- Total: $3.8 billion per year
Employment by Region
Over the period 2019 to 2048, the Northern Gateway Pipeline was projected to generate the following direct, indirect and induced full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs by region:

British Columbia
- Annual average: 7,736
- Total over the period: 224,344
Alberta
- Annual average: 11,798
- Total over the period: 342,142
Ontario
- Annual average: 3,061
- Total over the period: 88,769
Quebec
- Annual average: 1,003
- Total over the period: 29,087
Saskatchewan
- Annual average: 2,127
- Total over the period: 61,683
Other
- Annual average: 953
- Total over the period: 27,637
Canada
- Annual average: 26,678
- Total over the period: 773,662
Alberta
Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill
The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.
Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.
His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.
On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.
To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.
The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”
Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.
-
Crime1 day ago
How Chinese State-Linked Networks Replaced the Medellín Model with Global Logistics and Political Protection
-
Addictions1 day ago
New RCMP program steering opioid addicted towards treatment and recovery
-
Aristotle Foundation1 day ago
We need an immigration policy that will serve all Canadians
-
Business1 day ago
Natural gas pipeline ownership spreads across 36 First Nations in B.C.
-
Courageous Discourse1 day ago
Healthcare Blockbuster – RFK Jr removes all 17 members of CDC Vaccine Advisory Panel!
-
Business11 hours ago
EU investigates major pornographic site over failure to protect children
-
Health1 day ago
RFK Jr. purges CDC vaccine panel, citing decades of ‘skewed science’
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day ago
Conservatives slam Liberal bill to allow police to search through Canadians’ mail