Proposed ban on oil and gas promotion revives paternalistic treatment of Indigenous peoples

From the Macdonald Laurier Institute

By Karen Ogen-Toews

MP Charlie Angus needs to withdraw his offensive attempt to silence discussion and apologize.

First Nations are used to oppression. We lived for over a century with the heavy hand of the Department of Indian Affairs. We coped with bossy and even mean Indian agents. The government of Canada told us where to live, how to learn, tried to destroy our language and culture, and undermined our traditional economies.

We are sick and tired of being told what to do and think. We can do these things for ourselves. But First Nations know that paternalism is far from dead in Canada.

With his private member’s bill banning promotion of the oil and gas industry, Charlie Angus wants to bring back the oppressive hand of the state in a manner consistent with dictatorships and authoritarian states. The NDP MP for Timmins-James Bay and his party want to shut down fossil fuel production, a move that would devastate the Canadian economy and undermine the greatest — and often the only — opportunity that many First Nations have for economic renewal.

Even that is not enough. He wants to shut us up, telling us what to think and threatening us with jail and fines for not adhering to his strange, unrealistic and dangerous views of energy and environmental protection.

I am a proud spokesperson for First Nations engagement with the LNG sector. My First Nation, the Wet’suwet’en, has been on the front lines of the national debate about LNG and pipeline construction.

We have lived for years with the national media misrepresenting and distorting our community’s views on the Coast Gas Link Pipeline, a major resource project that now has significant First Nations ownership. This project has overwhelming support in my First Nation, not an impression one would get from the media coverage of the environmentalists’ interventions in community affairs.

Coastal Gas Link has already brought well-paid jobs, business opportunities and new financial resources to our people and it will do so for decades to come.

We have monitored the project closely and continue to work with the pipeline company to ensure the environment is protected and our interests respected.

At the First Nations LNG Alliance, we spent years exploring the global environmental impact of liquified natural gas. We know that Canadian LNG, produced to the highest international environmental standards, will allow Asian countries to cut back sharply on coal usage, a process with as much ecological benefit as many of the symbolic steps being taken in Canada and other nations.

It is so tragic that the Canadian discussion about energy and climate change has been reduced to trite phrases, simple concepts and now the unleashing of the authoritarian impulses that remain in the country.

I am confident that many First Nations have spent much more time exploring and debating energy production and use than most Canadian communities. Finding the balance between economic development, local environmental and cultural protection and ecological sustainability is hard work. Our communities discuss energy and infrastructure issues all the time, and we are comfortable with the decisions we have made.

A long-serving member of Parliament, Angus now wants to shut me up. He wants to fine me or put me in jail for doing my job and for presenting First Nations perspectives on fossil fuels. He wants to ban public discussion of oil and gas and has clearly bought into the idea that fossil fuels should be eliminated.

We have no idea about the future that Angus and others have in mind. Perhaps he envisages a country with homes heated by good will, transportation restricted to foot and bicycle, food transported by pack dogs, car-free roads paved only with good intentions and government budgets funded by best wishes.

Many odd and unexpected things come out of the House of Commons, but nothing in recent years is as upsetting and disgraceful as Angus’s private member’s bill, C-372.

So, I say this: Mr. Angus, you have gone much too far. Your private member’s bill is the most ridiculous, paternalistic and reprehensible example of oppression directed at First Nations people in decades. I hope you are embarrassed by your ideological over-reach, and I hope you have the decency to withdraw your bill and apologize.

You insulted Canadians and offended the hundreds of Indigenous communities and thousands of First Nations people actively engaged in the oil and gas sector.

We will not be quiet as we chart the future we want, on our terms and in our territories. Far from silencing us, you have made it abundantly clear that Indigenous peoples must speak for ourselves. Most importantly, we will fight to protect ourselves from the old-style paternalism that lurks way too close to the surface in Canadian public affairs.

Karen Ogen-Toews is the CEO of the First Nations LNG Alliance

Related Topics:#FirstNations #FirstNationsLNGAlliance #KarenOgen-Toews #MacdonaldLaurierInstitute #MPCharlieAngus #OilAndGasAgriculture

Up Next

Lessons from rising tide of Indigenous ownership in Canadian oil and gas shared in Norway

Don't Miss

Court to hear Charter challenge to $5,000 ArriveCAN ticket

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Temporary Alberta grid limit unlikely to dampen data centre investment, analyst says

COVID-19 / 1 hour ago

Trump DOJ dismisses charges against doctor who issued fake COVID passports

Business / 1 hour ago

Mark Carney’s Fiscal Fantasy Will Bankrupt Canada

Alberta

Temporary Alberta grid limit unlikely to dampen data centre investment, analyst says

Published on July 14, 2025

Todayville

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Cody Ciona

‘Alberta has never seen this level and volume of load connection requests’

Billions of investment in new data centres is still expected in Alberta despite the province’s electric system operator placing a temporary limit on new large-load grid connections, said Carson Kearl, lead data centre analyst for Enverus Intelligence Research.

Kearl cited NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang’s estimate from earlier this year that building a one-gigawatt data centre costs between US$60 billion and US$80 billion.

That implies the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO)’s 1.2 gigawatt temporary limit would still allow for up to C$130 billion of investment.

“It’s got the potential to be extremely impactful to the Alberta power sector and economy,” Kearl said.

Importantly, data centre operators can potentially get around the temporary limit by ‘bringing their own power’ rather than drawing electricity from the existing grid.

In Alberta’s deregulated electricity market – the only one in Canada – large energy consumers like data centres can build the power supply they need by entering project agreements directly with electricity producers.

According to the AESO, there are 30 proposed data centre projects across the province.

The total requested power load for these projects is more than 16 gigawatts, roughly four gigawatts more than Alberta’s demand record in January 2024 during a severe cold snap.

For comparison, Edmonton’s load is around 1.4 gigawatts, the AESO said.

“Alberta has never seen this level and volume of load connection requests,” CEO Aaron Engen said in a statement.

“Because connecting all large loads seeking access would impair grid reliability, we established a limit that preserves system integrity while enabling timely data centre development in Alberta.”

As data centre projects come to the province, so do jobs and other economic benefits.

“You have all of the construction staff associated; electricians, engineers, plumbers, and HVAC people for all the cooling tech that are continuously working on a multi-year time horizon. In the construction phase there’s a lot of spend, and that is just generally good for the ecosystem,” said Kearl.

Investment in local power infrastructure also has long-term job implications for maintenance and upgrades, he said.

“Alberta is a really exciting place when it comes to building data centers,” said Beacon AI CEO Josh Schertzer on a recent ARC Energy Ideas podcast.

“It has really great access to natural gas, it does have some excess grid capacity that can be used in the short term, it’s got a great workforce, and it’s very business-friendly.”

The unaltered reproduction of this content is free of charge with attribution to the Canadian Energy Centre.

Energy

LNG Export Marks Beginning Of Canadian Energy Independence

Published on July 13, 2025

Todayville

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Marco Navarro-Genie

Kitimat’s LNG launch ends years of delay, weak policy and lost opportunity. This is a strategic turning point for Canada

Last week marked a turning point for Canadian sovereignty. On July 1, 2025, the tanker Gaslog Glasgow departed Kitimat, B.C., carrying Canada’s first-ever commercial liquefied natural gas (LNG) export to Asia. More than a shipment, it signalled the end of our economic vassalage to the United States and a long-overdue leap into global energy markets.

LNG Canada CEO Chris Cooper called it a “truly historic moment.” He’s right. The cargo left just days after the Kitimat plant produced its first liquefied natural gas and entered operation. The $40-billion megaproject, the largest private-sector investment in Canadian history, is now a fully functional Pacific Coast export hub. It can ship up to 14 million tonnes annually, and expansion is already being discussed.

Yet this success didn’t come easily. Despite being one of the world’s largest natural gas producers, Canada lacked an LNG export terminal, largely due to political delays, regulatory hurdles and lack of federal support. That this happened at all is remarkable, given nearly a decade of federal sabotage. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ideological hostility to natural gas meant rebuffed allies, stalled projects and choked-off investment.

Foreign leaders (from Japan and Germany to Greece) practically begged Ottawa to green-light Canadian LNG. Trudeau dismissed them, claiming there was “no business case.” No one in his caucus dared contradict him. The result: lost time, lost markets and a near-complete surrender of our energy advantage.

But the business case was always there. Kitimat proves it.

The U.S. has been exporting LNG since 2016, giving them a nearly decade-long head start. But Canada has something our neighbours don’t: the Montney Formation. Spanning northeast B.C. and parts of Alberta, it covers about 130,000 square kilometres and holds enormous gas reserves. Montney gas, abundant and close to tidewater, trades at roughly half the Henry Hub price, giving Canada a significant cost edge.

Location seals the deal. Kitimat, perched on the Pacific, bypasses the congested Panama Canal, a major chokepoint for U.S. Gulf Coast exports, and offers a shorter, more direct route to energy-hungry Asian markets. This geographic advantage makes Canadian LNG not only viable but globally competitive.

In 2024, Canada exported about 8.6 billion cubic feet of gas daily to the U.S. via pipeline. With Kitimat, we finally begin breaking that one-market dependency. We also start clawing back the price differential losses that come with being captive sellers. This is how you build productivity, strengthen the dollar and reclaim economic independence from Washington.

The economic ripple effect is massive. The Kitimat build created 50,000 jobs at its peak, generated $5.8 billion in Indigenous and local contracts and left behind more than 300 permanent positions. Provincial revenues are projected in the tens of billions. In an era of anaemic growth, this is real stimulus and has staying power.

Predictably, critics raise environmental concerns. But this critique ignores global realities. Exporting Canadian natural gas to countries still burning coal is not a step backward—it’s a practical advance. Natural gas is up to 25 per cent cleaner than coal when comparing full lifecycle emissions (that is, from extraction to combustion). Global emissions don’t respect borders. If Canada can displace dirtier fuels abroad, we’re part of the solution, not the problem.

And this is only the beginning. Cedar LNG and Woodfibre LNG are already under construction. Atlantic Coast projects are in the queue. We must now defend this momentum against bureaucratic delays, activist litigation and ideological roadblocks.

LNG is not a climate villain. It’s a bridge fuel that cuts emissions, creates wealth and helps fund our national future.

Marco Navarro-Genie is vice-president of research at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy and co-author, with Barry Cooper, of Canada’s COVID: The Story of a Pandemic Moral Panic (2023).