New Brunswick·NewMi’kmaw communities have not made a financial investment in a proposed natural gas plant and may never own a stake in the project, despite company claims to the contrary.Indigenous investment stake in project will depend on outcome of rights-impact assessment, group saysJacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Aug 21, 2025 5:00 AM EDT | Last Updated: 30 minutes agoBrotman Generating Station in Rosharon, Texas, has similar components and layout as the proposed project that ProEnergy would build in Tantramar. (ProEnergy)Mi’kmaw communities have not made a financial investment in a proposed natural gas plant and may never own a stake in the project, despite company claims to the contrary.ProEnergy, the U.S. company hired by N.B. Power to build the plant in Tantramar, has promoted an Indigenous ownership stake in the project, a claim repeated by Premier Susan Holt.”North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council is a minority equity holder in the project,” Landon Tessner, ProEnergy’s vice-president commercial, said during a public meeting in July organized by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.The company’s registration document for its environmental impact assessment also uses the present tense, saying the tribal council “is a minor equity partner” in the project.But so far that is only an option, and whether it ever becomes reality hinges on the outcome of a Mi’kmaq-led review of how the project affects their rights.”The Mi’gmaq Chiefs have not made any decision regarding investing in this project,” said a statement from Mi’gmawe’l Tplu’taqnn Inc., which represents the nine Mi’kmaw First Nations in New Brunswick.ProEnergy, the U.S. company hired by N.B. Power to build the plant in Tantramar, has promoted an Indigenous ownership stake in the project, a claim repeated by Premier Susan Holt. (Frédéric Cammarano/Radio-Canada)The statement said the proposed site of the gas plant is in “an area of high cultural, ecological and strategic importance” to the Mi’kmaq Nation.While it acknowledges that the plant would strengthen the provincial power grid and allow more renewable generation,Mi’gmawe’l Tplu’taqnn Inc., also known as MTI, says the project must go through a rights impact assessment it will lead.”If concerns about impacts are not meaningfully addressed, then the project does not get Mi’gmaq consent,” Raven Boyer, the organization’s communications co-ordinator, said in an email.She said the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council, an agency that handles economic development for seven of the First Nations, would “presumably” only exercise its option to invest if the bands consent.The option allows Mi’kmaw ownership of up to one-third of the project.WATCH | ‘There was a step missed’: Confusion over Mi’kmaw role: Tristan Jackson, the CEO of Nikutik LP, an investment fund created by the tribal council, did not respond to a CBC request for an interview.The lack of a current council equity stake was first reported by the New Wark Times, an independent news site in the Tantramar area.The notion of an Indigenous partnership in the project has been a key selling point for the gas plant, which has sparked controversy and opposition in the area.Premier Susan Holt has also cited it when answering criticism that N.B. Power has hired an American company to build the plant in the midst of a trade dispute with the U.S.”One thing we are encouraged with this project is it will be co-owned by a group of different First Nations, a group of different New Brunswick First Nations that have an ownership stake in this project,” Holt said on CBC’s Information Morning in the Summer on Aug. 1.One Mi’kmaw band, however, has declared its “unequivocal opposition” to the project.Elsipogtog First Nation warned in a statement in July that the project “risks igniting widespread Indigenous resistance” and demanded that it be cancelled.”If this project continues to move forward, know that it will be met with legal and direct action,” the statement said. “Our Nation is prepared to defend our land, our rights and our future.”Elsipogtog is one of two Mi’kmaw First Nations that are not part of the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council. It is part of MTI but has its own consultation body, Kopit Lodge.In July, ProEnergy’s news release about the gas plant quoted the tribal council general manager, Jim Ward, calling the Missouri-based energy company “a great partner.”Chief Terry Richardson of Pabineau First Nation, who supports the gas plant proposal, said there was “a misunderstanding on who was going to negotiate this.”He said he would have advised ProEnergy to contact the Fort Folly First Nation, the closest reserve to the project site, first for guidance on which organization to deal with.”I think somebody within North Shore — you know, communication lines — they felt that they were doing that on behalf of Fort Folly, whereas Fort Folly wasn’t really totally aware,” he said.Chief Terry Richardson of Pabineau First Nation, who supports the gas plant proposal, said there was ‘a misunderstanding on who was going to negotiate this.’ (Jacques Poitras/CBC)”The chiefs are members of the board [of the tribal council], so it’s important that the chiefs understand what’s going on, and I think there was just a step left out here where it was moving quickly, and it should have went, probably, to the board first.”He said he believed MTI’s statement reflected concerns from Fort Folly Chief Rebecca Knockwood. Boyer said Knockwood was not available for an interview.In emails obtained by CBC News, Jackson told Barry Rothfuss of the Atlantic Wildlife Institute, which is near the site, that the North Shore Mi’kmaq Tribal Council’s science and environmental organization, Anqotum Resource Management, did a “high-level, desktop review” of ProEnergy’s plan.The council, Nikutik and Anqotum “are not consultative bodies,” Jackson said in an email. “Our roles are only to negotiate business deals and do technical work.”He also said there had been monthly meetings between N.B. Power and MTI about the project, something the utility itself said at the public meeting in July.”We’ve provided monthly updates to each of these folks on the need for the project, where it was, what was being evaluated, the opportunity to accompany and support the monitoring activities,” said Matt Gorman, an N.B. Power environment impact specialist.Elsipogtog said in its statement in July that it was “categorically false” that it had been consulted.Richardson said he considers the gas plant a necessity that will provide baseload power backup for N.B. Power’s expanded renewables generation.The utility says this will allow for a net reduction of 250,000 tonnes in greenhouse gas emissions overall.The Pabineau chief called the confusing statements over Mi’kmaw ownership “a growing pain in how we go through that consultation process” that should not jeopardize the project.”I think it’s just ironing out how we’re going to do this,” he said.”If we’re looking at nation-building projects, it’s important that we have that down, how we’re doing this consultation, how we’re moving forward, so we don’t end up with stumbling blocks that cost money and cause bad feelings.”ABOUT THE AUTHORJacques Poitras has been CBC’s provincial affairs reporter in New Brunswick since 2000. He grew up in Moncton and covered Parliament in Ottawa for the New Brunswick Telegraph-Journal. He has reported on every New Brunswick election since 1995 and won awards from the Radio Television Digital News Association, the National Newspaper Awards and Amnesty International. He is also the author of five non-fiction books about New Brunswick politics and history. With files from Oliver Pearson and Hope Edmond
No Mi’kmaw ownership in gas plant yet, despite company claims
