Canada wants faster projects. Modern Treaty Nations can build them.
Issue 04 | March 2026
When it comes to major projects, whether energy, mining, or transportation, there is a widely accepted view: you can accelerate permitting, but you can’t accelerate consent. That framing assumes consent is something you get at the end of a process.
Modern Treaty Nations are challenging that assumption. They are not just participants in projects. Increasingly, they are proponents, partners, land owners, and decision-makers rolled into one, and are shaping how projects are designed from the outset.
The Ksi Lisims LNG project in northern British Columbia illustrates how this shift is playing out at the front end of project design. The project is being advanced by the Nisga’a Nation as a proponent, not as a party being consulted. This changes the starting point. Decisions about location, design, environmental standards, and partnership structures are being shaped within a governance framework where the Nation is setting the terms.
The Gray's Bay Road and Port project in Nunavut reflects a similar dynamic in an Arctic context. The project is led by the West Kitikmeot Resources Corp, whose largest shareholder is the Kitikmeot Inuit Association, and is directly tied to Inuit priorities around access to resources, regional economic development, and sovereignty in the North. This is not simply infrastructure being proposed into a region. It is infrastructure being advanced as part of a broader governance and development strategy.
In Yukon, the Minto Mine illustrates how quickly this shift is evolving. In 2025, Selkirk First Nation became the first in Canada to assume ownership and operational control of a mine on its traditional territory. This was not an impact and benefit agreement. It was a government stepping into full control of an asset within its jurisdiction.
Modern Treaty Nations are shaping core elements of the projects in their territory: where development should occur; how infrastructure connects to broader land use priorities; what environmental conditions must be met; and how benefits are structured and shared. This changes how projects are built.
Design decisions that might otherwise be made within a proponent’s internal process are instead influenced early by governments that hold authority over land, resources, and regulatory pathways; and accountability to their citizens. Questions about routing, scale, timing, and ownership are not just technical refinements, they become governance decisions.
When that alignment happens early, projects move differently. When it does not, proponents find themselves revisiting decisions they thought were settled. To borrow and adapt a well-known political line from the 90s, it’s not the process or the timelines. It’s the governance stupid.
If Canada wants faster projects, it needs strong Modern Treaties
This isn’t theoretical. We’ve already seen how this plays out. When projects move without Modern Treaty Nations backing them they don’t move faster, they come back, get redesigned, or get stuck.
One example is the Mary River Iron Mine Expansion proposal in Nunavut. It advanced through years of technical review before running into fundamental concerns about marine shipping, wildlife, cumulative effects, and impacts on Inuit harvesting.
Those concerns were not peripheral. They were raised through a multi-year review led by the Nunavut Impact Review Board, involving extensive participation from Inuit organizations and Hunters and Trappers Organizations. The process was one of the most intensive in the Board’s history, with thousands of documents, multiple rounds of hearings, and sustained engagement across affected communities.
The Board ultimately recommended against the expansion, and the federal government accepted that recommendation. The process also showed how demanding treaty-based governance can be. Communities were expected to engage with highly technical material, often with limited capacity, and concerns about impacts led to protests outside the formal process.
The pattern is clear. In Ksi Lisims and Gray’s Bay, Indigenous governments are shaping projects from the outset. In Yukon, Selkirk First Nation is determining the future of an asset within its territory. In Nunavut, the Mary River expansion shows what happens when that dynamic is not resolved early.
If governments and proponents want projects to move faster in Modern Treaty areas, they have to start in a different place. There is no single process. Decisions are shaped across multiple governments and institutions, each with a defined role.
Modern Treaty Nations are not reacting to projects. They are setting priorities, taking ownership, and aligning projects with their broader objectives as governments.
For proponents, that changes the starting point. The first question is not how to get through an assessment, but who has authority and how decisions are made. For federal and provincial or territorial governments, speeding up internal processes will not be enough if treaty-based decision-makers are not built into how projects are structured from the outset.
Canada wants faster projects. The fastest will be the ones built with Modern Treaty Nations.
If you’re working on a major project in a Modern Treaty area and want to avoid costly redesigns and delays, message me.
The Modern Treaty Hub
In recent news:
The Mackenzie Valley Highway, Arctic Economic and Security Corridor, and Taltson Hydroelectric Expansion Project have all been advanced as federal priorities through Canada’s Major Projects Office, as part of a broader push to accelerate Arctic infrastructure. Each project is tied to improving connectivity, unlocking resource development, and expanding energy capacity in the North, with Indigenous governments playing central roles in how these projects are developed and governed. (Journal of Commerce)
Tla'amin Nation has signed an $80M deal to acquire a large tree-farm licence covering more than 1,500 square kilometres of its territory, giving the Nation direct control over how forestry is managed across a significant portion of its lands. While the land remains under provincial ownership, the licence enables Tla’amin to align economic development with long-term stewardship priorities, reflecting a broader shift toward Indigenous ownership and governance of major resource assets. (IndigiNews)
A youth-led cultural centre in Nunatsiavut is using a $1M Arctic Inspiration Prize to deliver language revitalization, land-based programming, and community services grounded in Inuit priorities. Beyond cultural impact, the initiative reflects a broader governance dynamic, with local institutions helping rebuild language, identity, and the foundations of self-government through community-driven programming. (The Philanthropist Journal)
Nunavut Tunngavik has moved its presidential by-election up to May 2026 and appointed an interim Vice-President to maintain leadership continuity following a vacancy earlier this year. The decision reflects the central role NTI plays in representing Inuit and implementing the Nunavut Agreement, with leadership stability seen as critical to carrying out its governance responsibilities. (NationTalk)
Sean Smith has been re-elected as Chief of Kwanlin Dün First Nation in Yukon, securing a second term with a majority vote and a renewed council. Smith emphasized using the Nation’s self-government authorities to advance housing, employment, and overall well-being for citizens, reflecting the continued focus on governance-driven economic and social development within self-governing First Nations. (CBC North)
Job postings:
Got news, a job posting, or a request for proposals you want to share? Message me “Posting” and a link so I can include it in the next edition.
