Indigenous involvement is key

For most of the last century, big ideas about the North were developed in southern offices by people who rarely spent time in the places they were planning for.

Decisions were made far from the communities that would live with them. Consultants flew in, gathered what they needed and left. Construction crews arrived for a season and moved on when the work slowed. When the dust settled, northern and Indigenous people were expected to keep the projects running even though they’d had little say in how those projects were designed.

The story of the Port of Churchill — located on the western shore of Hudson Bay in northern Manitoba, hundreds of kilometres from the nearest major highway — reflects much of this same past.

It has long been Canada’s only deep-water Arctic port and the end point of a rail line that cuts through the territories of several First Nations. For decades, governments announced plans for the rail and the port, but the decisions behind them rarely centred the First Nations whose lands and workers make the corridor possible. This created cycles of starts and stops, and choices that did not reflect the knowledge of the peoples closest to the land.

The new Port of Churchill Plus strategy is an opportunity to break that history. It ambitiously goes further than setting out infrastructure priorities, outlining how the corridor will be rebuilt, governed, financed and shared over the long term. The foundation must reflect the First Nations whose territories and people anchor the project.

This shift is possible in part because Indigenous institutions have built real capacity over the past two decades.

Communities are bringing capital, skilled labour and governance structures. Indigenous procurement now exceeds $8 billion annually. The First Nations Finance Authority is financing major infrastructure across Canada. And Longhouse Capital Partners and other emerging Indigenous-led infrastructure organizations are developing financial tools that reflect the needs and realities of First Nations communities, rather than assumptions made from the big cities.

These institutions exist because communities had to solve their own economic and infrastructure challenges when Canadian society was not prepared to. They are accountable to local people and grounded in generations of responsibility to the land. They understand that a corridor like Churchill requires stable partnership and decisions that match regional realities.

Churchill’s location adds to that urgency, with its rail line crossing muskeg, permafrost and shifting terrain that demand long-term planning. Its port also operates within a short shipping window shaped by ice patterns on Hudson Bay. These realities cannot be managed from afar. They will require leadership from the communities living with them.

First Nations are positioned to help determine the structure of the corridor in ways earlier efforts never allowed. But the history of past projects still shapes how communities view these kinds of new commitments. Real trust will depend on who is involved, how decisions are made and whether the responsibilities and benefits are shared in a way that honours the people who have lived along this corridor for generations.

Economic reconciliation becomes real when it is reflected in ownership and governance. It appears in who signs the agreements, who holds equity, who guides procurement and who helps make decisions. When First Nations are part of designing a project like Churchill from the beginning, the work is steadier, more realistic and more aligned with the long-term responsibilities communities carry for their lands and people.

Churchill can demonstrate a different approach to building major infrastructure in this country. Its geography, its history and the First Nations whose territories surround it make it a clear test of whether governments have learned from a century of top-down planning. If First Nations shape the project from the outset, the corridor will be grounded in a structure that can endure.

The Carney government has made it clear that we are entering a period where large-scale projects have returned to the forefront of the national agenda. First Nations will be central to nearly all of them. Churchill gives the country a chance to show that we are ready to plan differently, and to build in a way that reflects the people who have carried the responsibilities of this land long before any national strategy existed. If Churchill is built with the right partners at the table, it can become an example of how this country grows from its history — instead of repeating it. That is the work in front of us.

Michael Fox is from Weenusk First Nation and is the president and CEO of Indigenous & Community Engagement.