Indigenous, legal, economic, environmental and health organizations warn Ottawa is treating a speculative LNG project as inevitable despite unresolved consent concerns and ongoing court challenges
VANCOUVER/UNCEDED xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (MUSQUEAM), Sḵwx̱wú7mesh (SQUAMISH), AND səlilwətaɬ (TSLEIL-WAUTUTH) TERRITORIES — A growing number of Indigenous, legal, economic, environmental and health experts and organizations are vowing to intensify opposition to the proposed Ksi Lisims LNG project and associated infrastructure following a new supply agreement between Canada and Germany, warning Ottawa is attempting to politically advance a legally contested project that has not reached a final investment decision, nor has met the constitutional duty to consult with affected Nations and title holders.
Both Ksi Lisims LNG and the associated Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (PRGT) pipeline continue to face significant financial uncertainty through the global LNG market, active legal challenges, and sustained opposition from Indigenous nations, hereditary leadership, and civil society organizations.
The Haida Nation has not consented to LNG tanker traffic through territorial waters, while Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs are advancing an Aboriginal Title case before the B.C. Supreme Court regarding approximately 50 kilometres of pipeline crossing Gitanyow territory without consent. Gitxsan hereditary leadership is also challenging provincial approval of the PRGT project, and Kitsumkalum First Nation has formally raised concerns regarding impacts to Aboriginal rights. No public confirmation of consent has been provided by Gitxal’aala (Kitkatla). Additional formal opposition has also been expressed by the Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition and the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs (UBCIC).
Internal opposition has emerged within the Nisga’a Nation itself, where two Nisga’a citizens have filed a lawsuit in B.C. Supreme Court alleging inadequate consultation and financial risk related to the project.
Organizations also warned that expanding LNG infrastructure risks increasing climate pollution and costs, exposing communities to industrial health impacts, and leaving Canadians vulnerable to long-term economic instability as global energy markets continue shifting toward renewable energy and electrification.
Earlier this month, LNG Canada CEO Chris Cooper acknowledged the economic uncertainty facing major LNG projects, stating: “It’s a very, very tough world out there to make LNG competitive,” adding that international investors in the Canadian LNG sector “want help to be competitive,” when referencing LNG Canada Phase 2, another project that lacks a final investment decision, and lacks Free, Prior, and Informed Consent from all affected nations/title holders.
This raises fundamental questions around why Ottawa is considering subsidizing projects that appear unable to pull in adequate private capital.
Today’s announcement comes as the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE), the Canadian Association of Nurses for the Environment (CANE), the Lax’yip Firekeepers and My Sea to Sky are holding community forums in impacted communities this week on growing health concerns associated with LNG flaring and industrial expansion. The latest public forum is being held tonight in Kitimat, home of LNG Canada, which has been experiencing ‘operational issues’, and is continually flaring an average of 40 times more gas than permitted.
The organizations are calling on the federal government to:
- Halt further advancement of the Ksi Lisims LNG project and associated infrastructure;
- Respect Free, Prior, and Informed Consent and ongoing Indigenous legal proceedings;
- Conduct transparent assessment of long-term economic, environmental, and public health risks;
- Prioritize investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and sustainable economic development;
- Align Canadian energy policy with domestic and international climate commitments.
The following organizations and experts issued statements in response to Wednesday’s announcement and are available for interviews:
“Canada’s LNG deal with Germany reflects a continued relentless push by the Eby government to ram British Columbia into decades of LNG expansion despite mounting evidence that this path threatens both our climate commitments and long-term economic stability. First Nations are already experiencing the devastating impacts of climate change firsthand, and we cannot continue gambling future generations’ prosperity, health, and wellbeing on an industry that places increasing pressure on our lands, waters, salmon, and ecosystems. LNG development also raises serious concerns regarding air quality, public health impacts, and the cumulative effects of industrial development on nearby communities. Canada cannot claim to be advancing reconciliation while continuing to fast-track massive fossil fuel projects without addressing the concerns and opposition of all impacted First Nations.” — Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
“A government announcement does not create Indigenous consent, resolve active litigation, or guarantee economic viability. Despite today’s political messaging, Ksi Lisims LNG remains a legally contested project that has not reached a final investment decision and continues to face significant opposition and uncertainty. Canadians deserve honest conversations about the legal, financial, climate, and public health risks associated with locking the country into another generation of large-scale fossil fuel infrastructure.” — Gwii Lok’im Gibuu (Jesse Stoeppler), Gitxsan Wilp Spookwx and Co-Executive Director of the Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition
“The federal government risks violating Canadians’ fundamental rights by authorizing and subsidizing Ksi Lisims and other fossil mega-projects that drive the climate impacts threatening communities across the country. Judicial decisions increasingly link climate impacts with governments’ laws and actions, and the human rights obligations our governments owe to people under the Charter and international law. The Supreme Court of Canada has recognized that climate change poses an existential threat to human life in Canada and the International Court of Justice has called out fossil fuel subsidies explicitly as a potential ‘wrongful act’ under international law.” — Charlie Hatt, Climate Director, Ecojustice
“Ksi Lisims LNG carries an underappreciated financial risk. It could see Canadian taxpayers subsidizing a redeployable American-owned floating LNG asset that could move to other jurisdictions, where LNG production is cheaper and expanding more aggressively. It raises serious questions about the long-term economic benefit and security of any public investment.” — Andy Hira, political economist, and Professor at Simon Fraser University
“Once LNG facilities are built, resources and money flow outbound, never to return. Ottawa’s laser focus on LNG is not in the national interest, especially when large-scale renewable projects are proven to deliver more per dollar in terms of energy sovereignty and circular economies. Solar, wind and hydro have far-reaching dividends that bolster the Canadian economy and reduce the pressures of inflation on average Canadian families.” — Omri Haiven, policy analyst, Clean Energy Research Group
“It is no surprise that Germany, a country with a failed fast-tracking bill that has stranded multiple LNG assets since 2022, is now seeking Canadian LNG through Ksi Lisims, a floating terminal in northwestern BC. From U.S. private equity interests with ties to the MAGA movement bottom-lining this project, to importing all materials for construction, and selling these resources internationally – there is nothing about this deal worthy of applause by any Canadian citizen. That is, unless you celebrate the violation of Indigenous rights and only care about profit over people.” — Willo Prince, Campaign Manager, Indigenous Climate Action
“Ksi Lisims, an American-owned project, is being set up with an inordinate amount of taxpayer support in an attempt to overcome the fact that it would not be independently financially viable. Access to federal subsidies and tax breaks, and provincial tax exemptions and electricity subsidies mean that Canadian taxpayers will be directly subsidizing a German state-owned energy company. A project like Ksi Lisims, which is economically dubious today, will only require more support as time goes on and demand for fossil fuels drops.” — Michael Sambasivam, Senior Analyst, Investors for Paris Compliance
“Supply agreements like this one are full of commercial uncertainty, and the fundamentals facing this project have not changed. Real energy security means reducing fossil fuel dependency, not deepening it. Every dollar of public support directed toward a Blackstone-backed floating LNG terminal is a dollar not invested in the affordable, reliable clean energy systems Canadians and our trading partners actually need. Expanding fossil fuel exports also increases Canada’s legal and financial exposure to growing climate-related harms.” — Thomas Green, Senior Manager, Climate Solutions, David Suzuki Foundation
“Health remains a top concern for people across the country. Yet the federal government is barreling ahead to expand LNG production in the face of growing evidence of its serious health harms, and with no comprehensive study in place on its cumulative health impacts. Expanding LNG production at scale risks putting communities at higher risk of cancers and other diseases, reducing healthcare access, and raising healthcare expenses.” — Margaret McGregor, MD, CCFP, MHSc, and representative of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
“Ksi Lisims is not a Canadian export success story waiting to happen. It is a high-risk, legally contested fossil fuel project that has failed for decades to attract capital. The deal does not change the core economic, environmental, and reconciliation concerns surrounding Ksi Lisims.” — Alex Walker, Energy Analytics Program Manager, Environmental Defence
“Even with this announcement, Ksi Lisims LNG still lacks long-term buyers for the majority of its proposed production capacity. Neither private investors nor global gas companies are willing to take that risk, so why is Ottawa making people in Canada?” — Tracey Saxby, Executive Director, My Sea to Sky
“This project was proposed for Canada’s West Coast because of its proximity to Asia. The idea of shipping gas 18,000 kilometres, from the Nass River, through the Panama Canal to ports in Germany shows just how quickly Asian demand for LNG is collapsing. Rather than bail out this American-owned terminal with taxpayer money, the Canadian government should invest in projects that will lower our cost of living and benefit our communities long-term.” — Kai Nagata, Energy Campaigner, Dogwood
“Today’s announcement does not change the reality that Ksi Lisims LNG remains mired in legal challenges, environmental and health concerns, and is opposed by some Indigenous communities that will be impacted by the project. Rather than repeatedly rolling out the red carpet for fracked gas projects, the federal government should be laser focused on investing and supporting projects that actually improve the lives of people — clean energy, housing, transit and health care.” — Isabel Siu-Zmuidzinas, Climate Campaigner, Wilderness Committee
“This is no cause for celebration. The yet to be built Ksi Lisims LNG terminal and the 900km fracked gas pipeline to supply it are financially risky, environmentally destructive, and tied up in Indigenous community-led court challenges. We should be announcing German investments in future-proof renewables, not doubling down on the dirty gas exports of the past.” — Richard Brooks, Climate Finance Director, Stand.earth.
” Ksi Lisims LNG will lock in decades of planet-heating pollution while doubling down on an economic model held hostage to the whims of the world’s volatile powers. We cannot build a prosperous future on that instability. A rapid transition to clean, renewable energy is the only path that delivers both a livable climate and a resilient economy for Canadians and for the world. We are calling on governments to halt this project, uphold Indigenous rights and ongoing legal proceedings, and invest in the clean energy future we actually need.” — David Quigg, Organizer, Sierra Club BC
“Last week Canada signed a UN General Assembly resolution endorsing the ICJ’s advisory opinion on climate change, and therefore agreed that human rights law applies to decisions which affect the climate. So they can no longer hide behind just counting emissions under the UNFCCC and Paris frameworks. Canadians are dying from climate impacts, and the government will have to justify funding the climate impacts of Ksi Lisims.” — Patrick Canning, Legal Counsel for My Sea to Sky
-30-