Our North - SSE Policy Update Megathread

[Kirkhill]

Busy week ...

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/video/9.6664326

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/operation-nanook-nunalivut-2025-inuvik-1.7465762

Canadian Armed Forces performs arctic readiness exercises in Carcross

The 38 Canadian Brigade Group conducted arctic response exercises in Carcross to meet battle task standards needed to operate in far-north regions

www.yukon-news.com

U.S., Canada forces conduct military exercises in Greenland in sub-zero temperatures

Local temperatures were regularly below 0 degrees Fahrenheit and the coldest days reached minus 29 degrees F (-34 C), officials said.

www.cbsnews.com

And in unfinished business from last year

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/alaska-woman-sentenced-laser-attack-injured-canadian-military-1.7470256

 

[Kirkhill]

Disregard the headline.

The article doesn't suggest much questioning going on. More along the lines of how soon can you get here and keep us in the loop. And a call for dual purpose civil-military infrastructure.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/northerners-questions-conservatives-military-base-iqaluit-1.7455548

 

[Kirkhill]

The only threat that Canadians really fear is the US. But that has been the realm of fantasists like Richard Rohmer..... Until Donald Trump,

And I give you, Richard Rohmer at 101 on TVO.

 

[Kirkhill]

As the man says at the end - associations and alignments are more probable than membership.

 

[Kirkhill]

How Russia and China are seizing on Canada’s carelessness in the Arctic

Moscow and Beijing are attracted by the shiver of a weak flank in the Nato security alliance

web.archive.org

Spurred by the sudden crisis, a political arms race is developing. Ahead of national elections on April 28, both Mark Carney of the Liberal Party and Pierre Poilievre of the Conservatives have promised drastic investments in northern defence on visits to Iqaliut, a city of 7,500 people that is the largest in the Canadian Arctic.

“The world is changing,” intoned Mr Carney, the former Bank of England governor, who was born in the Northwest Territories, on March 18. “Our enemies are emboldened.”

‘The Arctic will humble you’​

“The biggest challenge we had was how to use our phones,” he said. In the minus 40 degrees C temperature, his hand went numb within 30 seconds of taking off his glove. “I couldn’t even grip the handlebar on my snowmobile.”

“You can be humbled very quickly,” he added. “But then humbled again by seeing a local kid walking around in a T-shirt.”

In this year’s operation, Chinook helicopters carried 650 soldiers from Canada, the US, Britain, Belgium, Sweden and Finland across the ice; rangers led long treks through shifting floats; and white-camouflaged troops buried themselves under the snow to survey faraway targets.

One morning Dr Lackenbauer sped by snowmobile out of the hamlet of Tuktoyatuk to a radar site on the edge of the frozen Beaufort Sea. A helicopter then picked up his team and dropped them 100km forward to carry out a second inspection at another radar system.

On a separate mission, it was “marvellous” to fly in a Chinook as it carried a giant sling full of soldiers’ sleds and other equipment, Dr Lackenbauer said – a delicate operation requiring input from different military branches.

“I would like more time up here,” one private from the southeasterly province of New Brunswick later told him. “And more time with the Canadian rangers.”

Colour Sergeant Ashley of the British army’s 3 ranger regiment was equally impressed. At one point his team was tracked by polar bears.

At another the rangers used “the prevailing wind to judge a route through featureless terrain”.

One month earlier, Mr Poilievre promised to build Canada’s first permanent military base since the Cold War in Iqaliut, and equip two new ice-breaking ships with missile systems – a design previously rejected on cost grounds by the navy.

I don't recall seeing the bit about Poilievre's ice-breakers being missile armed before.

And an interesting comment from one of Joe Biden's team on the Trump effect.

By providing Canada with the “kick” to invest in its own defences, Mr Trump’s aggressive approach may have a “silver lining,” said Iris Ferguson, the former deputy assistant secretary of defence in the Arctic under Joe Biden. Politicians now have a clear reason to justify previously unthinkable rises in spending. The recently announced increase of $4 billion in defence spending over the next five years is welcome, she said. But even the $50 billion planned over the next two decades is not an overwhelming sum, given how far Canada has to catch up.

For context, Russia built 475 structures across its Arctic military strongholds from 2014 to 2022.

In the past, Canada has “had a hard time executing on the things they’ve promised”, Ms Ferguson said, and “given their limited budget, they need to prioritise effectively”. The submarine fleet clearly requires an upgrade: Canada’s four Victoria-class diesel submarines were purchased second-hand from Britain in the early 2000s. Only one can be kept at “high readiness” at a time. None can fire at land-based targets.

But it will take at least a decade and tens of billions of dollars to fulfil Canada’s promise to construct a dozen under-ice submarines. Australia’s effort to build nuclear-powered boats, under the Aukus agreement, is bogged down. Quicker, smaller fixes could be found while pressing ahead with other projects.

“I think focusing on domain awareness and trying to ensure that they have the radar architecture where they can see the threats that are coming in.. [and] to be able to have command and control over the assets that they’re deploying would be one of the first things I would look at,” Ms Ferguson said. The over the horizon radar is a good start.

Ottawa seeking to open up​

Canada has previously shied away from working with Western allies in the Arctic. It feared eroding its claim to sole sovereignty over the Northwest Passage, the fastest route between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans when not frozen over. (In his first administration, Mr Trump declared the claim illegitimate, reiterating the historic American view that the waters are international.)

But now Ottawa is seeking to “open up with this Australia deal”, Mr Melvin said (Dr Neil Melvin of the Royal United Services Institute, a London-based think tank). To hedge against Mr Trump’s threats, Mr Carney has sought to establish fresh alliances with Britain and Europe. The EU is considering inviting Ottawa into its military procurement scheme. Britain could bring Canada into the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF), the alliance of 10 Arctic and Northern nations it leads that is already countering Russian spy ships and incursions by the dozen. “I think that would make a lot of sense,” said Mr Melvin.

Fresh approaches to international diplomacy are in the offing. In December 2024, Canada’s foreign ministry said it would appoint a new Arctic ambassador and two consulates in the region. It will also seek to resolve long-standing border disputes with the US and Denmark, permitting more focus on Russia and China.

Who knew? Canada's foreign ministry seeks to redraw artificial borders in the Arctic.

Concern over indigenous rights​

But there are delicate negotiations that will need to be handled on the home front, too. In the 1950s, Canada resettled thousands of Inuits so it could press its claim for sovereignty of the Northwest Passage, under threat from the US and Soviet Union. Many were removed from their parents. Some ended up in the unmarked graves found at residential boarding schools, the subject of a roiling scandal and profound shame within Canada.

Today, Ottawa is careful not to simply barge its way around First Nations’ lands. As he announced the expansion of Canada’s presence in the Arctic, Mr Carney promised $176 million for indigenous reconciliation initiatives. But the construction blitz coming to the region may well come into conflict, once more, with Inuit peoples: a recent editorial in the National Post warned that the critically needed new development “could have negative consequences – no matter how hard we mitigate – for wildlife and indigenous peoples”.

As it stands, construction projects must go through lengthy, arduous reviews to assess their impact on local communities. One road commissioned in 2019, connecting a mineral-rich area to a proposed port in the North West Territories, is only expected to begin construction in 2028, after the completion of the indigenous review process. “Projects need to be sped up,” the Post wrote, and assessments “need to be whittled down”. Mining rights should be opened up, and Arctic drilling too.

Upon learning of Mr Poilievre’s plan for expedited Arctic construction, PJ Akeeagok, the premier of Nunavut, sounded the alarm over native rights being trampled once again. “I look forward to Mr Poilievre’s explicit recognition that… his plans for the Arctic will be made in partnership with Northerners to reflect our rights, needs and perspectives,” he said.

Canada’s intelligence agencies have uncovered Chinese attempts to woo indigenous leaders, capitalising on discontent with the federal government.

To Mr Cowan, working with indigenous peoples is not a “charity”. Ottawa might have to move more quickly than before, but “they need to be our partners… Because I’m telling you, if you try to do anything without them, you’re f-----”.

In the Inuktitut language, Nanisivik means “the place where people find things”. Canada’s military appears to be belatedly finding its backbone. Ships, surely, will dock at the disused naval base before the passing of too many more summers.

 

[GK .Dundas]

I've been looking at the various parties stand on Defence issues. The only parties that seem have taken much an interest are the Liberals and oddly enough the Green Party.
Granted the Green's s use the first 3 1/2 pages are basically a rant as Orange man bad ,we gooder or something to that effect the other 1 1/2 pages meander all over the place being vague almost to the point of invisibility.
The Liberals on the other hand actually tell what they intend to do as well as actually having a real platform.
Although the Conservative don't have much down on paper (or perhaps I should say electrons as I viewing there website.) Pierre Poilieve has talked about a full blown airbase in the North.
Although he says he'll use Money from our Foreign aid budget..... Considering how large that budget is , I hope the Airforce doesn't mind living under canvas.
And the NDP really doesn't seem to have much either.
Mind this is the first election that I even seen Defence mentioned as much as it has been.
Even at the height of the Afghan conflict there was very little said.

 

[RangerRay]

I’ve been underwhelmed by the Tory defence program as well. I hope there’s more brought out at some point, but they appear to be more concerned with delivering tax cuts than addressing a more dangerous world.

 

[GK .Dundas]

I’ve been underwhelmed by the Tory defence program as well. I hope there’s more brought out at some point, but they appear to be more concerned with delivering tax cuts than addressing a more dangerous world.

Welcome to the Little Canada mentality.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I’ve been underwhelmed by the Tory defence program as well. I hope there’s more brought out at some point, but they appear to be more concerned with delivering tax cuts than addressing a more dangerous world.

Because they do their research and know that Canadians don't really care about the CAF as much as many other things...

Leger poll from last year....

Some of the key highlights of our survey about the Canadian Armed Forces…​

• Fewer than four in ten Canadians (38%) are confident that Canada has the military capability to support its allies in a serious military conflict if such a situation arises today, while 47% lack confidence in the military’s ability to take on such a task. However, more broadly as an institution, 64% of Canadians expressed confidence in the armed force (very/somewhat confident). This was ahead of other institutions such as the Federal Government, CSIS or Supreme Court.
• There is not a high level of confidence that federal government will increase spending to a NATO required 2% of GDP. One in five Canadians (20%) believe the government will reach its target spending within the planned eight years, while 45% think it will not. Over a third of Canadians (35%) are unsure. Conservative voters (55%) are more likely to believe the government will miss this target, but even 30% of current Liberal supporters feel the target will be missed.
• Mental health concerns (24%), lack of competitive pay (19%), past incidents of sexual abuse in the military (17%), and a perceived lack of national pride in the Canadian Forces (17%) are the main reasons Canadians cite for the Canadian Armed Forces recruitment challenges. Perhaps contributing to recruitment challenges is the fact just over 2 in 10 Canadians (23%) would be prepared to recommend a career in the armed forces to a family member or friend.
• Respondents to the survey were presented two options regarding major military equipment purchasing initiatives: Purchase from global sources at best price or purchase Candian manufactured equipment that promoted Canadian jobs. Respondents were divided on the best approach: 45% felt purchasing Candian made equipment was the best approach for the armed forces while 35% said purchasing globally was better. 19% were unsure.

Opinions Toward the Canadian Forces

Download the report to discover Canadians' opinions on the Canadian Armed Forces

leger360.com

 

[Maxman1]

Most of their policy is probably just not canceling existing procurement, like the P-8 and F-35, like Chretien did with the "Cadillac 'elicopters".

 

[RangerRay]

Because they do their research and know that Canadians don't really care about the CAF as much as many other things...

Leger poll from last year....

Some of the key highlights of our survey about the Canadian Armed Forces…​

• Fewer than four in ten Canadians (38%) are confident that Canada has the military capability to support its allies in a serious military conflict if such a situation arises today, while 47% lack confidence in the military’s ability to take on such a task. However, more broadly as an institution, 64% of Canadians expressed confidence in the armed force (very/somewhat confident). This was ahead of other institutions such as the Federal Government, CSIS or Supreme Court.
• There is not a high level of confidence that federal government will increase spending to a NATO required 2% of GDP. One in five Canadians (20%) believe the government will reach its target spending within the planned eight years, while 45% think it will not. Over a third of Canadians (35%) are unsure. Conservative voters (55%) are more likely to believe the government will miss this target, but even 30% of current Liberal supporters feel the target will be missed.
• Mental health concerns (24%), lack of competitive pay (19%), past incidents of sexual abuse in the military (17%), and a perceived lack of national pride in the Canadian Forces (17%) are the main reasons Canadians cite for the Canadian Armed Forces recruitment challenges. Perhaps contributing to recruitment challenges is the fact just over 2 in 10 Canadians (23%) would be prepared to recommend a career in the armed forces to a family member or friend.
• Respondents to the survey were presented two options regarding major military equipment purchasing initiatives: Purchase from global sources at best price or purchase Candian manufactured equipment that promoted Canadian jobs. Respondents were divided on the best approach: 45% felt purchasing Candian made equipment was the best approach for the armed forces while 35% said purchasing globally was better. 19% were unsure.

Opinions Toward the Canadian Forces

Download the report to discover Canadians' opinions on the Canadian Armed Forces

leger360.com

A lot has changed in public opinion since then. Trudeau was PM, Trump wasn't threatening Canada or cozying up to Putin, and Poilievre was headed for a landslide majority.

 

[Kirkhill]

I give you Moosonee as a starting point for an LNG terminal



View attachment 90584 View attachment 90587View attachment 90588

Natural Gas from the existing Trans Canada Pipeline at Cochrane, by existing rail from Cochrane to Moosonee and by barge from Moosonee to a floating LNG terminal then by tanker to Europe.

The barges would have to be built. The terminal would have to be bought or built. The tankers exist.

And Ontario gets a chunk of the Fossil Fuel Export dollars.

Now. How fast can you get those approvals in place?

Follow up with 2-300 km of pipeline along the rail and barge route to the terminal and also with a pipeline to Churchill or Port Nelson.

Today's announcement from Doug Ford -

A James Bay port -

In today’s letter, the premier says he would like the federal government to prioritize the Ring of Fire, nuclear energy generation, GO passenger train service, a new James Bay deep-sea port and a driver and transit tunnel expressway under Highway 401.

Doug Ford asks Mark Carney to prioritize 'nation-building' Highway 401 tunnel

Opposition critics say it would cost tens of billions of dollars and not truly address gridlock.

nationalpost.com

That works with both his Ring of Fire exploitation and his willingness to support pipelines. As I noted previously, natural gas is already at Cochrane with a line of communication (rail) established to Moosonee. A skeleton on which to build.



Also of note is the Manitoba connection (Nelson and Churchill)

Petition - Nee Sta Nan (all of us)

neestanan.ca

And Gray's Bay

....

And attention is being paid to some existing facilities

Canada names YK, Inuvik, Iqaluit as new northern military hubs

Yellowknife, Inuvik and Iqaluit were confirmed as the Canadian military's first northern operational support hubs alongside an apparent huge jump in funding.

cabinradio.ca

Infrastructure and Environnent - Canada.ca

Binder used by the Minister of National Defence to support their appearance on Mandate and Priorities in front of the House Standing Committee on National Defence.

www.canada.ca

Presumably Inuvik and Tuktoyaktuk will be looking for some love as well.

....

150 years of being ignored is not going to be reversed over night but allowing people to try, to find their own investors, and to support their efforts would go a long way to freeing up the Canadian economy.

 

[Kirkhill]

More of the same

Answer to a fractured economy: A northern corridor for trade, energy, and reconciliation

Opinion:

calgaryherald.com

 

[daftandbarmy]

More of the same

Answer to a fractured economy: A northern corridor for trade, energy, and reconciliation

Opinion:

calgaryherald.com

Too bad our infrastructure is about as resilient as a warm Mars bar


Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications

Critical transportation infrastructure vulnerabilities place lives and prosperity at risk, Senate report finds​

December 6, 2024

Canada is not ready to face the consequences of climate change on its transportation hubs and supply chain network, which threatens public safety and the country’s long-term economic prosperity, the Senate Committee on Transport and Communications said in its latest report.

Critical transportation infrastructure across the country is vulnerable to extreme weather events. In the East, a vital rail corridor connecting Nova Scotia with the rest of mainland Canada is in danger of washing away as sea levels rise and violent storms occur more frequently, putting at risk residents and the transportation of $35 billion per year in goods and services.

Out West, roads and railways servicing the Port of Vancouver — which sustains more than 115,000 jobs and enables the trade of more than $300 billion in goods each year — are also vulnerable to extreme weather events. To reduce its risk of sinking into the ocean, the Vancouver airport is raising the dykes that protect it from flooding, erosion and potential seismic events.

Meanwhile, the North — already lacking in transportation infrastructure — is facing new challenges brought on by melting permafrost that threatens road networks and airports. Forest fires have also damaged rail lines. The season for ice roads, which are vital to many remote communities and mining companies, has grown increasingly short.

The federal government must act urgently to strengthen Canada’s critical transportation infrastructure or risk catastrophe. The private sector is already engaged in climate change mitigation, but national efforts must not be siloed. The committee’s recommendations include that the government plan for and fund protection of transportation infrastructure and work with provinces, territories, municipalities, Indigenous communities and the private sector to ensure emergency plans and supplies are in place in case of an extreme weather event.

Critical transportation infrastructure vulnerabilities place lives and prosperity at risk, Senate report finds

Canada is not ready to face the consequences of climate change on its transportation hubs and supply chain network, which threatens public safety and the c

sencanada.ca

 

[lenaitch]

That works with both his Ring of Fire exploitation

It actually conflicts with his desire to explit the RofF, or at least doesn't support it. Ownership of the mineral rights in the RofF has moved around a bit but has always included refining in Ontario - the last decision I saw was Sault Ste. Marie (the other contenders were, if I recall, Sudbury, TBay and Timmins). There has never been a proposal to refine and ship directly from the RofF, and shipping unrefined ore would just be stupid.

 

[Kirkhill]

It actually conflicts with his desire to explit the RofF, or at least doesn't support it. Ownership of the mineral rights in the RofF has moved around a bit but has always included refining in Ontario - the last decision I saw was Sault Ste. Marie (the other contenders were, if I recall, Sudbury, TBay and Timmins). There has never been a proposal to refine and ship directly from the RofF, and shipping unrefined ore would just be stupid.

James Bay gives Ontario sovereign access to tidewater. The St Lawrence Seaway involves multiple partnerships - Canada, US, Ontario, Quebec, First Nations (Iroquois - Haudenosaunee), and various municipalities at choke points along the way.

SSM, Sudbury and Timmins are all closer to salt water by James Bay than by the Seaway, or by rail.

 

[FJAG]

James Bay gives Ontario sovereign access to tidewater. The St Lawrence Seaway involves multiple partnerships - Canada, US, Ontario, Quebec, First Nations (Iroquois - Haudenosaunee), and various municipalities at choke points along the way.

SSM, Sudbury and Timmins are all closer to salt water by James Bay than by the Seaway, or by rail.

We’ll, for half a year or so. Ice is a factor.

 

[lenaitch]

James Bay gives Ontario sovereign access to tidewater. The St Lawrence Seaway involves multiple partnerships - Canada, US, Ontario, Quebec, First Nations (Iroquois - Haudenosaunee), and various municipalities at choke points along the way.

SSM, Sudbury and Timmins are all closer to salt water by James Bay than by the Seaway, or by rail.

Unless Doug is pulling a Danielle, east of Cornwall, the St. Lawrence is all-Canadian. Unless he plans to 'nationalize' the RofF, the government isn't exploiting the resources, private companies are. The role of the government is to facilitate it with public infrastructure and stay out of the way of the market as much as possible. If the proponents and their financial backers intend to have a refinery in or near an existing city - where people would actually live and supply chains exist - somewhere further south, what would be the point of a port?

Minerals are a finite resource in any given location. The day a mine opens, its shut-down clock starts. There is a reason Ontario (and perhaps other provinces) doesn't allow new towns to be established near new mines; they were stuck with a town after the mine closes. Remote mines now have a temporary 'camp' with fly-in shifts.

I realize you are a proponent of arctic-via-Hudson's Bay shipping, and it has some merit, by having spent some time in the Hudson's Bay Lowlands/James Bay area, it is an extremely challenging and costly environment. Companies look to minimize costs, not maximize them.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Unless Doug is pulling a Danielle, east of Cornwall, the St. Lawrence is all-Canadian. Unless he plans to 'nationalize' the RofF, the government isn't exploiting the resources, private companies are. The role of the government is to facilitate it with public infrastructure and stay out of the way of the market as much as possible. If the proponents and their financial backers intend to have a refinery in or near an existing city - where people would actually live and supply chains exist - somewhere further south, what would be the point of a port?

Minerals are a finite resource in any given location. The a mine opens, it shut-down clock starts. There is a reason Ontario (and perhaps other provinces) doesn't allow new towns to be established near new mines; they were stuck with a town after the mine closes. Remote mines now have a temporary 'camp' with fly-in shifts.

I realize you are a proponent of arctic-via-Hudson's Bay shipping, and it has some merit, by having spent some time in the Hudson's Bay Lowlands/James Bay area, it is an extremely challenging and costly environment. Companies look to minimize costs, not maximize them.

I think a point that was brought up earlier is that the Nat Gas line runs through Cochrane. The new port in James Bay could be then potentially utilized as a LNG facility as well as a shipping hub for Ring of Fire minerals. Combined together they might top the balance in favour of a new port.

 

[lenaitch]

I think a point that was brought up earlier is that the Nat Gas line runs through Cochrane. The new port in James Bay could be then potentially utilized as a LNG facility as well as a shipping hub for Ring of Fire minerals. Combined together they might top the balance in favour of a new port.

Only if you build a complex refinery in the middle of nowhere. The Ring of Fire contains a host of minerals; nickle, copper, 'platinum group' and the big prize - chromium. Not an engineer but some can be refined in the same stream, and refineries for many already exist in Ontario - but not chromium. The plan of the proponents is to mine and process the other, more accessible minerals first as a way to fund development of the chromium deposits. As far as I am aware, there is no chromium refinery in North America and they require a lot of energy.

The pipelines (3 I think) carry gas to eastern Canada, so bleeding off any for overseas export would require additional capacity. Also, there has been talk about converting one of them to oil to get around environmental and sovereignty issues surrounding Line 5 which goes through the US. that would reduce NG capacity even further.

The main channel out of the Moose River into James Bay is measured in single digit feet and is constantly shifting. The waters of James an Hudson's bays and the islands are politically part of Nunavut.

Maybe we can get China to develop it. they like building fake islands.