Natural Resources Committee on March 24th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Good morning, colleagues. Let me call this meeting to order.

I will start by acknowledging that we are meeting on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe nation.

Colleagues, I will remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair. You know the routine.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted on Thursday, September 18, 2025, the committee shall resume its study of Canadian energy exports.

I would like to welcome our witness for this first hour, Mr. Natan Obed, president of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami.

Welcome, Mr. Obed. You will have five minutes for your opening remarks, after which we will open the floor to questions.

[Natan Obed, President, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami]

Good morning, everyone. It's an honour to be here.

Nakurmiik, Mr. Chair. I also recognize Vice-Chair Simard. I understand that Vice-Chair Stubbs is not with us today, but I recognize her as well.

Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami is the national representational organization protecting and advancing the rights and interests of Inuit in Canada. There are approximately 70,000 Inuit in Canada, the majority living in four regions collectively known as Inuit Nunangat. These regions are the Inuvialuit settlement region in the Northwest Territories, Nunavut as a jurisdiction but also as a self-determining region, Nunavik in northern Quebec, and Nunatsiavut in the northern part of Labrador.

Inuit Nunangat has 51 communities and encompasses roughly 40% of Canada's land mass and 72% of its coastline. It holds approximately 34% of Canada's fresh water. It must be understood that we are either owners or co-managers of 40% of Canada's land mass. We also, in the marine area, have provisions in our agreements that allow for co-management of that marine space. Canada is an Arctic state because of Inuit Nunangat, and our constructive arrangements with this nation-state underpin Canada's Arctic sovereignty.

Because of these facts and the ways in which we have worked with Canada to form a part of Confederation, we have a significant role to play in the conversation we are having today. Discussions about energy projects that are aimed at export are not new to Inuit. In fact, two of the four modern treaties that I referenced were highly influenced by such projects. The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, which now comprises Nunavik, was born from the government's decision to move forward with the James Bay hydroelectric project. The negotiations ensured an agreement in which indigenous rights were protected and upheld as government and industry looked for certainty on development.

Similarly, the Inuvialuit Final Agreement was heavily influenced by the Mackenzie Valley pipeline and the inquiry in regard to the pipeline's path to completion. The pipeline's inquiry recommendation to proceed only after settling indigenous land claims and conducting further environmental studies is foundational to how government and industry must engage, and it is also a foundation for the way Canada presents itself today.

As Canada looks to expand energy exports and invest in major infrastructure projects, the commitments made within these agreements cannot be forgotten or ignored. Further, initiatives that may impact Inuit or our lands, waters and ice must be conducted in full partnership in accordance with our modern treaties and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

In 2022, indigenous domestic income reached $60.2 billion, and indigenous entities were partners or beneficiaries in nearly 20% of Canada's electricity generation infrastructure. Inuit Nunangat provides a unique opportunity to develop and strengthen energy production and resource development. Despite this potential, there are significant infrastructure deficits that must be overcome. Further, greater investments in infrastructure and Arctic security will only increase the need to access energy, resources and critical labour. ITK has identified 79 priority projects for our communities, including enabling infrastructure projects that support the growth of energy export.

Currently, 89% of Canada's energy exports go to the United States. Whenever Canada considers diversifying its energy exports and thinks about Inuit Nunangat and its pathways, especially the marine pathways through Hudson Bay or Hudson Strait, we have to always understand that these are not just Inuit lands and waters. They are also essential places for our wildlife and for transit among our communities. In places where there is sea ice for up to nine months of the year, these are our highways, and the interruption of our highways is akin to the interruption of highways across Canada.

With the growing ambition of Canada to be an energy leader, especially in the creation of pipelines or new markets, we want to also be a part of the consideration of Canada's resources. Whether it's hydroelectricity, oil and gas or emerging energy technologies for the minerals for renewables or for uranium, Inuit Nunangat will be a key consideration for this country in the way in which it thinks about its energy future and energy exports.

I look forward to the conversation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you, Mr. Obed. It's great to have you for a full hour.

I know my colleagues are anxious to ask questions and make comments, and we are going to start with Mr. Clark for six minutes.

Oh, I apologize. Where did my...? The clerk stole my sheet.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

We'll start, as we always do, with the opposition. You see, I've been accused of bias already, but I'm not biased. I'm your neutral chair.

We have Mr. Malette, followed by Mr. Clark and then Monsieur Simard.

Mr. Malette.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you for taking the time to meet with us, Mr. Obed.

I believe in one of your statements you highlighted that none of the Inuit communities you represent are connected to the North American power grid, so my question is this: What are the economic and probably social consequences of this isolation for Inuit communities today?

[Natan Obed]

It's true. We have 51 communities, none of which are connected to any north-south power grid. Up until only a few years ago, it was almost 100% diesel power generation in our 51 communities. We have had some hydroelectric projects come online over the last five years, especially in northern Quebec, and we also have renewables such as wind and solar that now account for approximately 18% of our energy generation in our communities. We've talked a lot about bringing Inuit Nunangat into Canada. A way to do that is by ensuring that we have north-south links for essential infrastructure such as energy, as well as for ports, roads and aviation infrastructure.

We have a cost of living that is two to three times that of southern Canada. Also, the cost of energy is sometimes even more than three times that in southern Canada, as all of our energy has to be imported, usually by marine sealift and usually once per year, into our remote communities. This means that housing costs or just general costs for running businesses are almost too high to bear.

If you're paying thousands of dollars to heat your business every month during the winter, it makes it really hard for you to run a successful business. If you're looking to heat a private home.... Our median income is $70,000 less than non-Inuit who live within our homeland; it's $32,000 versus $100,000. This means that people are living in poverty or that people are food insecure.

Mostly it creates this negative loop where, for any opportunities or any advantage we might have for this country, Inuit cannot share incrementally in the growth of Canada in the same way that many other Canadians can, whether it be in growing the economy, our education or health outcomes, or the connectivity outcomes that many Canadians can think of when thinking about their own futures. With regard to our connectivity, we are largely connected through satellite technology, as of right now, largely through Starlink.

We're hoping that the Government of Canada can work with us on solutions to connectivity and these other challenges. However, right now it just means that Inuit Nunangat is almost an entirely different jurisdiction from the rest of Canada.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Thank you.

On exactly what you've said, in your view should the federal policy prioritize grid expansion into the north, or should they focus instead on localized off-grid energy systems, or both, for access in Nunavut?

[Natan Obed]

There is a project that is one of the 17 we have put forward to the Major Projects Office. It's the the Kivalliq hydro-fibre project, which would bring hydro from Manitoba to the central Nunavut communities, to places like Rankin Inlet, Arviat and those areas. We see that as a potential really positive step in ensuring that we can get our communities off diesel, but we'd also have the energy that is necessary to build our communities, whether it be through natural resource projects or just the natural expansion of our communities.

We also have been working with government grants to ensure that we have diversified our energy outputs. Even if we still have diesel, if we have wind and solar to supplement it, that gives us a slightly lower cost. Also, it gives us redundancy, so that we're not dependent on a single source.

All those things are important within our small communities, but we also understand the national importance for not only the production of energy but also for energy export. We remain willing and hopeful that we can play a significant role in doing that.

I'll also reference the M-18 project, which is a project in Tuktoyaktuk, or the area of Tuktoyaktuk, in the Northwest Territories, in our Inuvialuit region. It's just coming online. It has a 125-year life expectancy and it is also hoping to link in with the needs of the newly discussed forward operating site in Inuvik. We hope to also have energy solutions for the Government of Canada as militarization and sovereignty considerations appear.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Mr. Clark, I was sorry to get you a little excited earlier, but the floor is now yours for six minutes.

[Braedon Clark, Liberal, Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Obed, thank you so much for being here today. Over the course of this energy exports study we're working on, we've heard from the Assembly of First Nations, the Métis National Council and now from you. I think it's really important that we've heard from the three indigenous communities in Canada. Thank you for being here and for sharing your perspective.

You talked a lot about infrastructure. I think you mentioned 79 priority projects across the region. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your testimony seems to suggest that there's tremendous potential for energy production and energy exports, which are the focus of the study. The key to unlock that resource and that potential prosperity is enabling infrastructure independent in some ways of the energy. Could you give us some examples of what kind of infrastructure we need to to unlock in order to access the benefits and the resources that are there?

[Natan Obed]

I think this has been an essential question for the last 50 years. Canada's north, our home, Inuit Nunangat, has always been a reason to hope for the Canadian economy, especially for natural resource extraction. In many parts of our homeland, oil and gas really haven't been the key focus. It's often been critical minerals or deposits, like iron ore in Baffin Island or nickel and cobalt in my home area of Nunatsiavut. Now it's gold in the central part of Nunavut.

Moving forward, especially when we're thinking about renewable technology and nuclear, our homeland may have resources that will be essential for the production of those alternative energy sources, and those minerals may be exported as well. There might be export through Hudson Bay or Hudson Strait. Also there's the Beaufort Sea. There have been moratoriums on oil and gas exploration over the last 10 years. Perhaps in the future, that will change, and maybe that will be of strategic importance to Canadians and to the Inuvialuit.

At this point, we have infrastructure that largely has been built by Cold War interests, not by economic interests or community development interests. Most of our hub communities are based on the Cold War-era infrastructure built in the 1950s and 1960s by the U.S. and Canadian militaries to ensure the distant early warning sites were maintained and upheld. We've used that until now, but we now need the second phase of that north-south connection, whether it's through deepwater ports or through roads like in the Grays Bay road and port project, or through essential infrastructure like the Iqaluit hydro project.

All of those things can work together to ensure that our economies can merge and that we have an opportunity to benefit from whatever opportunities Canadians want to benefit from, but in a systemic way.

[Braedon Clark, Liberal, Sackville—Bedford—Preston, NS]

It's very interesting that you mentioned the Cold War legacy of the 1950s and 1960s. Now, for the first time perhaps, or in the largest way since that time, we're seeing a reinvestment in defence particularly in the north in Canada. One of the areas where I think there is potential from an infrastructure standpoint is on dual-use infrastructure.

From your perspective, what lessons can we learn from decisions taken in the past? Then, in the next five to 10 years, as we invest billions of dollars of new infrastructure money across the north, we can have infrastructure that serves not only a defence purpose, but also other purposes in areas where it makes sense, like energy exports that we've been talking about here.

[Natan Obed]

Canada's sovereignty, its territorial integrity, is symbiotic with Inuit self-determination and the sustainability of our people. We're the ones who know the land. We're the ones who live there. Virtually every square kilometre across Inuit Nunangat, our homeland, is used and occupied by Inuit. The Canadian military footprint is much less, I would say, and it is also seasonal. I see that as a strength, and it's an asset that Inuit are glad to share with Canada at this time.

When it comes to investment in the militarization of the Arctic, again, thinking about defence and security, these billions of dollars that have already been pledged and the billions more to come have to serve the purposes of not only protecting Canada from threats that come from an Arctic space, but also ensuring that we have sustainability of our communities. This could be done by ensuring that the water and sewer systems in the NOSH communities are upgraded to ensure that they are at a general standard. Airports and runways could be improved so that larger airplanes can land not only to resupply communities on a day-to-day basis, but also to respond to any national emergency when it comes. Deepwater ports could be improved to ensure that Arctic military operations or sealifts can happen in a more concise and cheaper way.

These are all things that help our communities, not to mention education and health care, which will be key considerations for integration in the coming years as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you both.

We will move to Mr. Simard for six minutes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Obed, we saw each other not long ago—if I recall correctly—when you appeared before the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development.

I want to talk about an aspect of the discussion that we had at the time. I told you about what we're doing here at the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. We're currently working on an energy exports study.

We have quite a paradox here, as you showed in your opening remarks. At a time when Canada wants to build infrastructure right in your area in order to export energy, we're facing an infrastructure deficit and completely unaffordable energy costs.

I don't want to add to the woes. However, I would like you to tell me how we can reconcile the two and how we can meet your vital need for infrastructure. This need for infrastructure could help Canada to export more energy. I would also like to know how we can provide affordable energy to the northern communities.

If you have any initial thoughts on the topic, I would appreciate hearing them.

[Natan Obed]

Each one of our 51 communities has thought about how to reduce dependence on diesel and how to lower energy costs in communities. Often our communities are in jurisdictions where there won't be major projects in a town of 1,000 people or 500 people. They won't just replace all our energy grid for, say, the 17 communities in Nunavik or the 26 communities in Nunavut. There just aren't the resources.

We've had to think about incremental positive change and how to diversify our energy supply within our communities through wind or solar. We thought about small nuclear and about hydro, but all of these potential solutions do come with costs that are new costs. We also don't imagine that we can just shut down our diesel power generation, because we are isolated. Each one of our communities is its own little island of energy capacity. We wouldn't want to leave our communities without any sort of backup, if at all possible.

Over the years, there have been many different conversations about how to make our communities more sustainable and to lower the cost of energy. The reality for people in these communities is that we're adjacent in many cases to massive hydroelectric projects or massive energy projects that are pumping 10,000 times more power than we would ever need every day, but we have absolutely zero access to it. We get no benefit from any of the benefits that come from those major projects.

That has been the frustration of many Inuit and communities for decades. Government is always thinking about how it can ensure that it does the most it can for small communities, but it also has limitations as well. Moving forward, we need to see a balance between the terms and conditions of these major projects and the benefits to the small communities, adjacent communities, to ensure that there is some level of equity and respect for the lands and areas in which these larger projects operate.

I'll give you an example. If fibre optic cable is going to be laid in strategic locations across our homeland to serve defence purposes, this is a perfect time to be able to provide equity to Inuit communities to ensure that fibre optic is provided to our small communities along the way. This is perhaps the cost of doing business or the cost of equity in this country.

Canada is a remarkable place. There's so much rural area in this country. It's not as if the federal government has never had to consider spending more money to ensure equity because of remoteness. We're asking now to be brought into that conversation in a meaningful way, whether it be connectivity or whether it be energy.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

You just said that we need to strike a balance.

Doesn't the major project that the government seems to want to embark on to build infrastructure to support trade corridors give you an opportunity to connect to energy sources? I'm thinking, for example, of critical minerals. However, if we want to develop these sectors, we'll need the associated infrastructure. This could be an opportunity for you.

I would like to hear your comments on another matter that has come to the committee's attention in the past. It concerns the much-vaunted Indigenous Loan Guarantee Program. We seem to be hearing about the current lack of expertise in this area and the shortage of people who can take all the steps involved. Moreover, many hurdles must be overcome to gain access to this type of program.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Give a quick answer, please, Mr. Obed.

[Natan Obed]

In relation to the loan guarantee fund, we're pleased that the Government of Canada has put aside such a large amount of money for major projects. We had hoped there would be a distinctions-based consideration for those funds so that there would be targeted funds for Inuit, first nations and Métis. That does not seem to be the case.

This is a new consideration from the Government of Canada. We're used to working with grant funding through budgets or other means. There needs to be a larger outreach from the Government of Canada and a larger consideration for how indigenous peoples can think about this loan fund in the suite of different supports that we have for economic development and the sustainability of our communities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you, both.

We're going to go to our second round. We'll have Monsieur Martel, Mr. Hogan and Monsieur Simard.

Go ahead, Mr. Martel.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Obed, thank you for joining us.

I would like to know what role you see for the Inuit regions in supplying Canada and its international partners with clean energy in the future.

[Natan Obed]

We have short-term and long-term hopes. The short-term hope was always that we would somehow get off diesel. That has been something we've worked on over the past 10 years, but we still have a very long way to go for our communities. We want to be leaders in climate action. Diesel is one of the most polluting ways to provide energy to communities. We hope we can still continue to work with the Government of Canada and with the jurisdictions in which we live to get off diesel.

We also have solutions for community energy needs that we hope to develop with the government. The two that I'll recognize again are the M-18 project in the Inuvialuit region, which would supply natural gas to communities in that region. It would also supply natural gas to any of the military's interests. There's also the Kivalliq hydro-fibre link project in the central part of Nunavut and the Iqaluit hydro project, which was just announced. These are just a few of the many different proposals or ambitions that our Inuit communities have to get off diesel and to provide sustainable and cheaper forms of power.

The role that we'd like to play within the export.... Obviously, right now we are not an Atlantic or Pacific route for energy export, but as the world looks north and as climate change makes the Northwest Passage and other areas of passage within the Arctic more feasible from an economic standpoint than ever before, we know that these complex considerations are coming to us. We would like to work directly with proponents, wherever the jurisdictions might be in this country, to ensure that if there are LNG or other oil and gas exports through our homeland, we have agreements in place and that we meet all of the necessary requirements under our land claims for environmental assessments, but that we are also meaningful partners in that work.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

You certainly provided some examples. However, I'm still wondering the following. How can we reconcile the ambition to increase energy exports to the world with the pressing need to reduce diesel dependency in Inuit communities?