Article content continued

The Haisla said yes to these projects because we have concluded that they will be built responsibly for our environment and will allow our people to flourish.

We said yes to these projects because we know they will provide employment, not only for ourselves but for the north.

Photo by CHAD HIPOLITO / THE CANADIAN PRESS

We said yes to LNG Canada and Coastal GasLink because the proponents and the provincial government have respected our expertise when it comes to our territory and our culture.

Haisla are not quick to offer endorsements for any projects when it comes to our territory. We firmly opposed the Northern Gateway bitumen pipeline proposal, which did not meet our conditions or our standards.

But we’re not talking about oil or bitumen. Coastal GasLink is natural gas, and it should not be confused. A natural gas pipeline will always be a natural gas pipeline.

I do acknowledge there is conflict between some hereditary chiefs and the elected council of the Wet’suwet’en regarding Coastal GasLink. I empathize with their situation, as Haisla have gone through similar issues in our past. But I urge outside interests to leave this to Wet’suwet’en to resolve on their own.

Given the large First Nations support with Coastal GasLink, I’m disappointed that the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs is choosing to stoke the flames of conflict regarding the Wet’suwet’en issue rather than stand in support of the 20 First Nations that have signed agreements for the pipeline.

Photo by Robin Rowland / THE CANADIAN PRESS

In fact, whether it’s the UBCIC or the Assembly of First Nations or the First Nations Summit, these groups seem content to rush to offer their perspective on what is happening within the Wet’suwet’en but have remained silent on all of the First Nations that are benefiting in real terms from these projects.