Ottawa has pledged tens of billions of dollars for Arctic defence infrastructure over the next decade, but Yukon Premier Currie Dixon says none of it has shown up on the ground in his territory.
In a wide-ranging conversation, Dixon laid out his frustration at being left out of a major prime minister's announcement in March, the state of consultation with the federal government, and what he sees as the biggest gap standing between Ottawa's plans and any real benefit for Yukoners.
Dixon was careful to frame his criticism as a call for inclusion rather than opposition to the buildup itself. He said he has pushed Ottawa for years to meet its NATO obligations by investing in Arctic security and sovereignty infrastructure, and that he is glad to see billions flowing into the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. His concern, he said, is that a third of the North has so far been left out of the conversation entirely.
The premier also pointed to the Dempster Highway, the only road link between southern Canada and the Arctic Ocean, as a concrete example of the dual-use infrastructure he argues Ottawa needs to fund if it wants a serious military presence in the region.
The following is one segment of a three-part series interviewing the Northern premiers. Read about Nunavut’s concerns about Inuit inclusion here. Meanwhile. the money seems to be flowing in the Northwest Territories.
What does that investment actually look like on the ground in your territory right now?
We're very supportive of the investment and the commitment the federal government's made. But we haven't seen any direct investment in the Yukon yet. We've heard the big commitments, we've seen significant promises, and unfortunately we just haven't seen that materialize into any real action in the Yukon yet. When the Prime Minister was in Yellowknife in March, he made a very significant announcement about investment in the Canadian North, and we were largely left out of that. You can't transform the North and the Arctic by ignoring a third of it.
Do you feel you're being consulted on what role you could play, or what specific needs you could provide?
Unfortunately, I think the answer there is no. The federal government's outreach in the Yukon has been a bit sporadic, and it hasn't been directly with the senior levels of the Yukon government. We certainly aren't consulted about exactly where they're spending the money and what we think is a good idea for them to invest in. At no point has the federal minister called me up and asked what I think about it.
What's the biggest strain on local infrastructure from all of this?
The Dempster Highway, the only road that connects the south to the Arctic Ocean, is significantly deteriorated. At least a third of it is in very poor condition, and about two thirds are passable but not great. If you're going to spend billions of dollars in a community like Inuvik, you can't do that without upgrading the road, and if you ever needed to expand it for significant military application, that road would need substantial upgrades. You also need power to keep the lights on and healthcare services available for military or civilian personnel living in the North as a result of that activity.
How much of the economic benefit do you expect to stay in the North?
A lot of that investment is going to come through southern businesses and southern communities and be imposed into the North. We think that's acceptable to some degree, but we hope Indigenous communities, northern businesses and territorial businesses can benefit from those investments too. The best way to do that is to start talking to us and plan together on how we can do some of this.
Does Ottawa's definition of Arctic sovereignty match how you'd define it for your territory and residents?
Yes and no. It's obviously imperative that Canada be able to enforce and secure our sovereignty in the North, and that includes military assets and infrastructure. But another important component is healthy and robust communities in the North. A very important part of our sovereignty are the people that actually live there, and ensuring they have healthy, thriving communities is a really important component of sovereignty.
If you had one specific change to how the federal government plans or delivers this investment, what would it be?
I wouldn't be doing my job if I didn't put my hand up and say the Yukon needs to be included in that as well.
What do you talk about with the other two premiers in the North?
Each of us have our own unique features in our territories, but there's a lot of alignment. The three territorial premiers meet regularly. We had our Northern Premiers' meeting this past June in Hay River, Northwest Territories, and issued a communiqué following that in late June outlining our collective position on a range of issues, including Arctic security and sovereignty. We've always collectively called on the federal government to provide clear and consistent communication with us, and to engage both the territorial governments and First Nations and Indigenous governments as they make these investments.
Anything else you want to add?
When the Prime Minister made that announcement in March, he announced $34 or $35 billion dollars in spending. Our three territories' combined GDPs are about $11-billion dollars. So we're talking roughly triple the combined GDPs of our three territories, in a single press release.
