Under a Conservative Party of Canada, the Ring of Fire’s permits would be greenlit within six months and the federal government would contribute $1 billion to build an access road.
So described Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre during a media event at Pioneer Construction on Wednesday morning.
“We’ve known about this place for a long time. Why are there no shovels in the ground? Why are there no paycheques in people’s pockets?” he asked, blaming Liberals for doing “everything they could to block this project.”
If elected, Conservatives would “unleash the production of chromite, cobalt, copper, nickel, platinum and others,” he said.
The long-discussed Ring of Fire is approximately 540 kilometres northeast of Thunder Bay. It covers approximately 5,000 square kilometres of land and is home to almost 30,000 active mining claims held by 15 companies for such things as chromite, cobalt, nickel, copper and platinum.
It’s inaccessible to equipment due to a lack of road access.
During a campaign stop last month during the provincial election cycle, Premier Doug Ford similarly promoted the Ring of Fire’s potential in Sudbury, pledging that, if elected (which they were), the Progressive Conservatives would push the project forward.
“Take us to court, do whatever you want, we’re moving,” Ford said at the time. “Enough’s enough, it’s been 20 years.”
For Poilievre, the Ring of Fire means opening up critical minerals “the world is desperate for” and would help “turn dollars to dictators into paycheques for our people.”
The Conservatives’ $1-billion pledge would go toward Canada’s two-per-cent NATO defence pledge requirement, Poilievre said, since the critical minerals are needed.
“We’ll make this money available by cutting foreign aid, bureaucracy, consultants and other Liberal waste to free up money for productive investments,” he said. “Only a Canada-first Conservative government will rapidly approve projects like these.”
During Wednesday’s appearance, Poilievre also pledged to repeal Bill C-69, which the federal government billed as aiding in creating a “cleaner environment,” and “stronger economy” by streamlining environmental review processes and consultations. Poilievre described it as grinding economic development to a halt.
Instead, Poilievre pledged to ensure, “Rapid permission to our companies to build more pipelines, more natural gas exports, more data centres, more mines and more projects of all kinds across this country,” and do away with the Liberals’ “keep-it-in-the-ground ideology.”
Poilievre made no mention of environmental concerns during Wednesday’s media event, and the four questions his team allowed from journalists, with no follow-ups, didn’t address the environment either (Sudbury.com was not allotted a question).
Sudbury Conservative candidate Ian Symington was in attendance.
After the event Symington answered Sudbury.com’s question on whether environmental protections would be affected by the Conservatives fast-tracking the Ring of Fire.
Although admittedly short on details, he said, “I suspect we’re never going to sacrifice the environment. What we’re trying to do is eliminate red tape and bureaucracy because a lot of these things are just dragging on for no good reason other than people are holding them up.”
When it comes to opening up resources, he said critical minerals such as those found in the Ring of Fire will help with battery-electric vehicle production.
As for reducing emissions, he said the goal should be reducing global emissions, not just those in Canada.
“If we can get our natural gas to countries that are still heavy coal emitters … you can bring global emissions down,” he said. “We profit, we can then take those profits and spend them in proper areas of diversifying our grid.”
Sudbury.com is seeking responses to Poilievre’s Ring of Fire pledges from local federal MPs and candidates.
Poilievre is hosting a rally at the Radisson Hotel in downtown Sudbury tonight. Doors open at 6 p.m. A counter-rally is being organized by critics to take place outside of the hotel. On their Facebook events page, these critics contend that Poilievre’s “Canada First” claims are inaccurate, and that “he doesn’t care about anything except making his rich friends richer.”
Sudbury.com will be covering both events.
Poilievre limits media time to four questions, no follow-ups
During Wednesday’s media event, Poilievre took four questions from journalists and did not allow any follow-ups.
This was to be the day’s only media availability.
Poilievre’s media conference at Pioneer Construction started shortly before 10 a.m., and he is hosting a “Bring it Home Rally” at the Radisson Hotel in downtown Sudbury tonight. Doors open at 6 p.m.
During the Wednesday morning media event, a media handler held the microphone as those journalists he selected asked questions.
Sudbury.com did not get any questions in, though other reporters asked the following:
- Lyndsay Aelick, CTV: Would you support processing of these critical minerals right here in Sudbury? (Yes)
- Harold Carmichael, The Sudbury Star: You've admitted to your political styles a little too blunt, too direct, will you soften up your amendment style in the weeks and months coming up to the next election?. (No)
- Inès Rebei, ONFR-TFO (translated from French): If you become Prime Minister, will you name a Minister designated for Official Languages, compared to what Mark Carney has done with his government? (Yes)
- Radio-Canada (translated from French): You spoke about President Trump's comments on his preferences in Canadian politics. According to you, do these comments demonstrate foreign interference? (Trump had said he’d prefer to work with LIberals. There was no direct answer from Poilievre, but he said that Trump wants the Liberals in power because they make Canada “weak.”)
The questions Sudbury.com would have asked if given the chance included:
- In breaking ground on the Ring of Fire, which specific processes currently holding it up would the Conservatives bypass or fast track to speed things up? How would Conservative environmental measures and Indigenous consultations compare to those undertaken by the Liberals?
- You’ve pledged to “axe the tax,” including most recently on industrial emitters and consumers. The Canadian Climate Institute called industrial carbon pricing “the most important policy Canada has for cutting carbon pollution and creating a competitive clean economy.”
- What do you plan to put in place to replace the carbon tax on industrial emitters you plan on axing to make up for the emissions reductions that industrial carbon pricing would have otherwise brought?
- Whose expertise are you relying on to inform these decisions?
- You’ve declined to pledge emissions reduction targets and would instead help other countries reduce their emissions. Why do you oppose Canada setting emissions targets?
- Your spokespeople called the Liberal caucus meetings at the Sudbury Holiday Inn in August 2024 “Lavish” and “Swanky.” You hosted a rally at the Sudbury Holiday Inn. You’re at the Radisson tonight. What qualifies as “lavish” and “swanky”?
- Given that it spurred ridicule, do you consider this media statement by Conservative spokesperson Sebastian Skamski to have been a mistake?
- Earlier this year, the NDP criticized you for a private fundraiser hosted by Sharon Stern and Aaron Stern at their Westmount “mansion.” Given that they own for-profit hospitals in the United States, is this evidence that you will push for private health care?
- Do you have any qualms with a two-tier health-care system in which those with money receive superior care?
- You said trans women do not belong in women’s spaces, thereby denying the existence of transgender people. Amnesty International called these comments a “dangerous distraction.” Do you regret these comments?
- What kind of message do you believe this gives transgender Canadians?
- You’re “perpetuating myths” about supervised consumption sites, to quote Prairie Harm Reduction. You called supervised consumption sites “drug dens” even though they’re a clinical setting. Proponents can cite numerous reports and studies to support their positive impacts. What evidence do you have to support your opposition to supervised consumption sites?
- Are you going to get your security clearance or remain in the dark on such matters as foreign interference allegations?
-With notes from Kaitlyn Lemay.
Tyler Clarke covers city hall and political affairs for Sudbury.com.