In a controversial statement that has sparked immediate backlash from Indigenous leaders across Canada, Infrastructure Minister Catherine McKenna clarified yesterday that while First Nations infrastructure remains “critically important,” her department does not classify these projects as “nation-building” initiatives.
“We have a dedicated funding stream for Indigenous communities that addresses clean water, housing, and community facilities,” McKenna stated during a parliamentary committee hearing in Ottawa. “These are essential services that every Canadian deserves, but they fall under our community development portfolio rather than our national infrastructure strategy.”
The distinction drew sharp criticism from Assembly of First Nations National Chief RoseAnne Archibald, who called the categorization “deeply troubling” and emblematic of the ongoing colonial mindset within federal institutions.
“When Canada builds a highway connecting Toronto to Montreal, that’s ‘nation-building,'” Archibald told CO24 News. “But when First Nations seek to connect their communities or secure basic infrastructure that other Canadians take for granted, suddenly it’s just ‘community development.’ This perpetuates the idea that Indigenous nations are somehow less than the Canadian nation.”
The 2025 federal infrastructure budget allocates $4.3 billion for Indigenous community projects over five years, representing approximately 8% of the total infrastructure spending. Critics argue this is insufficient given the significant infrastructure gaps in many First Nations communities, where boil water advisories, inadequate housing, and unreliable power remain persistent issues.
“The terminology matters because it determines funding priorities,” explained Dr. Hayden King, Executive Director of the Yellowhead Institute at Toronto Metropolitan University. “Projects categorized as ‘nation-building’ typically receive more robust funding, longer-term commitments, and are prioritized in budget discussions.”
The government’s Indigenous Services department reports that as of May 2025, 32 long-term drinking water advisories remain in effect across First Nations communities, despite the government’s previous promise to eliminate all such advisories by 2021.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Infrastructure Bank’s mandate specifically includes “transformative infrastructure” that “contributes to Canada’s long-term economic growth” – language that Indigenous advocates say should naturally include First Nations infrastructure development.
McKenna defended her department’s approach, noting that $750 million has been earmarked specifically for First Nations transportation networks in the latest budget. “This represents a historic investment in connecting remote communities to economic opportunities,” she said.
However, Nishnawbe Aski Nation Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler disagreed with this characterization when speaking with CO24 Politics. “Building roads to resource extraction sites is not the same as comprehensively addressing the infrastructure needs of our communities. The former serves Canada’s economic interests; the latter would be true nation-to-nation relationship building.”
The infrastructure gap between First Nations and non-Indigenous communities continues to widen according to a recent Parliamentary Budget Office report, which estimated it would require at least $30 billion to bring Indigenous infrastructure to standards comparable with the rest of Canada.
As this debate unfolds against the backdrop of Canada’s reconciliation efforts, one question remains pressing: Can true reconciliation exist when the fundamental infrastructure of Indigenous communities is still classified as something less than nation-building?
