\u201cI think a few of those companies are starting to say that they\u2019re very serious about making an investment in Manitoba,\u201d Kinew said in an interview earlier this month. \u201cThat would lead to infrastructure being built to do more export on Hudson Bay, which would be huge for our provincial economy.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Port of Churchill Plus proposal envisions a new resource corridor capable of transporting Western Canada\u2019s natural resources, including liquefied natural gas, oil, mineral ores, potash, fertilizer and agricultural products, to Hudson Bay, where they can be shipped to international markets.\u00a0<\/p>\n
It would likely include an upgraded northern railway, an all-season road, year-round shipping routes and a fossil fuel pipeline.<\/p>\n
This is far from the first time the near-century-old port has garnered attention from politicians keen to see it reach its potential as an international trade hub. But where several attempts to grow the capacity of the historic grain port fizzled out, this latest proposal is gaining steam.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
Federal and provincial governments have already committed more than $500 million combined for infrastructure upgrades and preliminary research. A study<\/a> to gauge industry interest in the project is underway, as is a study of the operational requirements to allow for year-round traffic in Hudson Bay. Manitoba has inked a memorandum of understanding with Alberta, Saskatchewan, British Columbia and the territories to collaborate on \u201cnation-building infrastructure\u201d and a west-to-east economic corridor.\u00a0<\/p>\n Past efforts to expand the port and diversify its trade potential were hampered by a lack of public and private investment. The remote location, difficult terrain and short ice-free shipping season make the port and associated Hudson Bay Railway particularly expensive.<\/p>\n \u201cIt wasn\u2019t seen as a priority,\u201d Barry Prentice, professor of supply chain management at the University of Manitoba, says in an interview.\u00a0<\/p>\n But threats to Canada\u2019s Arctic sovereignty and tariffs from its largest trade partner<\/a> have \u201cstirred up the pot a bit,\u201d he says. At the same time, new technologies and the realities of a rapidly changing northern climate have created opportunities to improve the economics of an Arctic trade route.<\/p>\n \u201cThe stars are kind of aligning so that Churchill again becomes a viable and maybe very attractive route,\u201d Prentice says.<\/p>\n While experts are divided on whether the plans for a northern Manitoba resource corridor will come to fruition this time around, they agree the Arctic is changing \u2014\u00a0and it\u2019s possible for Churchill to take on a more robust role in national trade.<\/p>\n From a \u2018neglected port\u2019 to a new vision for Churchill<\/p>\n When Arctic Gateway Group, a consortium of 29 First Nations, 12 local governments and corporate investors, purchased the port and the Hudson Bay Railway from its former American owners in 2018, the \u201cneglected\u201d infrastructure was in disrepair, president and chief executive officer Chris Avery says.<\/p>\n The railway washed out in 2017, cutting off communities in Manitoba and Nunavut that relied on the line for supplies and transportation. The rail line\u2019s foundation was sinking in the muskeg, culverts were blocked, rail ties hadn\u2019t been replaced. The port itself had rotting timber, exposed rebar and sinkholes in the wharf deck, Avery says. It had been shuttered in 2016.\u00a0<\/p>\n Led by Churchill Mayor Mike Spence and several northern Indigenous communities, Arctic Gateway Group thought: \u201cEnough is enough. We need to take back control of this asset that communities are dependent on, and by the way, even the country is dependent on,\u201d Avery explains.<\/p>\n The group secured government funding to repair and upgrade the existing infrastructure. Under the new ownership, port activity resumed: grain and northern supply shipments restarted in 2019 and the first critical mineral shipments<\/a> in more than 20 years set sail in 2024.\u00a0<\/p>\n Momentum for the port swelled the following year, in the wake of U.S. President Donald Trump\u2019s threats of Canadian annexation and skyrocketing tariffs. Canadian leaders stressed a need to strengthen Arctic sovereignty and open new avenues for trade; Kinew turned to the opportunity presented by the northern port.<\/p>\n \u201cThe whole [situation] with Trump and the U.S. has changed a lot of our thinking about the economy,\u201d Kinew said<\/a> last spring. \u201cWe\u2019ve got minerals, we\u2019ve got oil and gas. We\u2019ve got all sorts of great goods that we want to export.\u201d<\/p>\n During a meeting between premiers and Carney in June to pitch nation-building projects for a first-of-its-kind Major Projects Office, Kinew said<\/a> a trade corridor to Hudson Bay could include a pipeline to carry Canadian oil and gas products, hydrogen, potash or other natural resources.\u00a0<\/p>\n And now Port of Churchill Plus has landed on the Major Projects Office\u2019s list of transformative strategies<\/a>, announced in September.\u00a0<\/p>\n Avery says the consortium\u2019s vision is to support Canada\u2019s efforts to diversify trade, assert northern sovereignty and advance Indigenous economic reconciliation by becoming \u201ca major port.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n To get there, it will need four significant pieces of infrastructure.<\/p>\n The existing railway needs to be upgraded to class one standards, meaning it can carry rail cars with a maximum weight of almost 130,000 kilograms. While that\u2019s only about a seven per cent increase compared to current weight limits, \u201cour customers tell us that seven per cent makes a big difference.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n On top of rail, Churchill will need all-season road access to allow shippers and customers easier access to the port, with the added benefit of linking several northern communities that currently rely on an increasingly unpredictable winter-road network. Churchill, 1,000 kilometres north of Winnipeg, is only accessible by rail or plane. The provincial highway network currently ends near Gillam, Man., almost 300 kilometres southwest of the port town.<\/p>\n The port itself will need to accommodate year-round shipping, Avery says. Right now, it\u2019s operational for about four months per year when the ice cover on Hudson Bay is at a minimum. Due to climate impacts, that\u2019s expected to change<\/a> in the coming decades, but Churchill will need icebreakers in the meantime.\u00a0<\/p>\n Finally, to capitalize on \u201cthe No. 1 Canadian export, which is energy products,\u201d Avery says Manitoba will need a way to get those products to northern tidewater. While the company acknowledges oil and gas products can be shipped by rail (the port already transports diesel and other fuels as part of its northern re-supply shipments), he says \u201ceverything is being considered, including pipelines.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n At least two companies have proposed pipeline routes from Alberta\u2019s oilsands to Hudson Bay.<\/p>\n NeeStaNan, a Manitoba and Alberta-based company with First Nations owners, has proposed a \u201cutility corridor\u201d to Port Nelson, Man., a site 300 kilometres southeast of Churchill, that would be capable of exporting liquefied natural gas. The company\u2019s website says it has secured support from two Canadian natural gas producers and is exploring the feasibility of exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) via a facility at the mouth of the Nelson River.\u00a0<\/p>\n The other, an Alberta-based organization called Western Energy Corridor, proposes developing a link between Churchill and Western Canada that could contain \u201cone or more combinations of a natural gas transmission system, an oil pipeline or a high-voltage electric transmission system.\u201d The company\u2019s website states it has mapped out a 1,560-kilometre corridor and drafted documents for initial regulatory filing.<\/p>\n Is a fossil fuel pipeline really feasible in the north?<\/p>\n Past proposals to pipe Alberta oil to Manitoba\u2019s northern coast have failed. According to Heather Exner-Pirot, director of energy, natural resources and environment at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, that\u2019s at least in part because: \u201cThe economics of a seasonal port are terrible.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe question isn\u2019t: \u2018Has a pipeline ever been built this far north?\u2019 \u201d she says. \u201cThe question is: \u2018Can you put this infrastructure in a seasonal port and still get a return, still attract investment and still attract shippers \u2014 does it make economic sense?\u2019 \u201d<\/p>\n As of right now, Exner-Pirot says, the answer is no.\u00a0<\/p>\n What makes Churchill unique isn\u2019t just that the port is in deep Arctic waters. Similar ports exist in Alaska, Greenland, Norway and Russia. But those are located in places with year-round access to open water, she says; Hudson Bay, by comparison, is covered in ice about seven months per year.\u00a0<\/p>\n Typically, these part-time ports are used for what Exner-Pirot calls destination shipping. Goods are shipped in and out of a specific location like a community or a mine over the course of a much shorter shipping season.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s more expensive, it\u2019s logistically constrained and people can only sell \u2026 or receive their goods for a few months a year,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n Exner-Pirot says there is \u201cabsolutely not\u201d an economic case for building an oil or gas pipeline to Churchill, where the shipping season is about four or five months long.<\/p>\n \u201cIf you build an oil pipeline over 1,000 kilometres, you better be using it every day,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n Pipelines take decades to build and cost billions; they also face significant regulatory hurdles and often staunch opposition from Indigenous communities, environmental advocates and residents. Liquefaction facilities for natural gas, which Kinew has floated as a possibility for Churchill, aren\u2019t cheap either \u2014 a recently completed facility in Kitimat, B.C., cost $18 billion<\/a>.<\/p>\n Opposition to pipeline development, alongside Impact Assessment legislation that empowers the federal government to review the environmental, social and economic impacts of major projects, has created conditions where \u201can interprovincial pipeline in Canada has borne an unacceptable political risk,\u201d Exner-Pirot says.<\/p>\n \u201cPipelines are built every single day. We invest billions of dollars into pipelines every single year,\u201d Exner-Pirot says. \u201cIt\u2019s the \u2026 pipelines that have to cross either a provincial border or an international border that are the problem.\u201d<\/p>\n Manitoba\u2019s premier has already faced criticism for his recent support of new oil and gas infrastructure to Churchill. Former NDP vice-president Chris Wiebe told the Free Press the proposal was a reversal from the party\u2019s \u201cno new pipelines\u201d stance during the election campaign, while Clayton Thomas-M\u00fcller, an author and environmentalist from Mathias Colomb Cree Nation, called the proposal \u201cjarring and triggering\u201d in The Globe and Mail.<\/p>\n Exner-Pirot believes funds to upgrade the Port of Churchill could be better spent on other, year-round rail and port infrastructure. The Port of Vancouver is in need of investment, she says, adding exporters in Prince Rupert, B.C., only have one class of rail line capable of carrying the heaviest loads.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cEveryone is just begging the government to fix the West Coast port issues and they\u2019re spending half of their political attention on Churchill,\u201d she says. \u201cIt\u2019s very frustrating.\u201d<\/p>\n Developing a resource corridor through the tundra comes with additional costly challenges. The shifting muskeg and permafrost \u2014 increasingly unpredictable due to a rapidly changing climate \u2014 makes infrastructure more expensive to maintain.\u00a0<\/p>\n But University of Manitoba\u2019s Prentice says these challenges aren\u2019t insurmountable.<\/p>\n \u201cThey built an oil pipeline across Alaska, above ground, and it still functions,\u201d he says. \u201cI don\u2019t think it\u2019s something that the pipeline industry is incapable of doing again, it\u2019s just a matter of the costs and whether you have an investor willing to do it.\u201d<\/p>\n The Arctic is changing \u2014 so is Arctic shipping<\/p>\n For many, the most compelling argument for a more robust trade network through the Arctic is that climate change will open up shipping routes as sea ice melts.<\/p>\n Arctic Gateway Group is working with University of Manitoba researchers to better understand how the ice is changing and what impacts it will have on shipping.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe preliminary results of their study tell us that with climate change, the sea lanes can be open for six months of the year already \u2026 without any icebreakers or new types of equipment,\u201d Avery says. \u201cBy the end of the century, or within the lifetime of our kids, the sea lanes will be open on a year-round basis for commercial shipping.\u201d<\/p>\n Feiyue Wang, director of the Churchill Marine Observatory and one of the professors involved in the research, says the ice-free period in Hudson Bay gets about one day longer every year, based on observed ice cover between 1979 and 2025. That trajectory will likely accelerate in the latter half of the century, he says.<\/p>\n \u201cEven at this moment, the shipping window is already much longer than the current operational window at the Port of Churchill,\u201d Wang says.<\/p>\n Shipping is picking up, according to a report from Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment<\/a>, an Arctic council working group. More ships passed through the Arctic polar code area in 2025 than in any of the last 12 years, with the number of unique ships increasing 40 per cent over that time.<\/p>\n While most were fishing vessels, nearly 200 boats carrying oil, oil products, gas or chemicals passed through the region last year \u2014 again 40 per cent more than in 2013.<\/p>\n Mining has prompted some of the shipping increase, the report notes. Bulk carriers, which carry cargo like mining ore, sailed 156 per cent more nautical miles in the Arctic last year than in 2013. Natural gas vessels were unheard of in Arctic waters in 2014, but as of 2025, there were 40 unique gas tankers in the North sailing more than 866,000 nautical miles combined.<\/p>\n But \u201cjust because the bay is ice-free, doesn\u2019t mean it\u2019s navigable,\u201d Wang says.<\/p>\n Shipping routes through the Arctic require a continuous ice-free pathway. While much of Hudson Bay is covered by \u201cfirst-year ice,\u201d which forms in the winter and melts in the summer, multi-year ice in the high Arctic could float south and complicate pathways through the Northwest Passage. Ice conditions will likely be highly variable based on weather and climatic conditions, Wang says.<\/p>\n That means Canada will continue to need icebreakers to navigate the Arctic.\u00a0<\/p>\n More shipping increases risk of a spill. Researchers warn it could be devastating<\/p>\n With more tankers carrying oil and gas through the remote and extreme Arctic waters, the risk of an oil spill becomes harder to ignore.\u00a0<\/p>\n While part of Wang\u2019s research has focused on understanding the changes to the shipping season as a result of climate change, he\u2019s particularly passionate about another aspect of the marine observatory\u2019s work: \u201cHow would you actually develop that shipping in a way that is not only economically viable, but environmentally sustainable and culturally appropriate?\u201d<\/p>\n In the case of small leaks in warmer climes, the ocean is full of microorganisms that can quickly absorb oil and clean up a spill.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cWhat really concerns us is if you have a moderate, or even worse, a major oil spill \u2026 how can we actually clean that up?\u201d Wang says.<\/p>\n Typically, spills are recovered either by burning oil off the water, which gets rid of the majority of a spill but produces a potentially toxic smoke, or by dispersing the oil into the smallest droplets possible, which allows the contaminants to quickly flow into the \u201cmuch larger volume of the ocean\u201d and be absorbed and diluted by natural processes.<\/p>\n But those methods are designed for warmer oceans. \u201cWe know very little about how those will work out in a system like Hudson Bay,\u201d Wang says.<\/p>\n The remote and dangerous nature of the Arctic, with its poor visibility, long hours of darkness and a maze of sea ice to navigate would likely mean a longer wait for cleanup to begin. Freezing temperatures slow the work of the ocean\u2019s natural oil scrubbers, meaning spills would take longer to decompose. More concerning: existing cleanup plans assume an ice-free surface. If oil becomes trapped under the ice, it may be impossible to find and remove.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIf you have an oil spill, the best time window to respond is right away,\u201d Wang says.\u00a0<\/p>\n The longer oil is left to spread with the fast-moving currents, \u201cmore profound damage to the marine ecosystem\u201d may occur.<\/p>\n In the case of a large spill, impacts on local ecosystems and communities could be devastating. Vegetation and animal life could be contaminated, damaging Indigenous food sources. Local fisheries and tourism industries would likely be affected too, with far-reaching economic consequences. Communities exposed to contaminants may also face human health risks.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m obviously in favour of fossil fuel development, but I\u2019m not in favour of doing it in the most expensive, most dangerous way possible,\u201d Exner-Pirot, at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, says.<\/p>\n But from Wang\u2019s perspective: \u201cJust because there\u2019s a risk of an oil spill does not mean we should not have increased shipping, right? Just because there\u2019s always the risk of a car crashing does not mean that we should not drive on the highway.\u201d<\/p>\n Wang believes the technology and tools to respond to an ecological emergency can \u2014 and will \u2014 be developed. Crucially, he says, they will need to be developed in partnership with Indigenous communities who have extensive Traditional Knowledge of the marine environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n Ideally, he says, governments will invest in not only the technology to detect and respond to spills in the Arctic, but also in training local communities to lead response efforts.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u2018Generational opportunities\u2019 in Churchill: Arctic Gateway Group<\/p>\n Wang has worked closely with Indigenous communities around Churchill and in the Kivalliq region of Nunavut for over a decade. Overwhelmingly, he says, these communities want to see developments that improve career opportunities, living conditions and access to health and education \u2014\u00a0but only if those developments put the community\u2019s interests front and centre.<\/p>\n \u201cThat\u2019s where this environmental piece, to me, is the most important one,\u201d Wang says.\u00a0\u201cEveryone is talking about this Port of Churchill Plus project as a potential nation-building project, but if the environmental aspect and the Indigenous aspect \u2026 are not addressed properly, I don\u2019t think this project is going to go anywhere.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Manitoba\u2019s leaders are taking a similar approach. In December, Kinew announced<\/a> the Port of Churchill Plus project will be led by a new Crown-Indigenous Corporation, a first-of-its-kind leadership structure that will bring government representatives and Indigenous leaders together to guide development. The corporation is expected to be formally established in March.\u00a0<\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/churchill012-scaled.jpg\"\/)
A ship prepares to be loaded with grain at the Port of Churchill in 1978. The port opened in 1931 to offer a northern grain transport route for farmers in the Prairies. Photo: Bob Lowery \/ Winnipeg Free Press<\/p>\n![\"An](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/MB-WFP-251105-MB-Chambers-Chris-Avery-0001WEB.jpg\"\/)
Chris Avery, chief executive officer of Arctic Gateway Group, which purchased the Port of Churchill in 2018, says the group\u2019s goal in developing the port is to support Canada\u2019s efforts to diversify trade, assert northern sovereignty and advance Indigenous economic reconciliation. Photo: Mike Deal \/ Winnipeg Free Press<\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/MB-WFP-24514413_DSC_0417WEB.jpg\"\/)
Any development of the Port of Churchill will require all-season road access, as the site and town, 1,000 kilometres north of Winnipeg, are currently only accessible via plane and rail. Many northern communities currentlyrely on unpredictable winter roads. Photo: Dylan Robertson \/ Winnipeg Free Press<\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/pipeline-map.png\"\/)
A map depicting the approximate location of all federally regulated oil and gas pipelines in Western Canada. Provincially regulated pipelines are not depicted. Source: Canada Energy Regulator. Map: Julia-Simone Rutgers \/ The Narwhal and Winnipeg Free Press<\/p>\n![\"The](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Royal_Bank_of_Canada_RBC_climate_change_CGL_flight_Simmons_The_Narwhal-09.jpg\"\/)
Experts say it\u2019s not economically feasible to build an oil or gas pipeline to Churchill, Man., as the Hudson Bay port is inactive for several months of the year due to sea ice cover. Pipelines take years to build, are expensive and, like the Coastal GasLink pipeline in northern B.C. shown above, often face dedicated resistance from Indigenous communities. Photo: Matt Simmons \/ The Narwhal<\/p>\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/PRAIRIES-Churchill-WFP-PRAIRIES-WFP-260225-Churchill-Wang1WEB-1.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\n![\"An](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/PRAIRIES-Churchill-WFP-PRAIRIES-WFP-260225-Churchill-Wang6-WEB.jpg\"\/)
\nFeiyue Wang, director of the Churchill Marine Observatory and a University of Manitoba professor involved in research on the Port of Churchill expansion, says climate change is already melting sea ice and lengthening the harbour\u2019s operational period. Photos: Ruth Bonneville \/ Winnipeg Free Press<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/MB-WFP-221014-Polar-Bear-2-WEB.jpg\"\/)
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/MB-WFP-24514389_DSC_0284WEB.jpg\"\/)
\nMajor oil spills pose risks to local ecosystems and communities, including to animals in the affected area. Polar bears are a staple figure in Manitoba\u2019s north and could be impacted if an oil spill were to occur in Hudson Bay and at the Port of Churchill. Photos: Ruth Bonneville (left); Dylan Robertson (right) \/ Winnipeg Free Press<\/p>\n