Who Owns the Equity?

A private equity firm launched in Thunder Bay this week, and it is worth paying attention to for a reason that goes beyond the headline numbers coming out of Canada’s Investment Summit.

Making Ground River Capital, founded by Jason Rasevych of Ginoogaming First Nation, is not simply asking whether First Nations participate in resource and infrastructure development in Northern Ontario. It is putting a more structural question on the table: who structures the deal, and who owns the equity?

I have spent years developing energy, forestry and economic-development partnerships between Finnish organizations and companies and First Nations across Northern Ontario, while bringing Nordic partners into the Canadian market. One lesson has been consistent: the strongest partnerships are built early, when community interests can shape the commercial structure rather than being added after the essential terms have already been decided.

That is why the “deal-structuring gap” identified by Rasevych deserves attention. The issue is not only access to projects. It is access to the capital, transaction expertise, due diligence and financial structures that allow First Nations to participate as meaningful long-term owners where communities choose that path.

Canada is now trying to catalyse more than $1 trillion in total investment over five years. The September Canada Investment Summit produced nearly $500 billion in announced investment commitments and financing. But capital commitments alone do not create successful projects.

In Northern Ontario, major development sits at the intersection of capital, Indigenous rights and consent, infrastructure, permitting, community capacity, technology and commercial viability. Those elements have to converge before an investment announcement becomes a durable project.

The contrast this week is instructive. While Making Ground is advancing a model centred on Indigenous equity and financial capacity, Neskantaga First Nation publicly warned investors that proposed Ring of Fire roads and mineral development do not have its consent. These are not contradictory stories. Together, they show why Indigenous participation cannot be reduced to a single formula or treated as a box to check.

Equity ownership is not a substitute for rights, consent or community decision-making. Nor will every First Nation choose the same ownership structure. But where communities want an ownership role, the ability to structure, finance and govern that participation from the beginning can fundamentally change the economic relationship.

That moves the conversation from consultation alone toward ownership, capital, capability and long-term wealth creation. It also changes the questions investors and project proponents should be asking: Who participates in the upside? Who develops institutional capability through the project? Where does the wealth created by Northern development ultimately reside?

Making Ground River Capital is interesting because it is attempting to build part of that missing financial infrastructure. Its launch materials describe an Indigenous-owned investment and asset-management platform focused on First Nations equity, acquisitions and major infrastructure opportunities, including critical minerals, environmental technology, AI and infrastructure, health, defence and logistics.

The larger test will come with execution. At launch, the public materials describe the strategy and intended investment model; they do not yet establish a track record of completed acquisitions or deployed funds. That is normal for a new vehicle, but it matters when separating the significance of the idea from evidence of results.

Canada’s investment ambitions are large. The harder work is turning capital into projects that are commercially viable, locally legitimate and capable of creating durable value in the regions where development occurs.

The question, then, is bigger than whether more Indigenous investment vehicles will emerge before the next summit. It is whether Canada can build the financial, institutional and partnership architecture required before the next wave of major projects reaches the financing table — rather than trying to retrofit ownership after the deals have already been structured.