OTTAWA — Mark Carney’s first major policy consultation with provincial premiers signals a potential shift in how Canada handles major infrastructure projects that could reshape the country’s approach to economic development for decades to come.
The former Bank of Canada governor, now serving as the Liberal Party’s election readiness chair, met with several premiers last week to discuss ways of fast-tracking projects deemed in the “national interest” — a move that could dramatically alter approval timelines for everything from critical mineral mines to clean energy corridors.
“We’re looking at a total rethink of how we approach projects that matter to Canadians,” said a senior Liberal source familiar with the discussions. “The current system simply takes too long, and we’re falling behind.”
The consultations follow months of criticism from provincial leaders and industry groups who argue Canada’s regulatory framework has become too cumbersome, pushing investment to jurisdictions with simpler approval processes, particularly the United States.
Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe, who attended the meeting, described the discussions as “substantive” but emphasized that any federal framework must respect provincial jurisdiction over natural resources.
“We welcome the conversation about streamlining processes, but this can’t become another Ottawa power grab,” Moe told reporters in Regina. “Saskatchewan knows what Saskatchewan needs.”
According to documents reviewed by Mediawall.news, the proposal being floated would create a new category for projects deemed vital to national interests, potentially establishing a single regulatory window with fixed timelines and consolidated environmental assessments.
The premiers’ reactions reflected Canada’s regional economic diversity. Alberta’s Danielle Smith emphasized energy corridor projects, while Ontario’s Doug Ford focused on critical mineral development in the province’s north. Quebec’s François Legault, meanwhile, expressed caution about any system that might bypass provincial environmental review processes.
“What we’re seeing is a recognition across party lines that something must change,” said Martha Hall Findlay, president of the Canada West Foundation. “When it takes seven to ten years to get major projects approved in Canada, but only two to three in other OECD countries, we have a serious competitiveness problem.”
Statistics from the Canadian Chamber of Commerce show that major project investment has fallen by nearly 45 percent since 2015, with regulatory uncertainty cited as a primary factor by international investors.
The push comes as the federal Liberals face increasing pressure on economic issues. Recent polling by Abacus Data shows 63 percent of Canadians believe the government isn’t doing enough to support economic growth and job creation — numbers that have Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre hammering the government on what he calls “gatekeeping” of the economy.
“The Liberals are finally admitting what we’ve been saying for years,” Poilievre said at a campaign-style stop in Sudbury. “Canada’s economy is trapped in red tape while the world moves on.”
Environmental groups have expressed concern that faster approvals could come at the expense of proper consultation with Indigenous communities and thorough environmental review.
“We can’t sacrifice environmental protection in the name of speed,” said Keith Brooks, programs director at Environmental Defence. “The climate crisis demands we make the right decisions, not just fast ones.”
Indigenous leaders have also signaled that any streamlined process must still uphold the duty to consult and accommodate.
“First Nations aren’t against development, but we are against being bypassed,” said RoseAnne Archibald, former National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations. “Any new system must strengthen, not weaken, Indigenous partnership.”
The discussions reflect a growing consensus among economic experts that Canada’s regulatory system needs reform. A recent C.D. Howe Institute report concluded that regulatory hurdles add approximately 25 percent to major project costs in Canada compared to peer nations.
At a Bay Street conference last month, Carney emphasized the need for “predictable pathways” for investment in critical infrastructure. “Canada can’t afford to be the place where good projects go to die a slow death of a thousand cuts,” he said.
However, the political calculations remain complex. The Liberals must balance their environmental commitments with economic imperatives, while premiers guard their constitutional authority over resources.
In the corridor outside the closed-door meeting, one provincial official was overheard saying, “This could be huge, or it could be another federal-provincial food fight. Depends on the details.”
For everyday Canadians, the stakes are significant. Analysis from the Business Council of Canada suggests that accelerating approval of the top 25 major projects currently in the pipeline could create more than 200,000 jobs and add nearly $100 billion to GDP over the next decade.
As winter settles over Ottawa, these discussions might seem distant from kitchen table concerns. But for communities from Timmins to Fort McMurray, the outcome could determine whether new mines open, transmission lines are built, and whether young people stay or leave.
“When you strip away the politics, this is about whether Canada can still build things,” said former Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall, now a special advisor at Osler law firm. “That matters to everyone who pays a power bill or wants their kids to find good jobs close to home.”
The question now is whether these consultations will produce concrete action or join a long list of promising initiatives that faded after the initial headlines. With a possible federal election looming in 2024, the clock is ticking for both Carney and the government he hopes to join.
