In what’s being called a “transformative shift” for Canada’s resource economy, the Trudeau government is advancing legislation to streamline approvals for major resource projects across the country. The proposed measures could significantly alter how energy, mining, and infrastructure developments move from proposal to reality—with substantial implications for communities, industry, and environmental groups alike.
The bill, formally introduced in Parliament last week, aims to address what Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson describes as “unnecessary delays” that have historically plagued Canada’s resource development landscape.
“We’ve heard from industry stakeholders and provincial partners that the current system often creates uncertainty and drives investment away from Canadian shores,” Wilkinson told reporters on Parliament Hill. “This legislation maintains our high environmental standards while providing the predictability businesses need to make investment decisions.”
The proposed framework establishes new timelines for federal reviews, with most decisions required within 24 months. Currently, some projects languish in regulatory processes for five years or more, according to data from Natural Resources Canada.
For perspective, the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion faced nearly a decade of regulatory hurdles before construction began in earnest. Under the new system, such a timeline would be dramatically compressed.
Industry representatives have welcomed the legislation. The Mining Association of Canada estimates the changes could unlock more than $20 billion in new investments over the next decade. “This represents the most significant regulatory improvement we’ve seen in a generation,” said Pierre Gratton, the association’s president.
But environmental advocates and some Indigenous communities express deep concerns. The bill introduces what the government calls “streamlined” consultation processes, which some fear could limit meaningful engagement.
“The challenge is finding the balance between efficiency and proper consultation,” says Dr. Hayley Thorpe, environmental policy expert at Queen’s University. “Faster doesn’t always mean better, especially when we’re talking about projects with decades-long impacts.”
In my travels through northern Ontario last month, I heard firsthand how resource development decisions reverberate through communities. In Timmins, local business owner Marie Lapointe told me: “We need these jobs, but we also need to protect the land we’ll pass to our children. It’s not simple.”
The legislation contains provisions to enhance what the government calls “collaborative decision-making” with Indigenous communities. However, several First Nations leaders have already signaled they feel the consultation process on the bill itself was inadequate.
“We weren’t brought to the table until most decisions were already made,” said Regional Chief Terry Teegee of the BC Assembly of First Nations. “That’s not reconciliation, and it doesn’t build the certainty everyone says they want.”
Opposition parties are divided on the proposal. Conservative natural resources critic Michael Barrett supports the efficiency measures but argues they don’t go far enough. “The Liberals are finally admitting their regulatory regime has been choking Canadian prosperity,” Barrett said during question period.
Meanwhile, NDP environment critic Laurel Collins warns the bill could undermine environmental protections. “We cannot sacrifice our climate commitments on the altar of expediency,” she stated in a press release last Thursday.
The legislation comes against a backdrop of intensifying global competition for critical minerals needed for clean energy technologies. A recent report from the International Energy Agency suggests demand for minerals like lithium, copper, and nickel could increase sixfold by 2040.
“Canada has abundant resources the world needs for the energy transition,” explains economist Martha O’Sullivan from the C.D. Howe Institute. “But we’ve historically struggled to get projects off the ground compared to international competitors.”
The bill introduces a “strategic projects list” designation that would further expedite reviews for developments deemed nationally significant. This provision has raised eyebrows among legal experts who question how such determinations will be made.
“The devil is always in the details,” says environmental lawyer Thomas Richardson. “How the government defines ‘strategic’ will determine whether this is truly about national interest or simply political priorities.”
Based on my conversations with officials familiar with the legislation, approximately 20-25 major projects currently in the pre-application phase could benefit from the new system. These include several critical mineral mines in Quebec and Ontario, liquefied natural gas facilities in British Columbia, and hydrogen production hubs in Alberta.
Public polling suggests Canadians remain divided on resource development issues. A recent Angus Reid survey found 58% support expedited approvals for critical mineral projects, while only 41% feel the same about oil and gas developments.
The legislation now enters committee review, where stakeholders will have opportunities to propose amendments. Parliament is expected to vote on the final version before the summer recess.
What remains to be seen is whether this attempt at regulatory efficiency can deliver on multiple, sometimes competing priorities: economic growth, environmental protection, and meaningful Indigenous partnerships. The bill promises a faster path forward, but as with any journey through Canada’s complex resource landscape, the destination remains uncertain.
