The federal government has responded to “feedback from thousands” by postponing a series of sweeping environmental rollbacks and extending the comment period for the proposed regulatory changes from June 7 to July 22.

The decision derails the government’s plan to table legislation as soon as the week of June 8. That was before the proposals “angered First Nations and mobilized civil society organizations,” CBC reports.

Senior government officials were genuinely surprised by the depth and vehemence of the response, The Energy Mix has learned.

“Among the suite of measures were designating pre-approving development in certain ‘federal economic zones’ and giving the federal cabinet limited power to exempt projects from the ‘jeopardy test’ for species at risk,” CBC writes. The Assembly of First Nations responded that the proposed changes represented “a pattern of exclusion.”

Ecojustice Executive Director Kimberly Shearon added in a statement that, “by gutting the laws that guarantee fundamental environmental protections, this government will only be fast-tracking preventable—and in some cases irreversible—harms to communities and ecosystems.”

One major concern is that the proposed measures would postpone assessment of major impacts from energy and resource megaprojects from the approval stage to final permitting—by which point major decisions about project design would be complete and likely deemed irreversible.

“You can’t rush development and protect nature like this—if we do both poorly, both fail,” said Sandra Schwartz, executive director of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society. “I’ve worked on the laws that protect Canadians’ right to a healthy environment, and seeing them weakened while species like caribou are pushed toward extinction is deeply frustrating. Once nature is gone, we don’t get it back.”

In a media release announcing the postponement, the government said it “received valuable feedback from thousands of stakeholders, Indigenous groups, and members of the public across the country, underscoring the importance of these issues to Canadians.”

Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc said Canadians “have demonstrated a strong interest in these proposed reforms,” while acknowledging that the changes “have the potential to shape how we build major projects and strengthen our economy for years to come.” Extending the consultation period, he added, “will allow us to hear from even more Canadians and help us develop reforms that reflect the views and priorities of people across the country.”

Transport Minister Steven MacKinnon added that “building a stronger, more connected Canadian economy requires that we listen to the people and communities it serves.”

Government affairs specialist Alex Cool-Fergus had a more jaded interpretation on LinkedIn.

“The federal government just extended the consultation period on proposed deregulation to the middle of the summer, the very time Canadians are paying the least attention,” she wrote. “Why? Probably because there is an emerging realization that their proposed deregulation measures are deeply unpopular among voters, no matter partisan affiliation. Nature matters and is a core identity issue for almost all of us. Undoing essential protections that keep our natural environment and communities safe in the name of making life easier for business is politically risky.”

With byelections coming up in the fall, the government “will need to demonstrate that they are on the little guy’s side,” Cool-Fergus added. “This is proof for those of us who despair about the state of climate and environmental affairs in this country that people do still care. There are lessons to be learned here.

A day earlier, climate, energy, and nature protection groups had converged on Parliament to urge the government to reverse course on the environmental policy rollbacks.

Representatives of 16 groups held a news conference to say Ottawa had gone too far in undermining environmental and climate policy, The Canadian Press reported. Their pleas came ahead of planned meetings with Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin and senior officials in the Prime Minister’s Office.

“Prime Minister (Mark) Carney is proposing the worst evisceration of environmental law in Canadian history, ensuring that Canada is left behind in the energy transition,” said Environmental Defence Canada Executive Director Tim Gray. “Canadians will pay the price and the damages could last for generations.”

Ottawa released two discussion papers last month which proposed, among other things, approving projects before they’re reviewed and exempting certain projects from laws meant to protect species at risk.

It also proposed taking the responsibility for reviewing pipelines, transmission lines, and offshore renewable energy projects away from the federal Impact Assessment Agency and handing it to the Canada Energy Regulator.

At the time, Anna Johnston, a staff lawyer at West Coast Environmental Law, who was extensively involved with development of the Trudeau government’s Impact Assessment Act, said the changes would be “far worse than what happened under Prime Minister Harper’s government in 2012.” Former federal environment minister Steven Guilbeault agreed.

The federal government has said it has been told by industry that the level of expertise on energy projects available at the Canada Energy Regulator couldn’t be found at the Impact Assessment Agency, CP says.

The proposals are part of Ottawa’s attempt to position itself as a reliable energy supplier as the American/Israeli war on Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz ramp up energy prices globally.

Oil and gas industry leaders have for years called on Ottawa to remove regulatory hurdles which they say impede development, specifically the federal Impact Assessment Act and the West Coast tanker ban.

They have said the complexity of Canada’s regulatory processes puts at risk opportunities to provide more global energy security.

Trevor Ebl, president of Canadian natural gas pipelines at Calgary-based pipeliner TC Energy, said last year companies like his are competing with American and Mexican rivals for capital investment.

He compared TC’s Coastal GasLink pipeline in B.C., completed in 2024 after 10 years, with TC’s Southeast Gateway project in Mexico, which came online last year after only three years in development.

The environmental groups said there’s no evidence to suggest Canada’s laws are prohibiting development.

“Of course they would say that. Industry has a long history of always lobbying for environmental deregulation,” Gray told journalists.

“The government of Canada has an obligation to its citizens to display and reveal the evidence that they’re using, if they’re going to roll back 50 years of environmental regulation which protects public interests. No evidence exists from our perspective.”

With earlier files from The Canadian Press.