Environmental assessment specialists, nature protection advocates, Indigenous leaders, and other climate and energy analysts are aghast at the scope and potential impacts of the legislation introduce Friday by Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government that would grant it new powers to quickly push forward major projects the federal cabinet deems to be in the national interest.

Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc tabled a bill in the House of Commons that would give Ottawa the authority to draw up a list of large projects it wants to prioritize and to expedite their federal approval, The Canadian Press reports.

Carney said it has become too hard to build new projects in Canada and vowed that this legislation will change that.

“We’re in an economic crisis,” Carney told a news conference on Parliament Hill. “We’re still facing intensifying, unjustified tariffs from our largest trading partner and the best way to respond to that is to respond at home, build strength at home.”

But critics sprang immediately, warning that the bill pushes too far in the direction of unrestrained, unregulated project development.

“Among its many flaws, Bill C-5 does not require that decision-makers consider a project’s potential adverse environmental effects when deciding whether or not it is in the national interest,” Climate Action Network Canada said in a release. “This glaring absence is a clear abdication of the federal government’s environmental obligations. This Bill reinforces the false dichotomy between the economy and the environment, and will allow proponents of projects to argue that their economic benefits are more important than properly assessing their climate and environmental impacts.”

[Disclosure: Energy Mix Productions is a member of CAN-Rac.]

“This is the first time in 40 years that Canadian environmental assessment law has been written to serve political deals first and environmental responsibility second,” said Green Party leader Elizabeth May (GPC, Saanich Gulf Islands), in a release that called the bill “a blank cheque for Cabinet to push through projects without proper oversight.”

“This is not environmental assessment,” May declared. “It’s a political playbook.”

The Greens are out with a backgrounder [pdf] that analyses the bill in more detail.

“First Danielle Smith, then David Eby and Doug Ford, and now Mark Carney. Seems like a rare bipartisan consensus has emerged, but unfortunately it is for using external threats as cover for seeking sweeping and unjustified executive power,” wrote Martin Olszynski, associate professor and chair in energy, resources and sustainability at the University of Calgary. Like other legal analysts, Olszynski pointed to Section 22 of the bill, which would allow Ottawa to exempt specific projects from regulation.

Justina Ray, president and senior scientist at Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, said the bill can still “explicitly integrate ecological and social risk considerations directly into Canada’s industrial strategy from the outset” by “strategically bypassing” areas that are critical to biodiversity, planning the pace and scale of development to “minimize reactive adjustments”, and extending consultation with Indigenous communities to incorporate downstream and cumulative impacts. “The practical importance of these considerations cannot be overstated,” she wrote on LinkedIn. “Just as thoughtful planning before a journey reduces the need for costly detours later, proactively addressing environmental and social factors early improves efficiency and effectiveness, and the chances for achieving strong outcomes.”

West Coast Environmental Law staff lawyer Anna Johnston reached the same conclusion with a different metaphor. “Bill C-5 flies in the face of everything we know about responsible decision making and could do more harm than good to Canadians,” she said. “Deciding to approve projects before making sure they are sound is like building a house and then calling an architect to ask if you got it right. I wouldn’t feel safe in that house.”

“Canada is on fire, once again. This should not be normal,” wrote Keith Brooks, programs director at Environmental Defence Canada. “And yet our national conversation is dominated by talk of pipelines, and reports are coming in that the government is contemplating walking away from key climate policies like the oil and gas emissions cap.” While “Canada’s new government is understandably focused on defending against U.S. President Trump’s threats of annexation and economic warfare,” he added, “we cannot jettison our climate commitments in an attempt to build ‘Canada strong’.”

Passing the Bill This Summer

Bill C-5, the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act, is twinned legislation meant to break down internal trade barriers and cut red tape for major projects, CP writes.

The bill was a marquee election promise by Carney, who campaigned on a pledge to make the country an “energy superpower” and build up a more resilient economy in response to Donald Trump’s global trade war.

The prime minister said he will do everything possible to get the legislation passed this summer and did not rule out having Parliament sit longer.

The House is only scheduled to sit for another two weeks and the Liberals are governing with a precarious minority, forcing them to seek the support of MPs from other parties to advance their agenda.

“Yes, it is a top priority for this government, and we will do everything to get it passed before the summer,” Carney said. “And if Parliament needs to sit longer, it should sit longer in order to get it passed. That’s what Canadians expect.”

The legislation would create a new federal office to take the lead on streamlining approvals for major projects and task the intergovernmental affairs minister with overseeing the final permitting decision.

The government said the goal of the bill is to send a clear signal to businesses and quickly build up investor confidence.

Carney said the current approval process forces projects to undergo multiple reviews and assessments one after another, rather than at the same time. “That process is arduous,” he said. “It takes too long and it’s holding our country back.”

“For too long, when federal agencies examined a project, their immediate question has been, ‘Why?’ With this new bill, we will ask ourselves, ‘How?’”

He said Ottawa won’t force projects on provinces that refuse them, but “added that the first ministers’ meeting demonstrated the provinces are willing to collaborate,” CBC reports.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre described the new bill as a small step in the right direction. “We do not need baby steps. We need breakthroughs,” he said.

Echoing recent demands from fossil fuel CEOs, Poilievre said he wants the government to repeal the federal oil tanker ban on B.C.’s northern coast, terminate the oil and gas emissions cap, and scrap the Impact Assessment Act that sets out a process for environmental reviews.

He said he would consult with his caucus about how to approach the bill in Parliament but added that Conservatives would “vote in favour of accelerating even one project.”

Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers CEO Lisa Baiton said she was “encouraged by the federal government’s flexibility and efforts to work with the provinces to accelerate the approval process for major projects.”

Indigenous Communities Prepare for a Fight

The Assembly of First Nations immediately announced an emergency meeting in the next week to discuss the bill, with National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak declaring herself “deeply concerned” about its impact after meeting with Carney Thursday, CP reports. “First Nations support efforts to protect Canada from economic uncertainty and advance resource revenue sharing agreements,” she said. “However, First Nations are very concerned that this proposal may violate many collective rights… Failure to obtain free, prior and informed consent will likely result in protracted litigation.”

She said the AFN first saw a copy of the bill Friday, and its lawyers were reviewing it with Elders.

Woodhouse Nepinak had already pushed back after she and AFN regional chiefs received a three-page backgrounder on the bill dated May 23, with a request “to consult and cooperate on proposed legislation on national interest projects and to continue to engage on its implementation,” the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network reported—all on a seven-day deadline.

“We understand the timelines are accelerated, but immediate cooperation is required to secure our national interests,” said the letter, obtained by The Logic, which was signed by two senior members of the Privy Council Office. 

In a reply to Carney released May 30, ahead of the first ministers’ meeting in Saskatoon, Woodhouse Nepinak reminded the PM “that the AFN is not a one-stop shop for consultation or a rights holder, and he is failing to meet proper standards for consultation,” APTN said.

“The AFN has not received a mandate from Chiefs on any aspect of your proposal because we have just received it and our next Assembly is scheduled to be held in July 2025,” the letter stated. “In addition, the Executive Committee of the AFN at this point has had less than a week to review the small amount of information shared; and are seeking preliminary legal and policy advice relating to the proposal, such as it is.”

Already, the new legislation is drawing comparison to Stephen Harper-era efforts to fast-track fossil fuel infrastructure that became the spark for the national Idle No More protests beginning in 2013. Now, “Indigenous leaders say they will not be sidelined in the race toward big nation-building projects,” The Logic writes. “If they don’t grapple with Indigenous opposition, Carney and company may be running headlong into the same roadblocks that confounded Harper’s similar aspirations.”

“We’re seeing now again, sort of the beginnings of another movement,” Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler of Nishnawbe-Aski Nation told The Logic.

Related: Last-Minute Changes to Ontario Mining Bill Are Not Good Enough, First Nations Say

Environmental Advocates Warn Bill Could Undermine Protections

Climate, environmental, and energy transition groups warned the new process could upend efforts to fight climate change.

“Green-lighting major projects up front, before asking how they would affect communities, is nonsensical,” said CAN-Rac National Policy Manager Alex Cool-Fergus. “It’s in the national interest to allow for public participation, uphold Indigenous rights, and protect our shared climate, lands, waters, and air—not to rush through risky resource extraction projects. Bypassing democratic norms under the pretext of a ‘crisis’ is a tactic as old as time. This government must do better.”

“Major project decisions should align with Canada’s biodiversity commitments outlined in the 2030 Nature Strategy—not bypass them,” said Workshops for Biodiversity Executive Director David Roy. “While we understand the importance of accelerating certain developments, doing so without robust environmental and Indigenous safeguards risks undermining public trust and long-term outcomes. Nature protection and climate action are the true nation-building project Canada needs.”

“This is a time for bold, decisive moves—not for throwing more fuel on the fires that are overtaking our forests and communities,” said Jamie Kneen, national program co-lead at MiningWatch Canada. “We can’t win a race to the bottom with a U.S. regime that respects no laws or limits. It’s time to take an independent and fundamentally different approach: one that builds a strong, sustainable economy by protecting nature, not wrecking it; by supporting communities, not bulldozing them; and by building truly respectful relationships with Indigenous peoples, not steamrolling them or trying to buy them off.”

“We should be fast-tracking climate solutions, not fossil fuels,” said Keith Stewart, senior energy strategist at Greenpeace Canada. “To even consider designating oil and gas expansion projects as in the national interest is a slap in the face to not just the next generation, but every Canadian struggling right now to deal with climate change-fuelled wildfires. Climate change is making life more expensive and the air harder to breathe, so why double down on what’s causing the problem?”

Expert Cautions Against ‘Shortcuts’

Consistent with Carney’s discussions with provincial/territorial premiers earlier in the week, the bill sets out five criteria to evaluate whether a project is in the national interest. They include the project’s likelihood of success, whether it would strengthen the country’s resilience and advance the interests of Indigenous peoples, and whether it would contribute to economic growth and show “clean growth potential”.

The new federal review office will work toward a goal of approving projects within two years. That’s a political promise rather than a hard-and-fast rule, CP says; the legislation does not mention timelines.

While the bill would give the government broad power to skirt environmental laws to push projects forward, one expert said it remains to be seen how Ottawa will use it.

“This is the kind of consolidation that you sometimes see in times of national emergency. We see it in wartime, we saw it in COVID to some extent. That consolidation can let you move more quickly, which can be a good thing, but it can also be a risky thing,” said Stewart Elgie, the Jarislowsky chair in clean economy at the University of Ottawa.

He warned that trying to “shortcut environmental interests” does not help expedite projects.

“The Harper government never got a major pipeline built, and it’s because they gave short shrift to environment and Indigenous concerns. It ended up with blockades and litigation that ultimately slowed down the projects,” Elgie said.

Carney said the legislation requires meaningful consultation with Indigenous peoples consistent with the Constitution and the Crown’s duty to consult.

The federal review office will also include an Indigenous Advisory Council with First Nation, Inuit, and Métis representation.

The legislation comes with a sunset clause that forces a review after five years. It does not touch on any provincial approvals that might be needed to allow a project to go ahead.

Major segments of this report were first published by The Canadian Press on June 6, 2025.