Bill C-5 promises faster project approvals but critics warn it bypasses oversight and repeats old mistakes.
That tension between speed and accountability is something I’ve seen before—and it’s why Bill C-5 demands a closer look.
As someone who works with organizations to rebuild trust and navigate miscommunication, I watch policy closely. When legislation promises transformation but skips hard conversations, I take notice. Bill C-5 isn’t just about infrastructure: it’s about how we govern, who we include, and whether we’re still capable of building anything together.
The Carney government promoted Bill C-5 as a way to fast-track major infrastructure projects, such as pipelines, transmission lines and clean energy corridors, by allowing cabinet to designate them as “in the national interest.”
In practice, that means bypassing environmental reviews and consultation. While it’s being framed as bold nation-building, the bill gives the federal cabinet sweeping authority to override existing processes, raising serious concerns about transparency, inclusion and democratic oversight.
Supporters argue that bold measures are needed because the system too often fails to deliver. Canada has a history of stalled developments. Federal ambition frequently collides with regulation, leaving projects in limbo. Bill C-5 promises to break the logjam.
But critics, including Indigenous leaders and provincial premiers, see a bill that centralizes power in Ottawa and risks repeating the very mistakes it claims to fix.
Fast-tracking sounds efficient, but major infrastructure projects in Canada intersect with provincial, Indigenous and environmental jurisdictions. Consultation exists for a reason: to balance competing interests, avoid legal delays and foster long-term buy-in.
Some Indigenous communities support accelerated projects where they hold equity stakes. Others see Bill C-5 as a modern echo of top-down decision-making. A faster process that excludes key voices isn’t progress—it’s regression.
Concern is growing across the political spectrum. Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe warns that “optics will not fix a broken system.” Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has called for substance over spin. Quebec’s François Legault flatly rejects federal overreach, while British Columbia insists that Indigenous consultation must be meaningful, not token.
Even federal Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre weighed in: “If you have a wall that is blocking everybody, why would you say only a certain group is allowed to go around the wall? Knock down the wall.”
That’s the core problem. Bill C-5 doesn’t remove barriers—it offers selective exemptions.
The real obstacles remain. The Impact Assessment Act, often called the “No More Pipelines Law” by critics, is still largely intact despite a partial Supreme Court ruling. Other restrictive policies, such as the B.C. tanker moratorium and various net-zero mandates, continue to layer complexity.
Rather than reforming these systems, Bill C-5 sidesteps them for cabinet-designated projects. That’s not comprehensive reform. It’s patchwork authority.
Canada is spending heavily on climate adaptation, Indigenous reconciliation, housing, health care and defence, all while managing a rising federal debt. Add energy transition and industrial retooling, and the question becomes urgent: are we building strategically or stretching ourselves thin?
These aren’t just policy concerns. They go to the heart of how decisions are made—and whether people still feel heard in the process.
Because beyond spending and regulation, there’s a deeper issue at stake: trust.
Our public discourse is fracturing. Debate is increasingly ideological, polarized and unproductive. The political left often champions equity but struggles with execution. The right promotes freedom but oversimplifies complex issues. Most Canadians live in the middle, frustrated with the noise and looking for leadership that builds rather than divides.
We need to stop mistaking consultation for obstruction, or recognition of legitimate opposing voices as a threat to authority. Real nation-building isn’t about speed or volume—it’s about shared effort. It means doing hard things together and ensuring that our largest projects reflect more than just federal ambition. They must reflect shared values and long-term resilience.
Don’t settle for slogans. Ask your member of Parliament what oversight exists in Bill C-5. Pay attention to whose voices are heard and whose are sidelined. Most of all, stay engaged.
Because nation-building doesn’t begin in Ottawa. It begins with citizens who ask better questions and demand better answers.
Faith Wood is a professional speaker, author, and certified professional behaviour analyst. Before her career in speaking and writing, she served in law enforcement, which gave her a unique perspective on human behaviour and motivations. Faith is also known for her work as a novelist, with a focus on thrillers and suspense. Her background in law enforcement and understanding of human behaviour often play a significant role in her writing.
The commentaries offered on SaskToday.ca are intended to provide thought-provoking material for our readers. The opinions expressed are those of the authors. Contributors' articles or letters do not necessarily reflect the opinion of any SaskToday.ca staff.
