The federal government has proposed legislative changes to streamline the review process for major project approvals, aiming for a one-year federal review timeline. This move is described as necessary and overdue, particularly for Alberta.
Regulatory system challenges
For too long, Canada has struggled with a regulatory system that has become slow, fragmented, unpredictable and duplicative. Major energy, infrastructure, mining, transportation and industrial projects often spend years navigating overlapping federal and provincial reviews, shifting requirements and prolonged uncertainty. While rigorous environmental oversight is essential, the current system has too often caused delays without delivering better outcomes.
The result has been weakened investor confidence, declining competitiveness and missed opportunities in critical sectors, undermining Canada's long-term economic resilience and energy security.
Albertan perspective
As an Albertan, Janaka Ruwanpura views this announcement as a pragmatic and necessary correction. Alberta's economy has long relied on its ability to responsibly develop major projects across energy and petrochemicals, as well as emerging sectors such as hydrogen, carbon capture and critical minerals. Yet many of these projects have faced delays that far exceed reasonable review timelines, often without any added environmental value.
Investment flows to certainty. Increasingly, Canada has lost investment to jurisdictions such as the United States and Australia, where approval processes are clearer, timelines more predictable, and regulatory coordination stronger. As global demand for energy, infrastructure, and critical minerals accelerates, Canada cannot afford to remain a high-risk destination for project development.
Environmental standards not weakened
A one-year review target does not mean weakening environmental standards. It means improving coordination, eliminating duplication, setting clear expectations, and ensuring timely decision-making. In many cases, proponents are not actively conducting studies for years; they are waiting between stages of an inefficient process.
Concerns raised by environmental organizations, Indigenous communities and civil society must be taken seriously. Faster approvals cannot come at the expense of environmental integrity, Indigenous rights, or public trust. If reforms are perceived as shortcuts, they will face resistance, litigation and ultimately further delays.
Path forward
The path forward is not to maintain the status quo. It is to build a smarter, more integrated system that delivers both efficiency and accountability. Several proactive measures can help achieve this balance.
First, Canada should fully implement the one project, one integrated review model it has proposed, bringing together federal, provincial and Indigenous authorities from the outset. This would reduce duplication and ensure that all perspectives are considered early, when they have the greatest impact, rather than late in the process.
Second, Indigenous engagement must shift from consultation to co-development. Early involvement, supported by adequate capacity funding and technical resources, can improve project design, reduce conflict and build long-term partnerships. Projects that meaningfully incorporate Indigenous perspectives are more likely to succeed.
