A key point of debate in this election is how Canada can reduce its economic dependence on the United States by pivoting to new markets for energy products.
The Conservatives and Liberals have both vowed to break the logjams that have blocked development of major energy projects in recent decades. But to do this, they must bring along First Nations who have, often through the courts, established roadblocks over environmental concerns.
Northern Gateway, which would have brought Alberta oil to the Pacific coast, was cancelled in 2016 after the Federal Court of Appeal found Canada failed to consult with First Nations on the pipeline project. The Energy East pipeline project was cancelled in 2017 following regulatory delays and Indigenous opposition.
Both the Liberals and the Conservatives in this campaign say they can fast-track new energy projects, allowing Canada to wean itself off its reliance on the United States for trade. In 2023, Canada exported $124-billion of oil, and 97 per cent of it went to the United States, sold at a deep discount to prices on the world market. Finding new markets for that oil would change the dynamic in the current Canada-U.S. trade dispute.
To change that profile, Canada will need to get to ‘yes’ on major energy projects. Both of the major parties in this election say they can do that – although only the Conservatives are unequivocally committed to constructing new oil pipeline capacity. (Liberal Leader Mark Carney said Sunday that “maybe pipelines” should be built.)
Both parties say they will streamline regulatory processes and impose time limits on decision-making. Mr. Carney says that as part of that, he would ensure that Indigenous consultations related to federally regulated infrastructure projects such as rail expansions, port upgrades and nuclear energy projects are held within “clear, predictable, and competitive timelines.”
Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Leader, wants to repeal Bill C-69, which requires that resource projects be assessed for environmental, health, social and economic impacts and respect the rights of Indigenous peoples. Both parties would seek First Nations consent through what they call economic reconciliation – offering financial incentives to win approval. The Conservative version would see First Nations collect directly from industry: Indigenous communities would have the option to take a share of federal corporate taxes from industry operating on their lands.
The Liberals have been more vague, saying they will pursue meaningful reconciliation and partnership with Indigenous communities through economic policy. They have committed funds to help get energy projects with Indigenous partnerships off the ground.
Courts have been clear that governments cannot ignore Indigenous rights to consultation and accommodation. The Liberals and the Conservatives are offering variations of incentive plans to bring First Nations on board for development. It’s a tactic that has already been employed successfully by mining, energy and forestry companies, but it won’t always work: sometimes, the answer is ‘no.’ The question is, what happens then? And that is something both Mr. Poilievre and Mr. Carney have yet to make clear.