The federal government’s Bill C-5 fast-tracks pipelines at the expense of environmental protections and Indigenous rights.
On June 26, 2025, Bill C-5, An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act, received Royal Assent and became law. The bill was rushed through the House of Commons and passed just one day before Parliament rose for its summer recess.
The legislation gives Ottawa new powers to designate projects of “national interest”and accelerate approval. While the government framed the bill as a tool to strengthen the economy and unify Canada’s regulatory framework, its hurried passage left little room for public debate, media scrutiny, or thorough study. This lack of transparency undermines democratic accountability and prohibits proper scrutiny of the bill, which can often lead to changes and amendments.
Even more troubling is how Bill C-5 sidelines existing environmental and Indigenous protections by removing the rigorous multiple-step approval process and cutting it down to one review. The legislation weakens consideration of the safety of endangered species, limits consultation with Indigenous communities, and reduces transparency around environmental reviews.
The government has highlighted investments such as the Indigenous Loan Guarantee Program to show communities have a stake in projects, but funding does not offset the potential loss of land. While Indigenous groups may choose to support resource development, Bill C-5 does not make their consent mandatory. Through provisions such as eminent domain, the government could seize land for projects including pipelines and roadways, undermining trust and reconciliation.
The ink was barely dry On Bill C-5 when Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Alberta signed a new a new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to build a west-east pipeline. With the project expected to be designated as a nation-building initiative, its approval process could be accelerated under the bill’s provisions .
While not legally binding, it signals future agreements that could be fast-tracked under Bill C-5. Pipelines are among the most environmentally destructive projects, and the bill gives the government broad power to approve them with minimal oversight.
The Carney government promises to practice meaningful consultation with Indigenous peoples and perform proper environmental reviews, but the legislation leaves loopholes and workarounds to undermine these commitments.
Currently, the government argues the Bill is meant to help Canada “get shovels in the ground” and combat the ongoing tariff war with the United States, as well as fulfill the Liberal promise of making Canada the largest economy in the G7 and an energy superpower globally.
In reality, these projects will still take years to commence; by then, tariffs will have already had a detrimental impact on the Canadian economy.
Seemingly, the projects seriously under consideration appear to be pipelines, evident in the prime minister’s own comments and in the meetings Carney’s team has taken with oil and gas companies. Building new pipelines will not only damage ecosystems and treaty lands during construction, but the resulting increase in oil production and use will worsen the climate crisis for decades.
Framing pipelines as an economic safeguard is a short-sighted solution that ignores the broader costs of fossil fuel dependence. Instead of protecting Canada’s economy, this approach will deepen the nation’s reliance on outdated infrastructure and leave an even greater mess for the next generation to clean up.
The solution is to invest in new research and technology rooted in sustainability, allowing Canada to move away from its reliance on oil and towards a Canada that has roots in the future and not the past, meaning sustainable projects that strengthen the economy, protect the environment, and respect Indigenous rights.
Lilly is a third-year Political Studies student and Assistant News Editor at The Journal
Tags
Bill C-5, environmentalism, indigenous affairs
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.