The One Canadian Economy Act, also known as Bill C-5, is the federal government’s plan to modernize and speed up the delivery of major infrastructure and resource projects in Canada. Bill C-5 was passed by politicians in Ottawa shortly after its introduction in June.
That’s welcome news for many leaders in Canada’s construction industry, like John Gamble, president and CEO of the Association of Consulting Engineering Companies – Canada (ACEC-Canada), who believes the move is long overdue. Gamble says the One Canadian Economy Act reflects several of his organization’s long-standing advocacy positions, including calls for better interjurisdictional co-ordination, reduced red tape and faster project approvals.
“It’s going to give rise to a lot of important discussion that we need to have. And it commits the government to a course of action in terms of addressing the fact that we cannot be a competitive nation if it takes 10, 15, 20 years to get projects approved,” said Gamble. “When you take 10-plus years to get projects approved, you’re almost guaranteeing partial obsolescence before you even get the project permitted, before shovels go in the ground. You are responding to an economy of 10 or 15 years ago, and that’s not going to help us moving forward.”
“It’s not about getting the projects done at any cost. We want the projects done well. We want them done right. We just want them done effectively and efficiently.”
John Gamble, Association of Consulting Engineering Companies – Canada
Gamble says the reforms in the One Canadian Economy Act should help build a stronger, more resilient economy and give Canada better footing in a shifting trade and geopolitical landscape. “Creating the infrastructure we need allows us to access resources and get them to market both domestically and for export,” he said. “This kind of infrastructure will give us agility and make us more self-sufficient and competitive globally.”
The One Canadian Economy Act is intended to help facilitate “nation-building” projects through streamlined regulatory processes and mechanisms that cut inefficiencies and other obstacles, such as duplicate permit approval. It creates a framework to identify and fast-track these initiatives by establishing a Major Projects Office and creating a “one project, one review” approach to approvals. A key change that reduces the federal review process to two years.
“The idea of one-project, one review is certainly something consistent with the kinds of solutions we’ve been advocating for that provide clarity. Sometimes a firm ‘no’ is better than an indefinite ‘maybe’, particularly for private investors,” Gamble said. “This creates a rational permitting process that is efficient and expedient so that we get to the decisions we need in a prompt and timely manner. It’s not about getting the projects done at any cost. We want the projects done well. We want them done right. We just want them done effectively and efficiently.”
The reforms will likely lead to infrastructure projects proceeding more quickly. “Which means there’s going to be increased demand for both engineering and contracting services. The projects may also require earlier engagement of engineers to meet the readiness criteria for projects of national interest,” Gamble said.
Gamble says the success of the One Canadian Economy Act will depend on how well it is implemented. He adds ACEC-Canada’s support for the program is contingent on core principles. This includes ensuring the streamlining and red tape reduction objectives do not compromise rigorous technical, environmental and safety standards required for infrastructure projects. Licensed professional engineers are legally and ethically bound to safeguard public health and safety, and ACEC-Canada’s position is that streamlining cannot erode these responsibilities.
As well, ACEC-Canada asserts that Indigenous engagement in the One Canadian Economy program must be meaningful and well resourced. It also maintains both government and industry will need to support capacity-building for Indigenous communities so they can not only fully participate in consultations, but also take part in the projects themselves. ACEC-Canada has identified several ways the association and its more than 400 member firms can help the One Canadian Economy Act deliver on its potential. This includes:
- Providing expertise to help shape effective regulatory models and timelines that balance speed with quality
- Advising on best practices for “one project, one review” frameworks, particularly where federal and provincial jurisdictions overlap
- Promoting long-term, value-based procurement during implementation of fast-tracked projects
- Facilitating engagement across sectors to ensure shared understanding of goals, risks and responsibilities
“There are a lot of organizations out there that want this to be successful [and] our hope is the government recognizes they will need help doing this. To make this work, they’re going to need to depend on some expertise, much of which will be outside of the government,” said Gamble. “I think we all jointly as a broader industry need to tell the government that we’re here to make this work. This is in the interest of all. Just using this as an excuse to cut corners is probably going to do more harm than good. We have a vested interest in making this work. And better still, we know how to deliver projects.”
“There are a lot of organizations out there that want this to be successful [and] our hope is the government recognizes they will need help doing this. To make this work, they’re going to need to depend on some expertise, much of which will be outside of the government.”
John Gamble, Association of Consulting Engineering Companies – Canada
Gamble says his organization will be watching for an amendment to the One Canadian Economy Act that adds a five-year sunset clause for the designation of “national interest” projects. It means after five years the federal government will no longer be able to designate new projects in this category unless it chooses to extend the window.
“It’s not necessarily problematic, but it does just add a hint of uncertainty,” said Gamble, adding there are concerns related to the huge backlog of infrastructure projects still requiring approvals in Canada. “I’m not against the idea of a periodic review of any legislation for that matter, but this is something we’re a little concerned about.”
National Infrastructure Assessment
While the One Canadian Economy Act focuses on improving the efficiency of project delivery, ACEC-Canada says it must be implemented in tandem with a fully realized National Infrastructure Assessment (NIA) – an initiative the engineering organization continues to strongly support. The NIA is being led by the Canadian Infrastructure Council (CIC), an expert advisory body Ottawa set up in December. The council is engaging key partners and stakeholders from industry and government to gather their knowledge and help ensure the NIA is useful for communities across Canada. ACEC-Canada has already been involved in the discussions
“To their credit, they have been very open with us. [The CIC] has reached out to us proactively and we’ve had a lot of engagement with them,” said Gamble. “One thing we would like to see is this engagement with industry become a bit more formalized. We have suggested having an industry advisory panel to feed into the Canadian Infrastructure Council.”
Gamble views a long-term infrastructure strategy as something that Canada has lacked but needs now. “What we need is a line of sight, so we know we’re actually investing in the right kinds of assets and are making smart, informed decisions. This will allow the infrastructure ecosystem, everybody from the owners to consultants to contractors and everyone else involved in delivery of investment, to manage and allocate our resources appropriately,” he said.
“The National Infrastructure Assessment, by providing that vision for our infrastructure and what we see as a potential roadmap to get there, will allow us to make good data-based policies. It can make our investments in infrastructure very potent over the long term, in terms of their effectiveness in meeting climate goals, growing the economy and having a good return on investment for the taxpayer.”