Liberal leader Mark Carney and conservative leader Pierre Poilievre offer similar sound energy development plans that accelerate regulatory processes and create energy corridors to develop natural resources projects.
But some analysts and observers of the industry, while applauding the instructions that both leaders are taking, are warning that their proposals can face significant challenges.
“It’s great to see that improving regulatory systems for important projects is on the agenda, but both approaches … they raised some quite great questions about how that would really work in practice.” said Monica Gattinger, president of the Positive Energy Program of the University of Ottawa.
Both Pailievre and Carney said that their plans would help reduce the dependence of the United States, particularly following the rates imposed by the president of the United States, Donald Trump.
To that end, Carney said he wants to reduce waiting times for the approval processes for important five -year resources to two years. Poilievre conservatives have promised a maximum of a year for review times, with a six -month objective.
Both leaders have also raised the problem of implementing some type of energy corridor.
Carney has promised to create commercial and energy corridors for various types of projects that are considered interesting for transport, energy, critical minerals and digital connectivity.
Meanwhile, Poilievre announced the creation of a “National Energy Corridor ” Canada ‘that” accelerated approvals for transmission lines, railways, pipes and other critical infrastructure throughout Canada in a completely pre -drawn transport corridor completely inside Canada. ”
The conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, speaking of Saint John, NB, details the plan of his party of having a pre -approved corridor that allows companies to build pipes, transmission lines, railways and other critical infrastructure throughout Canada.
‘I have not seen many details’
In the corridor, all levels of government would provide legally binding commitments to approve projects, according to conservatives.
Even so, Gattinger said that one of the first challenges for these policies will be to define exactly what a corridor is.
“I do not think there is a single definition of runner, and we have not seen many details of any campaign about what they mean with that concept,” Gattinger said.
Martha Hall Findlay, director of the School of Public Policies at the University of Calgary and former Liberal Deputy, said Carney and Pailievre are talking about the importance of Canadian energy for the economy.
“It is not frequent that the leaders of the two main parties say similar things,” he said.
“They are arriving from a slightly different perspective. Both say, we understand it, we need to build the infrastructure, we need to capitalize on the resources that we are so blessed to have in this country in this country. [and] that we have not been capitalizing for 20 years. “
Hall Findlay also said that his public policy school has studied the concept of a northern corridor for years and has reached some important conclusions.
“One of the fundamental conclusions is [that] The shortcuts make long delays. Two will be difficult. “
Katarina Koch, one of the researchers of that corridor project, said it is important to keep in mind that a pre -approved corridor is not an infrastructure development in itself, but only a route that is leaving aside for any potential future development.
“It is not yet clear what kind of infrastructure will be built potentially in this corridor,” he told CBC’s Calgary Eyeopener. “So that is where much of complexity and uncertainty comes from.”
The corridor could include different types of infrastructure (pipes, roads, railways) and all come with their own regulatory requirements, Koch said.
Liberal leader Mark Carney praised Alberta’s energy workers and promised to turn Canada into a ‘energy superpower’ into a campaign stop in Calgary.
“The community could be open for a type of infrastructure, but maybe not for other types of infrastructure,” Koch said. “And then there are really some questions about how this approval process will look.”
The process also implies dealing with the rights of owners, protected areas and indigenous communities, he added.
The great chief criticizes the proposal
Conservatives have said that the first nations will be involved from the beginning, ensuring that economic benefits flow directly to them and that their approval is ensured before money is spent.
But shortly after Pailievre’s announcement, the great boss Savanna McGregor of Algonquin Anishinabeg Tribal Council criticized the proposal.
“How can there be consultations (if not accommodation and consent) if the corridor is ‘pre -approved’ before someone has the plans for which infrastructure will be built and where?” She wrote in the Toronto star.
Hall Findlay said that one of the frustrations with the Poilievre corridor plan is that it makes the idea easy to implement.
“And it is not. And I think Mark Carney acknowledges that it is more complicated,” he said. “You cannot say: ‘We will simply do this and obtain permits and approvals.’ It must take into account the interests of the community, regional interests, the interests of the indigenous community.”
But with Carney, Hall Findlay said there is still an uncertainty about what it means exactly for an “energy corridor”, and if that includes oil pipes.
She said the world needs Canadian oil and should be increasing production.
“Am I looking to listen to certain things from Mark Carny that may be a bit more specific about not being shy about the oil? Yes.”
Gattinger added that it is not clear how Carney, by doubling the limit of oil and gas emissions and in the bill C-69, the impact assessment law (called “no more acts of pipes” of some critics), squares that talk about the improvement of the investment environment to obtain more created projects.
“Indeed, we have the same investment environment that we have had in the last issue of years,” he said. “How does that change things for Canada’s appeal as a place to do business?”
But on the conservative side, Gattinger said that if they balance too much towards the projects prior to the application, they could begin to lose public support.
Too focused on regulatory systems, says Expert.
Gattinger also said that both leaders are too focused on deadlines and how to improve regulatory systems so that projects are built faster.
“That is an important objective, but many of the weaknesses in the Canadian investment environment have been problems beyond time, such as the predictability of our policy frame,” he said.
An example, said Gattinger, is the uncertainty about whether Canada will have an industrial carbon price or a limit of oil and gas emissions.
“If you are an investor, you cannot calculate the economy. Of a project easily when you have this unpredictability.”
