Giving fast lane permitting a test drive

Federal fast-tracking initiatives

Federally, the Building Canada Act established a new Major Projects Office (MPO) aimed at accelerating nationally significant projects by streamlining federal approvals, coordinating financing, and acting as a single point of contact for proponents, governments, and Indigenous Peoples¹. The Government of Canada has so far referred 15 projects to the MPO, of which 5 are electricity projects, 3 are energy projects, 5 are mining projects, 3 are highways, and 1 is an industrial terminal. The MPO has also been asked to focus its attention on six ‘transformative strategies’ related to regional rail, port, critical minerals, wind power, carbon capture, electricity, and energy development.

The Building Canada Act allows the government to designate projects as being in the national interest to fast-track, or in some cases bypass, federal approvals and permits. To date, the MPO has not declared victory in its work on a particular project or strategy, nor has any project been formally designated as a “national interest project”. While new streamlining initiatives are sending a positive signal to regulators and investors, we expect scrutiny over the MPO’s work to intensify in 2026. Most investors, particularly in the private sector, will need to see practical results before they are prepared to risk capital.      

While the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) continues to assess federally designated projects under legislation adopted in 2019 and amended in 2024², it is in the process of re-engineering the legislation’s implementation, including with a considerably faster two-year process that will be available for any project—not just national interest projects under the Building Canada Act. The IAAC will also continue to act as a federal permitting coordinator, working with proponents and other federal agencies to navigate federal permitting requirements and develop detailed permitting plans.

The one-project, one-review concept—which has been a goal for years—picked up unprecedented momentum this past year. In January 2026, the Eskay Creek Revitalization Project was given the green light after undergoing a substituted IAAC process with the British Columbia government. Like its agreement with British Columbia, over the past year, the IAAC has negotiated similar draft cooperation agreements with Alberta, Manitoba, and Prince Edward Island, and finalized agreements with Ontario, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador which seek to accelerate approval timelines, share information between jurisdictions, and avoid duplication. According to the Impact Assessment Registry, there are currently 36 projects “in progress” in its impact assessment, excluding projects on federal lands or outside Canada. Of those 36 projects, 19 are mining, 6 are nuclear, 4 are roads or bridges, 1 is oil and gas, 2 are ports, 2 are dams or hydroelectric facilities, and 2 are waste and water management.

Finally, the Government of Canada adopted certain initiatives intended to avoid delay while fulfilling its constitutionally mandated duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous Peoples whose rights may be impacted by a proposed project. The process requires meaningful, two-way dialogue with Indigenous Peoples potentially impacted by development, aiming to address their concerns and, where appropriate, provide accommodation. Project proponents are typically required to engage meaningfully with local Indigenous groups early in the project development process in order to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals, as well as avoid legal disputes. To avoid inefficiencies and duplication, the federal government committed to improving coordination between regulatory departments on Indigenous consultations in a Cabinet Directive³. Additionally, the federal government appointed an Indigenous Advisory Council to the MPO to help shape how the office will work with Indigenous Peoples to advance the projects and strategies referred to the MPO in light of the ambitious acceleration goals.

Provincial and territorial fast-tracking initiatives

Provincial governments have also adopted new legislation to cut regulatory red tape and shorten review times. British Columbia’s Infrastructure Projects Act extends faster permitting pathways to “provincially significant” projects, which includes projects that contribute to the province’s critical mineral supply or energy security. In 2026, we expect regulations to be adopted that will bring this legislation into force and further define which projects are to be considered “provincially significant”.

Similarly, in Ontario, the Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act overhauls the project permitting regime, establishing streamlined processes and new Special Economic Zones. In 2026, we expect the first Special Economic Zones to be designated by the province, along with the exercise of new ministerial powers and the operationalization of accelerated permitting over projects.

The Québec government introduced a similar bill in December 2025 that would allow priority projects to undergo a single authorization covering dozens of environmental and resource management laws. It is uncertain whether this bill will become law before the next Québec election, which is scheduled for October 5, 2026.

Canada’s three territories are each subject to distinct environmental assessment legislation establishing regulatory bodies and processes based on modern treaties concluded with Indigenous Nations⁴. The Government of Canada’s Northern Regulatory Initiative aims to increase confidence and efficiencies in northern regulatory regimes while advancing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by providing funding, support, and other resources that benefit those jurisdictions.

Can fast-tracking reforms deliver?

Canada’s new fast‑lane permitting frameworks set the stage for faster, more coordinated project approvals, but success will depend on how effectively federal, provincial, and territorial systems work together; how transparently regulators implement these tools; and whether processes uphold environmental standards and Indigenous rights. The coming year will give us a much better sense of whether these reforms translate into real reductions in timelines and greater investor confidence—or whether structural gaps and jurisdictional complexity continue to slow progress.