Dr. Michael Batu is an associate professor in the Economics department at UFV and former economist for the Government of Ontario. Anna Johnston, LLM, is a West Coast Environmental Law (WCEL) staff lawyer.
On June 26, Bill C-5 — the “One Canadian Economy Act” — received Royal Assent, officially becoming law. Its sweeping powers to fast-track projects while bypassing environmental safeguards and Indigenous consultation have triggered backlash from First Nations and environmental advocates. The Cascade spoke with Johnston and Batu about the bill’s potential implications.
Bill C-5 both smooths out labour mobility across provinces, and gives the cabinet power to greenlight “national interest” projects — like pipelines and ports — without following certain federal rules.
Johnston commented that the bill dismantles environmental legal protections that have been fought for decades.
“We have been working for decades to build Canada’s environmental legal safety net, and Bill C-5 circumvents those laws that we’ve fought long and hard to secure for people.”
Batu stated that it’s essential to consider the context of the bill and argued that Canada’s slow approval process hinders productivity. However, Johnston said that Indigenous consultation and public involvement are a constitutional obligation and the foundation of good governance.
“The duty to consult that exists because of the Crown’s fiduciary duty and the constitutionally affirmed rights of Indigenous peoples, that’s not red tape. That’s a constitutional imperative … [and] it’s a pillar of our democracy for the public to have a say about major issues that affect them.”
She pointed out a 2024 study in FACETS that showed most delays in mining and infrastructure projects come from market forces, not government processes. Johnston argued there are smarter ways to improve efficiency — like expert panels or early public engagement — without gutting accountability.
“Bill C-5 takes a sledgehammer to a problem that needs a little bit of tinkering around the edges.”
Batu commented that trade between provinces has lagged behind international trade for decades, and mobility barriers remain. He believes these changes are long overdue and pointed out that the bill’s efforts to ease domestic trade are crucial, especially in a post-tariff, protectionist era. The bill aims to fix that by removing internal barriers and making it easier for workers to move between provinces without recertifying their credentials.
Johnston isn’t opposed in principle to breaking down trade barriers between provinces, but warns that automatically accepting different provincial standards could weaken protections for the environment, worker safety, and public health.
Most controversy has focused on the “Building Canada Act” portion of the bill, which bypasses environmental laws and Indigenous consultation. Batu acknowledged the tension and said he understands where the criticism is coming from.
“For me, as an economist, I see their point. I also see the point of development, because we really need it. So, we have to balance things.”
He reasoned that living in poverty isn’t an option for a wealthy country like Canada. He believes the key is finding middle ground — investing in projects and setting aside part of the revenue to fund future innovations, especially technologies that support environmental sustainability.
Johnston doesn’t dismiss the importance of transformative investments that could shield Canada from economic pressures and sees opportunity in projects that grow industries, create jobs, and move the country forward. However, Johnston urged Canadians to consider the project’s long-lasting environmental, social, and economic repercussions for future generations.
On July 15, nine First Nations launched a constitutional challenge against C-5, and Ontario’s comparable Bill 5 — warning both bills threaten land, water, and treaty obligations.
Johnston emphasized how these bills undermine Indigenous rights.
“Indigenous peoples have constitutionally enshrined rights that have to be respected. One of the fundamental problems with Bill C-5 is that it allows [the] government to make decisions, and in fact, encourages government to make decisions without adequately consulting, let alone securing a free fire and informed consent of Indigenous people.”
Johnston expressed frustration that Indigenous peoples are again forced to lead the pushback, rather than being meaningfully included by the government. She also criticized the rushed drafting of the bill, which was tabled, passed, and received Royal Assent within five weeks after the Liberals took office.
Batu agreed it was an unusually fast legislative process for a bill with such sweeping implications.
“This kind of law deserved a little bit of discussion, which I think was denied to some people.”
Chief Angela Levasseur from the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation highlighted during a summit in Gatineau how Canada’s push to fast-track development contradicts the original spirit of the treaty relationships.
“We were promised a treaty relationship based on peace, mutual respect and the sharing of this land and its resources; instead, we are watching as Canada enacts new legislation to fast-track development on our territories while the promises made to us over a century ago remain broken.”
Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.
