Building for Tomorrow
Issue #4 | December 2025
Canada is about to enter a new era of nation-building. As Ottawa promises to “build, baby, build,” the provinces line up behind new trade corridors and the private sector awaits new business opportunities. The stakes for Canada’s economic future are high.
Rail lines, airports, ports, roads and pipelines are essential contributors to national prosperity. However, not all infrastructure is created equal and the “how” of project approvals deserves just as much attention as the “what.”
The Building for Tomorrow series tracks, analyzes, explains and critiques the policies, projects and politics shaping Canada’s trade-enabling infrastructure.
East-West Energy Corridor
While headlines focus on a potential pipeline from Alberta to the northwest coast of British Columbia, another possible nation-building endeavour with an energy focus is in the works.
Pipelines continue to be a major question mark when it comes to major projects, but another province-led project is being developed for potential inclusion in the Building Canada Act’s list of National Interest Projects.
As part of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed in July, between Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta, Ontario has launched a feasibility study to explore the development of a national East-West Energy Corridor.
Energy self-reliance
Ontario has cited the need for greater energy self-reliance, domestic manufacturing and access to resources “east-west,” rather than relying on the southward flows.
Given Western Canada’s oil and gas production and Ontario’s refineries and port infrastructure access, the corridor is seen as a way to connect production and markets within Canada to export points. The study is also positioned to strengthen Canadian steel and manufacturing supply chains by specifying that pipelines be built with Canadian steel.
The feasibility study
- The corridor is envisioned to carry oil, gas and other energy products from Western Canada (notably Alberta and Saskatchewan) to refineries in southern Ontario, and to new and expanded ports on James Bay, Hudson Bay and the Great Lakes.
- The study, expected to be completed next year, is being conducted by an advisory team including GHD Limited, Ernst & Young LLP (EY Canada), Mokwateh, AtkinsRéalis Group Inc., Wood PLC and Turner & Townsend Limited, with Infrastructure Ontario serving as commercial advisor.
- The scope of the study includes identifying corridor and site options, cost analysis, route selection and potentially a strategic petroleum reserve. It also includes evaluating complementary opportunities such as all-season roads, mineral exports and grid upgrades.
Manitoba’s Non-Participation: A political gap?
As provinces move quickly to advance large-scale infrastructure, questions remain about whether Indigenous consultation – and in some jurisdictions, Indigenous co-decision-making – will be meaningfully integrated from the outset of major projects.
Manitoba’s refusal to join the MOU without early-stage partnerships illustrates how differing provincial approaches to reconciliation may create governance gaps.
“Our government will not treat consultation as a box to check after decisions are made,” Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew said. “We believe reconciliation requires shared decision-making from the start.”
The MOU signed by the three provinces calls for enhanced regulatory coordination, including a “One Project, One Process” model for federal project reviews, greater deference to provincial decision-making authority, and a reaffirmation of the duty to consult Indigenous communities and support equity participation in major infrastructure projects.
Premier Kinew emphasized that Manitoba’s framework for large-scale projects begins with Indigenous partnership rather than consultation after the fact.
This approach underscores Manitoba’s intent to integrate Indigenous governments as co-decision-makers from the earliest planning stages. It also highlights tensions between “build big, build now,” and provincial and Indigenous autonomy. On the other hand, the push for speed risks tripping over substantial litigation, and Manitoba’s approach of Indigenous inclusion and consensus-building may also prove more effective in the long run.
What is the federal role?
Canadians have responded positively to indications that the federal government is becoming more focused and ambitious about advancing nation-building infrastructure. However, there have also been indications that the federal government will not “impose a project on a province.”
In the context of the potential East-West Energy Corridor, a central question will be how – and to what extent – the federal government chooses to exercise its authority. Will it coordinate interprovincial efforts, facilitate regulatory processes and ensure Indigenous consultation obligations are fulfilled?
Additional considerations include whether the federal government will drive the project forward without Manitoba’s consent if it determines the corridor is in the national interest, or whether it would step in to negotiate with Manitoba on behalf of the other three provinces.
The recent Canada–Alberta MOU on streamlining major infrastructure provides an example of Ottawa signalling a more active, central role in advancing nation-building projects.
If the federal government continues with this level of involvement with similar projects in the future, initiatives like the East-West corridor could also receive strong coordination and support. But only time will tell.
Each month, Building for Tomorrow explores new developments in trade-enabling infrastructure in Canada, such as the rationale behind national projects, negotiations and agreements between different Canadian jurisdictions and developments in approval processes and policy.
This edition of Building for Tomorrow was written by Margi Pandya. If you have any developments you’d like to see featured or topics that you think should be covered, please send them to .