Major Project Investors Need a Less Political, More Predictable Regulatory Process

September 8, 2026 - As Canada brings together global investors for the Canada Investment Summit and looks to accelerate the building of major projects, a more predictable regulatory process is needed to give investors and proponents the confidence to commit capital, according to a new C.D. Howe Institute report.

In Clear the Way: Does the Building Canada Act Help Canada Build? authors George Vegh and Kate Koplovich argue that Canada’s renewed focus on getting major projects built must be accompanied by a next phase of regulatory reform that addresses the underlying sources of uncertainty facing investors and proponents. They recommend giving expert regulators final authority over project approvals, simplifying project review criteria, and enforcing statutory time limits.

“Canada’s renewed focus on building major projects is welcome, but attracting investment requires more than a commitment to move faster,” says Koplovich, Senior Policy Analyst at the Institute. “Investors willing to invest in long-term projects need to know what rules apply, who ultimately decides whether a project proceeds, and whether an approval will endure through political change.”

While the Building Canada Act and Major Projects Office are intended to help accelerate major projects, Vegh and Koplovich identify two underlying sources of uncertainty that remain: political decision-making over individual projects and open-ended review criteria that require regulators to consider broader public-policy objectives.

In their report, Vegh and Koplovich envision a process in which pipeline proposals are assessed by experts against clearly defined criteria directly related to the project and the regulator’s mandate. They argue that once a project meets the applicable legislative and regulatory requirements, the final approval should rest with the expert regulator rather than be subject to political discretion.

The authors argue that political decision-making creates uncertainty for long-term investment, pointing to the US approval system, where presidential approval is required only for projects that cross the US border, while other projects are approved based on legislative requirements.

The report also recommends removing broader policy debates from individual project hearings and addressing them through economy-wide regulations that apply consistently across projects. For example, support in achieving government climate objective requirements should be established through government regulations rather than debated separately during each project review.

Finally, the authors recommend enforceable statutory timelines for governments, project proponents, and intervenors. Extensions should only be granted where proponents can demonstrate a need arising from unforeseen circumstances.

“Canada has made progress in shortening some approval timelines through administrative improvements, but more work remains,” says Vegh, Senior Fellow at the Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy. “The next step is creating a more predictable, less political regulatory process that gives investors the confidence to commit to the major projects Canada needs to strengthen investment and productivity.”

A separate upcoming C.D. Howe Institute report by David Jones will examine how the Major Projects Office and federal government have prioritized major projects to date, and how those choices align with the objectives of the Building Canada Act.

Read the Full Report

For more information, contact: George Vegh, Senior Fellow, Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy; Kate Koplovich, Senior Policy Analyst, C.D. Howe Institute; and Raquel Schneider, Communications Officer, C.D. Howe Institute, 647-805 3918, rschneider@cdhowe.org.

The C.D. Howe Institute is an independent not-for-profit research institute whose mission is to raise living standards by fostering economically sound public policies. Widely considered to be Canada’s most influential think tank, the Institute is a trusted source of essential policy intelligence, distinguished by research that is nonpartisan, evidence-based and subject to definitive expert review. 

Want more insights like this? Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest research and expert commentary.