Bill C-5: Canadians support fast-tracking projects, but conflicted over individual elements of the legislation -

Half still want proper ecological assessments; two-in-five in Quebec demand provincial input

June 26, 2025 – The fast track on projects deemed in the national interest is well on the way to being paved. But while Canadians broadly support the concept of accelerating the timelines of major national infrastructure projects, concern remains over what steps are being skipped to get there.

New data from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute finds three-quarters (74%) of Canadians say they support “fast-tracking” major projects. But half (49%) are opposed to bypassing environmental reviews to speed things up, and three-in-10 (30%) do not want provincial oversight tossed to the wayside either.

The latter is more of a concern in Quebec, where two-in-five (42%) reject provincial laws and regulations being overridden.

Bill C-5 has proven controversial among some First Nations. While it guarantees consultation on projects throughout their timeline, it does not offer a veto to Indigenous groups, many of whom worry their constitutional rights will be ignored in the rush to build.

A majority of Canadians (59%) support where the bill landed, with consultation but no override for First Nations.

In what has been a change of pace for the federal Liberals under Prime Minister Mark Carney, Bill C-5 passed in the House of Commons thanks to the support of the Conservatives, who often stood in opposition to legislation proposed by Carney’s predecessor, Justin Trudeau. In fact, recent Liberal and Conservative voters find themselves broadly agreeing on different elements of the bill – except when it comes to bypassing ecological assessments. On that matter, Liberals are more likely to be opposed (60%), while Conservatives are more likely to be in favour (59%).

About ARI

The Angus Reid Institute (ARI) was founded in October 2014 by pollster and sociologist, Dr. Angus Reid. ARI is a national, not-for-profit, non-partisan public opinion research foundation established to advance education by commissioning, conducting and disseminating to the public accessible and impartial statistical data, research and policy analysis on economics, political science, philanthropy, public administration, domestic and international affairs and other socio-economic issues of importance to Canada and its world.

INDEX

Majorities of Liberal, CPC voters support C-5
Broad support for “fast tracking” projects in general, but more resistance to the details
Support for Indigenous consultation, but no veto
Higher opposition in Quebec to limiting provincial oversight
Division across regional lines on bypassing environmental reviews
Environment concerns a sticking point for past Liberal, NDP voters

Majorities of Liberal, CPC voters support C-5

Bill C-5, the Liberals’ signature legislation that aims to remove interprovincial trade barriers and speed up critical infrastructure projects, was passed in parliament prior to the House of Commons rising for its summer break. It stands before the senate, who are expected to take this week to assess the bill and pass it prior to its own pause for the summer months.

Perhaps what was most notable about the bill was that it passed with the combined vote of the Liberals and Conservatives. Passing C-5 was split into two votes, and the NDP and Bloc Québécois supported the section of the bill focused on removing interprovincial trade barriers but opposed the rest. The cooperation of the Liberals and Conservatives to pass legislation is a significant break from the prior house sessions under former Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, when the Conservatives voted against nearly every piece of legislation proposed by the government.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first term in office has already seen more agreement between the Conservative and Liberal parties as Carney has pivoted the Liberal Party more to the centre.

Indeed, majorities of those who voted CPC (58%) and Liberal (60%) in April say they support Bill C-5, while NDP voters are more divided (36% support, 35% oppose). Overall, that leaves C-5 with slight majority support (53%) among Canadians, though the second most common view is not opposition (22%), it is uncertainty (26%):

Broad support for “fast tracking” projects in general, but more resistance to the details

The devil, however, is in the details. The first half of the bill – removing interprovincial trade barriers – continues to be popular among Canadians, with nearly nine-in-10 (88%) supporting that element of Bill C-5. Dismantling interprovincial red tape was seen by Canadians in February as a necessary response to the tariffs of U.S. President Donald Trump.

Related:

On the second half, Canadians overwhelmingly support, by a more than five-to-one margin, C-5’s aim to accelerate the completion of major infrastructure projects. But there is more disagreement over how to get there. First Nations and environmental groups have said the bill gives the federal government too much power to force through major projects without proper consultation.

By a two-to-one margin, Canadians are more likely to support than oppose consultation, without a full veto available, with Indigenous communities. Indigenous leaders say the bill may lead to legal challenges because it threatens their constitutionally protected rights.

A similar margin of two-to-one support overriding provincial oversight on projects deemed “in the national interest”. There is less support, but still a majority say they’re on board with limiting province’s abilities to block energy, mining or clean-tech projects.

The most disagreement is seen on condensing or bypassing environmental reviews, which is opposed by half (49%) of Canadians:

Support for Indigenous consultation, but no veto

One of the more controversial elements of the bill is its stance on Indigenous consultation. “First Nations are united,” said Assembly of First Nations National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak. “They want prosperity, but they don’t want it at the expense of our rights.” Woodhouse and others have called on Governor General Mary Simon to not give the bill royal assent, to give First Nations more time to analyze and be consulted on C-5.

The Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Rebecca Alty said that the government would give priority to projects that engage with Indigenous people first, as well as look “for projects that have Indigenous support and, even better, Indigenous equity.”

A majority in most provinces – and half in Quebec – believe the bill has hit the right balance by requiring consultation but not granting a veto to Indigenous communities.

Prior research by the Angus Reid Institute looking at a similar issue in B.C., where the government was looking to co-manage public lands with First Nations, found only one-in-five British Columbians believed the Indigenous governments should have veto over land-use decisions. The changes to that province’s Land Act were eventually withdrawn.

Higher opposition in Quebec to limiting provincial oversight

A prior version of the bill did not include a clause which was written into the final version that passed in the house, which requires the written consent of the province or territory where the project is being carried out.

Still, there are some questions as to how Bill C-5 would interact with provincial jurisdiction. The bill’s frame on national interest projects is not whether or not the project will be approved, but how the government will approve it. It also grants the sole authority to approve the project to the minister responsible to the department the project falls under.

Those living in Quebec are most concerned about the potential effect of Bill C-5 on provincial oversight, with nearly as many opposed to overriding it completely (42%) as supporting it (45%). Notably, those in Alberta (75%) are most supportive of bypassing provincial laws, after several instances where major oil pipeline projects – TransMountain expansion, Northern Gateway, Energy East – were hung up or halted because of opposition outside of Alberta.

Division across regional lines on bypassing environmental reviews

The most controversial aspect for Canadians is the potential of C-5 to limit, or not perform at all, environmental assessments of projects deemed in the national interest. The bill has been criticized for potentially “gut[ting] environmental protections”.

Those living in Alberta and Saskatchewan are more supportive of condensing environmental reviews for projects of national interest. Elsewhere, there is more opposition, including three-in-five (61%) in Quebec.

As recently as February, Canadians’ priorities for energy policies had shifted, with more saying creating economic growth was most important, while fewer said protecting the natural environment. But it appears that even when it comes to fast tracking important projects, Canadians are more likely than not to want proper steps taken to ensure the environment is not harmed.

Environment concerns a sticking point for past Liberal, NDP voters

While there is bipartisan agreement between the two largest parties in the House of Commons, the environmental factor is one area of divergence. Recent Liberal voters are more likely to oppose bypassing environmental reviews than support that element of Bill C-5, while the reverse is true of those who voted Conservative in April.

On other elements of the Liberals’ Bill C-5, there is much more alignment between Conservatives and Liberals:

Survey Methodology:

The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from June 20-23, 2025, among a randomized sample of 1,619 Canadian adults who are members of Angus Reid Forum. The sample was weighted to be representative of adults nationwide according to region, gender, age, household income, and education, based on the Canadian census. For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 2.0 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding. The survey was self-commissioned and paid for by ARI. Detailed tables are found at the end of this release.

For detailed results by age, gender, region, education, and other demographics, click here.

For PDF of full release, click here.

For the questionnaire, click here.

MEDIA CONTACT:

Shachi Kurl, President: 604.908.1693 shachi.kurl@angusreid.org @shachikurl

Dave Korzinski, Research Director: 250.899.0821 dave.korzinski@angusreid.org

Jon Roe, Research Associate: 825.437.1147 jon.roe@angusreid.org