You don't win a race by going slowly
Canada holds a rare and enviable position in the global energy transition — second only to China in battery metals supply — yet squanders that advantage through regulatory timelines that stretch beyond a decade. The constitutional division of environmental authority between federal and provincial governments has created a system where delay compounds delay, and commitments to reform remain aspirational rather than operational. At a moment when the world is racing to secure the raw materials of a post-carbon future, Canada's bureaucratic inertia risks converting geographic fortune into a missed historical opportunity.
- Canada's decade-long mine approval process is turning a world-class resource endowment into a competitive liability as China tightens its grip on battery supply chains.
- The constitutional overlap between federal and provincial environmental review doesn't just create duplication — negotiating a joint assessment agreement alone can consume more than a year before any actual review begins.
- Statutory time limits on environmental assessments function as ceilings in theory but floors in practice, with decision makers free to pause the clock indefinitely through requests for additional information.
- The federal Critical Minerals Strategy names the problem and pledges 'one project, one assessment,' but offers no concrete mechanisms — risking the fate of many well-intentioned policy documents before it.
- A path forward exists: standing bilateral federal-provincial agreements, hard time limits, and early Indigenous partnership could accelerate approvals without sacrificing the environmental standards that give Canadian supply its credibility.
Canada ranks second in the world for battery metals supply — lithium, cobalt, rare earths — and has the environmental standards and emerging manufacturing capacity to match. It is a position of genuine strategic advantage. Yet the country is losing ground not for lack of resources, but for lack of regulatory speed.
The numbers tell the story plainly. Getting a battery metals mine approved and built in Canada takes more than a decade. The Marathon Palladium Copper Project in Ontario, brought to completion in 2023, began its approval journey in 2012. Even after restarting the process in 2021 with prior environmental approvals in hand, the company faced nearly two more years of conditions, engagement requirements, and accumulating costs.
The structural cause is Canada's constitutional architecture. Environmental oversight is shared between federal and provincial governments, and rather than harmonizing that overlap, the current system lets it multiply. Negotiating a joint assessment agreement between jurisdictions can itself take over a year — before any substantive review begins. Time limits exist on paper but function as suggestions; decision makers may extend them indefinitely by requesting additional information, effectively pausing the clock at will.
The federal government's Canadian Critical Minerals Strategy acknowledges the dysfunction and commits to 'one project, one assessment.' But the strategy is long on principle and short on mechanism, and without concrete tools, the pledge risks becoming shelf policy while timelines keep stretching.
Three changes would make a real difference: transforming statutory time limits into genuine maximums rather than comfortable targets; replacing project-by-project jurisdictional negotiations with standing bilateral federal-provincial cooperation agreements; and resolving longstanding Indigenous concerns — water infrastructure, land rights — before they surface as obstacles mid-review. Indigenous communities are increasingly both assessors and investors in mining projects, making early engagement a practical necessity, not a courtesy.
Canada has shown it can build tailored regulatory frameworks when it chooses to — pipelines have the Canada Energy Regulator, nuclear projects the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. A purpose-built framework for critical minerals could preserve environmental rigour while restoring competitive speed. Without it, the country risks watching others claim the market position that its own geography should have guaranteed.
Canada sits in second place in the global race to supply battery metals—the raw materials that will power the world's shift away from fossil fuels. Only China ranks higher. It's a position of genuine advantage: the country has vast deposits of lithium, cobalt, and rare earth elements, environmental standards that matter, and a growing domestic battery manufacturing sector. Yet Canada is squandering this head start through sheer bureaucratic inertia.
The problem is simple and stubborn: it takes more than a decade to get a battery metals mine approved and built in Canada. A mine that Generation Mining brought to completion in 2023—the Marathon Palladium Copper Project in Ontario—began its journey in 2012 under a previous owner. Even after the company restarted the federal and provincial approval process in 2021, it took nearly two years to reach the finish line. And that was after environmental assessment approvals had already been granted. The company still faced additional conditions, further engagement requirements, and mounting costs.
The root of the delay lies in Canada's constitutional structure. Environmental regulation is shared between federal and provincial governments, which means major mining projects often require approval from both levels. Rather than streamlining this overlap, the current system allows it to compound. When a project needs both assessments, negotiating a joint agreement between jurisdictions can itself consume more than a year before any actual review begins. Time limits on environmental assessments exist, but they function more as suggestions than rules—decision makers can extend them indefinitely, using requests for additional information to pause the clock and defer final approval.
The federal government's recently released Canadian Critical Minerals Strategy acknowledges the problem and commits to the principle of "one project, one assessment" for major developments requiring both federal and provincial review. It promises to work with provinces to reduce duplication and increase efficiency. But the strategy offers little detail on how to actually achieve these goals, and without concrete mechanisms, the commitment risks becoming another document filed away while timelines continue to stretch.
Accelerating approvals requires three concrete changes. First, statutory time limits must become genuine maximums, not minimums. Environmental assessments should be completed as quickly as possible, not stretched to consume all available time. Second, rather than negotiating joint assessment agreements project by project—a process that itself creates delays—federal and provincial governments should establish standing bilateral cooperation agreements that apply to every critical minerals project. This approach mirrors successful harmonization efforts in other sectors and has proven workable in recent negotiations over child care and health care funding. Third, governments must address longstanding Indigenous concerns that currently surface during environmental assessments. Issues like water infrastructure on reserves, if left unresolved beforehand, become obstacles during mine reviews. Indigenous communities are increasingly both participants in environmental assessments and financial stakeholders in mining projects, making their early engagement essential rather than optional.
Canada has already demonstrated that it can create tailored regulatory pathways for specific industries. Pipelines operate under the Canada Energy Regulator. Nuclear projects fall under the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. A similar framework for critical minerals projects—one designed specifically to accelerate review while maintaining environmental rigor—could position Canada as a responsible, efficient supplier during the global energy transition. Without it, the country risks watching China and other competitors capture the market advantage that geography and resources should have secured. The race is underway. Canada needs to stop walking and start running.
Citas Notables
Governments must prioritize working in partnership with Indigenous communities to expedite decision-making processes while maintaining stringent environmental standards— Jeremy Barretto, regulatory law partner at Cassels
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does it take so long? Is it just bureaucracy, or are there real environmental concerns that need time to assess?
Both. The environmental review itself is legitimate—you need to understand impacts on water, ecosystems, Indigenous lands. But the system allows decision makers to pause the clock indefinitely, turning a deadline into a suggestion. A project can sit waiting for "further information" for months.
So the issue isn't that Canada is being too careful. It's that Canada is being slow and careful at the same time.
Exactly. And while we're being slow, China is being fast. They're already dominating battery cell manufacturing. We have the raw materials—we're just not getting them out of the ground fast enough to matter.
The piece mentions Indigenous communities several times. Are they the real bottleneck?
No. They're actually part of the solution if governments listen early. Right now, unresolved issues—like water infrastructure on reserves—become obstacles during assessments. If those concerns were addressed beforehand, Indigenous communities could participate as partners rather than obstacles.
What would "one project, one assessment" actually look like?
Instead of a mine needing separate federal and provincial approvals that take years to coordinate, there's a single process with both governments working together from the start. It's not radical—we do it for pipelines and nuclear projects.
Is there a risk that speeding things up means cutting corners on environmental protection?
Not if you design the process right. Faster doesn't mean less rigorous. It means eliminating delays that don't add rigor—the endless requests for information, the paused clocks, the year-long negotiations just to agree on how to assess something.