How Canada Learned to Build Again: An examination of transformative federalism and the nation building project agenda

We are a nation of builders… it’s time to build big again… and take control of our future”.

These are words taken from a Government of Canada ad that premiered in November of 2025, one of numerous Government communications promoting the national development program of Prime Minister Mark Carney, and represent a seismic shift in policy, framing, rhetorical style and ambition in Ottawa. The ad itself may seem innocuous in a vacuum, yet it weaves in language of historical achievements, boasting of Canada’s success constructing the St. Lawrence Seaway megaproject of the 1950s, as an example of national self reliance and ‘patriotic development’ to be emulated in light contemporary challenges. A deeper examination into this country’s history will reveal this language, framing and style are no accident; a harken back to the earliest years of Canada’s existence, and how the fraught challenges of national unity and survival were conquered in Canada’s most vulnerable state.

Born from Development

Like any other country, Canada’s geography and the challenges brought by it shaped the very nature the country’s institutions, self-concept and power structure. Lacking easy avenues for interconnectivity, Canada’s provinces have historically followed a more autonomous development track relative to the central governing authority of the day. In 1867, when the first four provinces united to form Canada, it was not an easy marriage and required a delicate management of the process of nation-building and institutional development. In settling the frontier, Canada continued to experience difficulties excreting authority over the sprawling plains of the prairies. The Red River rebellion is perhaps most emblematic of this. To this day, it often seems that Canada in constant negotiations with itself as per what its existence should be. Unlike nearly anywhere else on earth its provinces can exert remarkable pressure on the Federal government, a balance of power that has often resulted in gridlock on matters of basic law, governance and most crucially for this examination, national development.

Occasionally, visionary leaders have been able to inspire and unify the country around extraordinary projects. These daunting efforts have been the glue that has held a country a continent across, of sprawling biomes, far north to the blistering tundra together against the civilizational expanse of the American frontier. Early in this country’s history, Sir John A. MacDonald embarked upon the megaproject of bridging the width of the North American continent by rail, to fulfil ambitions of uniting the newly minted province of British Colombia with the national core in the St. Lawrence watershed. This project was among the largest ambitions of his second tenure, coinciding with his policies of tariffs and support for immigration in his platform of national development. The project of the railway was daunting, necessitating an immense amount of imported labour and resources; yet upon completion it became the glue which held the country together, its stops became the towns and cities that today dot the Prairies, and those most fortuitous among them became the large cities bellowed of a new prosperity. Recounting back to Manitoba’s provincial legislative building as a shining example, its opulence and grandeur feel out of place of what has become modern Winnipeg; yet despite its continued service it serves as an artifact to a bygone age of optimism and national flourishing.

2025 marks 140 years since the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway was completed, and much has changed. A token to the remarkable success of this Country is the merger between Canadian Pacific and the Kansas City Southern railway companies, a matrimony conceived to unite an incredible swathe of territory and track across North America under single management. In other areas, there are clear emblems of this country’s failure. Leadership that wallows in failure never builds a legacy. A tenure spent apologizing and ‘game-managing’ doesn’t breed results. Inspired leadership channels the interests, frustrations, and ambitions of a broad and diverse constituency into a unifying project, a monument yielding dividends beyond the temporal.

Following Mark Carney’s election as Prime Minister in 2025, he sought to redirect the national focus towards a slate of ambitious new directives. Impressively, Carney has appeared to take a chapter of from the historic achievements of his predecessors that led to Canada’s success, understanding that as a broad country with many diverging interests, unity can best be achieved by placing everyone on the same team with a common goal. No doubt the moment called for a new approach, but attention ought to be paid to the language used to frame these lofty goals. They’re wrapped in patriotic embellishments and framed in a context many thought long abandoned from his predecessor’s tenure, Canada’s identity as a free and sovereign nation.

Challenges and Churn

The economy Mark Carney inherited was one built on an unbalanced foundation. In the 4^th quarter of 2025, housing remained the largest sector for growth in Canada, with construction following and a notable continued decline seen in manufacturing. As of 2024, housing and real estate made up a disproportionate 13.2% share of GDP, with the most significant gap between investment into housing and intellectual property seen in the G7. Additionally, the role of government in the economy has reached historic proportions, with Jason Kirby writing in The Globe and Mail that public-sector spending on non-residential construction matched private investment in 2024, driven by growth in healthcare and education. These excerpts reveal the unfortunate reality of Canada’s modern economy, productivity is far below expectations, punching below its weight in many sectors which contribute the most value-added gains.

This trend itself is not new, but rather the organic path of least resistance given the set of policy instruments in place since the 2008-financial crisis. Access to low interest rates and continually growing immigration fueled significant growth and speculation in residential real estate, acting as the easiest avenue for capital investment, and leaving the opportunity cost of decreased investment in starts ups and new ventures discarded. The proximity, infrastructure, economies of scale and scope, and cultural pull of the United States has acted as a vacuum for Canada’s best and brightest young talent, whilst immigration continued to increase, in anticipation of an aging workforce and need to uphold the social contractual obligation of continued growth in investment for residential homeowners.

It is no secret that Canada faces a productivity crisis, it is no secret that its ability to disperse services has strained and nor is it a secret that it has proven structurally to address any of these issues. Visionary leadership is required in times of fractured unity and discord. John A. MacDonald led the effort for Canada’s unification, blazed the trail for nation building on where would sit the tracks that united Canada east-to-west. Mark Carney unlike most recent leaders is oddly archetypal of this tradition. A man with extensive service in both the public service and the leadership of Canada’s most significant asset-management firm, his resume inspires a sentiment public confidence nearly forgotten throughout the turbulent tenure of his predecessor Justin Trudeau.

This general air of competence is noteworthy about Carney, and it tracks him consistently. Despite a significant holdover of personnel from the prior Trudeau administration, there has been an ideological re-centering in his Liberal party. Development is no longer a dirty word, and party leadership has so far proven its ability to shut down dissent on pro-energy development policies. Carney’s surprising overture to Alberta premier Danielle Smith in November, concluded with a memorandum of understanding that in return for certain carbon capture commitments and other infrastructure goals, Ottawa yields its opposition to a long sought oil pipeline to Northern B.C., easing prior caps on oil patch emissions and a tanker ban in Northern B.C. Having long grown dissatisfied with its place in confederation, to the point of present premier being elected on a wave of Ottawa resentment, Alberta has been gifted what it has long desired, with the caveat that it too must play by the new rulebook.

The seminal piece of legislation that has thus far defined this new era of Canadian governance is Bill C-5, the One Canadian Economy Act. Given royal assent on June 16, 2025, this act enshrines two objectives, a commitment eliminating interprovincial trade barriers, and facilitating the construction of what are termed “nation-building projects”, both of which were key platform items in the prior federal election.  The vehicle for this new age of patriotically framed infrastructure projects is the Major Projects Office, a body tasked with reviewing and expediting the development of selected proposals under the oversight of the Privy Council Office.

Building Again

Thus far two rounds of announcements have taken place for projects approved and designated for expedited development by the MPO, the highlights feature LNG terminals and the expansion of the hydro-electric grid Northern B.C., multiple mining sights, a small modular reactor (SMR) nuclear project in the Durham region and the expansion of the port of Montreal.  These projects are each ambitious in their own regard but bound collectively represent the confluence of multiple strategic objectives. The Carney government sees development of an energy corridor between Alberta and Northern B.C. as the most advantageous way to alleviate concerns of western alienation, whilst providing a lifeline for Canadian energy to reach markets aside from the United States. An additional focus on Quebec is also noteworthy, with a surge in popularity of the Bloc Quebecois, Ottawa is likely anticipating that increased investment and industrial integration between Quebec and other provinces could prove to be a potent sedative for separatist ambitions. Lastly, these projects all tie together with the first aim of Bill C-5, the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act which provides a mandate to the government to eliminate trade barriers and promote economic integration across provinces. Projects such as the McIlvenna Copper Project, integrate other provinces by dispersing the supply chain, in this instance, mining in Saskatchewan and smelting in Quebec.

There remains opposition to Carney’s development plans. Premier David Eby of B.C. and even portions of Carney’s own liberal caucus have voiced strong dissent on the grounds of environmental protection and indigenous land rights. Bay Street has surprisingly reacted solemnly, with stock prices of 5 Canadian energy majors showing a mild drop in the week following the announcement of the second tranche of nation-building project proposals. Yet despite these concerns, the scale and speed by which new development is being greenlit and expedited is encouraging for Canadians concerned about their economic future and represents a shift back to the fundamentals of this country’s economy, returning to the sectors in which Canada is a world leader, with world class talent and expertise.