As Conservatives are fond of pointing out, nearly a year into the Building Canada Act, not a single project has received a national interest designation and its accompanying regulatory powers.

In committee, Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc framed this as a success: “The good news is that we haven’t yet had recourse to that legal instrument,” he said. 

But that may be about to change, as the Alberta-Ottawa agreement sets deadlines that would produce the act’s first designation. 

Alberta says it is on track to submit its new bitumen pipeline proposal to the Major Projects Office by July 1, while Canada promises to pursue the designation of national interest by October 1. 

Rajan Sawhney, provincial minister of Indigenous relations, told Bloomberg the pitch will include a general path for now, with a specific route to be determined at a later date. 

And while Alberta politicians speak of active talks with interested companies, none have surfaced publicly yet. 

At a technical briefing on the agreement’s implementation, officials sidestepped the question of whether a project could be designated without a private proponent, saying they would need to see Alberta’s proposal first.

READ MORE: ‘Threat’ of Bill C-5 spurring collaboration, says CEO of Major Projects Office

Lawyer and former Canada Energy Regulator chair George Vegh tells iPolitics the absence of a private proponent is not technically disqualifying under the act, pointing to federally-owned Trans Mountain as precedent.

He adds that designating a project without a defined route is not necessarily prohibited under the act either, though it “would be an odd thing to have a hearing on, because you still have to meet all the requirements.”

Under the Building Canada Act, LeBlanc and Cabinet decide which projects qualify as being in the national interest, and Liberals have resisted providing a definition despite pressure from opposition parties.

The act lists five factors to consider as part of the designation process, including whether a project strengthens Canada’s autonomy, resilience and security; provides economic or other benefits to Canada; has a high likelihood of successful execution; advances the interests of Indigenous peoples; and contributes to clean growth and Canada’s climate objectives.

But the list is neither binding nor exhaustive, and a project need not meet all of them to qualify. 

LeBlanc recently told a joint committee that he will make a recommendation for designation based on the advice of the head of the Major Projects Office, Dawn Farrell. 

This mirrors a process diagram that appeared on an earlier version of the office’s website, suggesting the agency plays a central role in the initial stages of designation.

Last fall, however, Farrell told a House environmental committee she expects some projects will be referred to her office having already been designated by the Carney government.

“Projects can be referred and sent to us as designated projects, and the differentiation there is that those projects would be in the earlier stages,” she said at the time. 

READ MORE: Head of MPO expects only ‘one or two projects’ will obtain national interest status

Once designated, a project enters an 18-month review and consultation period overseen by the office, culminating in a conditions document that sets the terms for approval and replaces standard permits.

Ottawa hopes to deliver the conditions document for a proposed pipeline by September 2027. 

Vegh is skeptical the approach will streamline the regulatory process. 

“The government will effectively sign off on the project prior to any sort of hearing, but the hearing still goes forward,” he said. 

He says it is not clear what would happen if the real safety or consultation concerns emerged during a hearing. 

“… [Does] the government just influence it away, because it’s already approved it?” he asks. 

A designation of Alberta’s pipeline would be a first at the federal level, but the powers themselves are not without precedent.

Ontario’s Bill 5 gives the province similar authority, and the Ford government used it earlier this spring to designate Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport as a Special Economic Zone, seizing control of land and displacing Toronto from the tripartite agreement that governs the site.