Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

RESOURCE WORKS -- A dedicated coast-to-coast right-of-way specifically set aside for energy infrastructure projects has re-emerged as a question for voters to consider


Conservative Party leader Andrew Scheer says Canada should position itself as a global energy superpower, given its considerable natural wealth.

That's a familiar refrain, but for years now the stumbling block has been political congestion over pipelines. The solution, Scheer said, lies in defining a single corridor that would allow for minimized environmental impacts, lowered costs for environmental assessments, increased certainty for investors, all leading to project completion.

The political and economic context for such an idea has changed a lot since it was first proposed for Canada in the 1960s by Richard Rohmer, a decorated Second World War hero whose Mid-Canada plan arose when Rohmer suddenly became captivated by a map of Canada in his study. 


A dedicated, coast-to-coast right-of-way specifically set aside for energy infrastructure projects like pipelines and new hydroelectric projects could only work today with strong endorsement by Indigenous people. There is already an emerging discourse on this crucial point. In recent times, First Nations entrepreneur Calvin Helin has been promoting a corridor concept as the key to Indigenous empowerment that also enables the country as a whole to prosper. 

Critics have frequently dismissed such ideas as too ambitious.

Much has changed in the past several years; indeed, Mid-Canada now seems quite modest when compared to China's Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road project announced in 2013. The infrastructure development and investment initiative is already being built and, if completed, will stretch from East Asia to Europe. Now known as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), or sometimes as the New Silk Road, it is one of the most ambitious infrastructure projects ever conceived. 

Since 2015, the University of Calgary has been studying a Canadian concept in detail, resulting in a number of published reports. The National Infrastructure and Market Access Program – the Canadian Northern Corridor – is led by the university's School of Public Policy together with the Centre Interuniversitaire de Recherche en Analyse des Organisations (CIRANO) based in Montreal. Its mission is to investigate "the feasibility of a multi-modal transportation corridor in Canada’s north and near north, providing access to ports on all three oceans for our renewable and non-renewable commodities. It is designed to undertake policy-relevant, multi-disciplinary research, led by the two institutions and supported by a network of researchers across Canada."

Organizers have published this video: 

In 2017, the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, published a report on the issue, finding that:
A visionary, future-oriented infrastructure initiative, such as the proposed northern corridor, would give rise to significant economic opportunities for Canada and would play an important role in the development of Canada’s northern regions. Because an initiative of this scale and scope would likely take decades to complete, the federal government – on a priority basis – should ensure that a feasibility study on the proposed northern corridor is undertaken.

The Senate recommendation was that work was needed leading to a task force to conduct consultations across Canada with relevant communities to determine how the proposed northern corridor should be developed.


The Liberal government's response was quite supportive, with Minister Marc Garneau authorizing initial work to be done. However, in moving forward with initial steps for a National Trade Corridors Fund (NTCF), the government messaging seemed more focused on corridors for information, like broadband networks, and for green energy infrastructure, with the dreaded word "pipeline" appearing nowhere in its correspondence. 

Given the heavy political congestion caused in recent years by pipeline projects, a creative approach such as an energy corridor for pipelines and transmission lines would be a welcome addition to the national policy discourse. If Indigenous Canadians are central to the idea's discussion and evolution, such a proposal might even stand a chance of proceeding to further stages of examination.

As we mull this idea, it's important not to forget that international organizations are doing their best to erase the decision-making capacity of Canadians, through a large array of land sterilization initiatives being advanced outside of the country's democratic processes. Taken together, commitments being contemplated and advanced through this agenda would constitute the largest land and resource disposition in the history of the world. The full economic and access implications of the sterilization strategies have not been scrutinized in any fashion. 

At the current rate of progress, any major corridor decision could be moot by the time this work reaches the final conclusion envisioned by these privately financed, unaccountable campaigns. 


Even before a corridor concept is advanced, the Council of the Federation should spearhead a full-on impact assessment of the strategies being proposed by these international bodies and their various "associates" in environmental activism. 

An astute federal contender might also consider adding to the basic corridor concept a platform commitment to "working with our provincial and territorial counterparts, complete a comprehensive biodiversity and economic risk assessment, a coordinated review of comprehensive options to address Canada's biodiversity priorities, and a robust consultation with Canadians on a path forward for managing Canada's biodiversity assets. Decisions will be evaluated in light of the results of this analysis, and we will work at the Federal, Provincial and Territorial levels to chart a path forward that takes into account Canadians long term interests." 

Regardless of which party or parties choose to champion the corridor concept, one thing stands out: that preserving Canada's options in an era of globalization and climate change will take extraordinary foresight and determination. 

Author of this commentary, Stewart Muir, is the founder and executive director of the Resource Works Society based in Vancouver, British Columbia. 

Resource Works is building awareness of the importance of natural resources – energy, mining, forestry – to personal well-being. Stewart is a co-author of The Sea Among Us: The Amazing Strait of Georgia that won several distinctions including the Roderick Haig-Brown Regional Prize from the BC-Washington chapters of the American Fisheries society. 

A Vancouver native, he has worked as a journalist and media executive in Hong Kong, Australia, Toronto, Ottawa and western Canada

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Focus on the nine things I mentioned. That’s what will allow the Conservative Party to win the next election

IMAGE CREDIT:   Darryl Dyck, the Canadian Press. I thought I had already made up my mind who I would be ranking on my ballot, in the Conservative Party of BC leadership race; now I am not so sure.  That means that, at least for me, and perhaps many others, it’s a good thing voting hasn’t already taken place. There were initially only one or two of the candidates that I thought might be a little too right of centre for my liking, now it seems that list is growing. I consider myself more closely aligned with what used to be called a Progressive Conservative, regardless, I feel more than comfortable within the Conservative Party of BC.  Some, however, in messages to me on my political Facebook page, have been rather, shall we say, a bit mean-spirited in comments they’ve made about my ‘purity’ as a conservative. To tell you the truth, I really don’t care! Some leadership candidates, in comments made online, have also been raising the issue of who is a pure enough conservati...

WARD STAMER -- Those are REAL forestry numbers, not just made-up numbers

The following is a condensed version of remarks Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s made, regarding Forestry, in the BC Legislature, on Tuesday afternoon (02/24/2026)   Let’s talk a little bit, when we talk about Budget 2026, about the forest industry, which is near and dear to my heart. Forestry remains one of British Columbia’s foundational industries. It’s a pillar that built this province. Entire communities depend upon it. Interior towns, northern communities, Vancouver Island regions, the Kootenays, the Lower Mainland, with manufacturing facilities in Surrey and Maple Ridge, just to name a few — everywhere in BC is touched by forestry. One word that was not mentioned in Budget 2026 was forestry. That’s a shame, an incredible shame. It wasn’t an oversight – it was intentional. This government has driven forestry into the ground .... INTO THE GROUND! We can talk a little bit about some of the initiatives that this government has brought forth, to try to resurrect ...

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...

Labels

Show more