QUESTION PERIOD — Prime Minister’s Office
Government Priorities
June 11, 2025
Senator Gold, last week, Prime Minister Carney stated that he would not impose a pipeline project on a province that opposes it, insisting there must be full consensus among provinces before proceeding. But this is not just a political misstep; it’s a constitutional contradiction. Paragraph 92(10)(c) of the Constitution Act clearly grants federal government jurisdiction over interprovincial infrastructure, including pipelines. This authority has been reaffirmed by both the B.C. Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada in the Trans Mountain Pipeline case. Even the Trudeau government previously upheld that jurisdiction by approving the TMX pipeline over British Columbia’s objections.
Senator Gold, can you explain why the Prime Minister is now undermining this clear and settled constitutional authority? How can we build a functioning national economy or develop our natural resources if any single province is effectively handed a veto over projects of national importance?
Thank you for your question. There is a difference between the powers that were set out in the Constitution Act, 1867, how the powers have evolved and been interpreted by the courts, and the reality of co-operative federalism in the 21st century. The provinces own their resources; the federal government has its areas of jurisdiction. There is no contradiction here, senator, with the greatest of respect.
This Prime Minister respects the sovereign jurisdiction of the provinces. He respects the rights — inherent rights, recognized rights — of Indigenous peoples. He recognizes the political fact that we need to work together out of respect for different governments exercising jurisdiction in their areas. Constitutional powers notwithstanding, this government is committed to working together with provinces, territories and Indigenous leaders for the betterment of all Canadians.
We have to respect the federal authority in this country as well. Senator Gold, this concession arbitrarily hands provinces a power they do not constitutionally possess. It sets a dangerous precedent for national unity and economic development. To paraphrase Pierre Trudeau, it is not the role of the Prime Minister to be a “head waiter to the provinces.”
Will this government reaffirm its constitutional authority over interprovincial projects and commit to leading with the national interest in mind instead of appeasing narrow provincial politics at the expense of Canada’s future?
With the greatest of respect, I just do not accept either the constitutional premise or the political premise of your question. This is not renouncing constitutional authority. It is exercising it in a respectful and responsible way.
