The Case for a Canadian Resources Advisory Council

June 5, 2026

Share:

As published in the Hill Times, an English-only outlet.

Since 1946, the United States has relied on the National Petroleum Council to provide advice to the secretary of energy on issues affecting the country’s energy future. Its membership includes leaders from industry, Indigenous and environmental organizations, academia, labour, finance, and research institutions. The purpose is not to allow industry to dictate policy, but to ensure governments are making decisions with access to operational expertise, investment realities, and long-term strategic insight.

Canada has no equivalent institution, despite energy and mining representing some of the country’s most strategically important sectors.

Canada’s energy and mining sectors are foundational to the national economy and increasingly strategic in a more unstable world. Together, they contribute approximately $399 billion to Canada’s GDP — about 14% of the economy — and support well over 1.4 million jobs. These sectors drive prosperity across the country, and supply resources essential to modern economies.

Recent years show Canada’s energy and mining sectors are strategically vital beyond economics. As geopolitical competition grows, their importance to secure supply chains and Canada’s long-term prosperity and resilience will continue to increase.

Prime Minister Mark Carney has correctly identified that Canada must expand its economic reach, while simultaneously strengthening competitiveness at home. The establishment of the Advisory Committee on Canada–U.S. Economic Relations reflects an important recognition that effective policymaking requires deeper collaboration with the private sector and with the industries operating on the ground. If it’s good enough to support our Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement review process, why not apply the same principle to the historic challenge of powering a brighter future?

Canada possesses many of the advantages required to become a global energy and resource powerhouse: abundant natural resources, access to three oceans, deep technical expertise, world-class companies, and a highly skilled workforce. Yet, despite these advantages, we continue to struggle with slow project development, fragmented permitting systems, intergovernmental misalignment, and declining investor confidence.

These challenges require not only an unprecedented level of co-ordination between federal, provincial, territorial and municipal governments, but also an unprecedented level of collaboration between governments and industry. Industry is ready to step up. Indigenous communities are also increasingly seeking meaningful participation and equity ownership in major projects. What remains missing is a formal structure capable of bringing these perspectives together consistently and strategically.

A Canadian Resources Advisory Council could help fill that gap.

The exact structure, membership size, mandate duration, governance framework, reporting obligations, and composition of such a body can all be worked out through consultation. The objective is not to replicate the American system exactly, nor is it to create another layer of bureaucracy. It is to formalize collaboration in sectors where delays, policy uncertainty, and strategic misalignment are becoming increasingly costly.

There are legitimate concerns that any advisory body could be perceived as government favouritism, or an attempt to pick winners and losers. Those risks should be acknowledged directly and addressed through transparent governance, balanced representation, and clear mandates. But refusing to institutionalize collaboration because of those risks would ignore a larger reality: major nation-building objectives cannot be achieved if governments and industries operate in silos, making key decisions independently from one another. Moving with speed increasingly requires moving in lockstep.

The American example demonstrates the practical value of this type of collaboration. In late 2025, the National Petroleum Council released a report examining how permitting delays and regulatory fragmentation were slowing energy infrastructure development in the U.S. The report offered concrete recommendations to improve interagency co-ordination, streamline approvals and reduce unnecessary duplication in project reviews that are now actively informing discussions around American infrastructure competitiveness and industrial strategy.

Canada would benefit from a similar forum capable of identifying bottlenecks before they become crises, and helping policymakers understand the real-world consequences of regulatory and investment decisions.

Ottawa has already taken meaningful steps through initiatives such as the Major Projects Office and the “One Project, One Review” initiative. These efforts have also reflected sustained, co-ordinated calls from industry that we have been hearing for years. However, they do not fully address the absence of a permanent, structured mechanism through which industry and the federal government can jointly assess long- term strategic priorities and emerging risks.

The stakes are becoming too high for fragmented policymaking. Canada does not need governments and industry to agree on everything. It does, however, need them working at the same table.

Bryan Detchou, Senior Director, Natural Resources, Environment and Sustainability, Canadian Chamber of Commerce

Visit the Energy Security Council and Critical Minerals Council to learn more about the Canadian Chamber’s advocacy.