Energy
Strong domestic supply chain an advantage as Canada moves ahead with new nuclear

From the MacDonald Laurier Institute
By Sasha Istvan
Canada has two major advantages. We produce uranium and we have an established supply chain.
The pledge from 22 countries, including Canada, to collectively triple nuclear capacity by 2050 drew cheers and raised eyebrows at the United Nations Climate Change Conference last fall in Dubai. Climate commitments are no stranger to bold claims. So, the question remains, can it be done?
In Canada, we are well on our way with successful and ongoing refurbishments of Ontario’s existing nuclear fleet and planning for the development of small modular reactors, or SMRs, in Ontario, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and most recently Alberta.
The infrastructure required to generate nuclear energy is significant. You not only need engineers and technicians working at a plant, but the supply chain to support it.
Over five decades worth of nuclear generation has allowed Canada to build a world class supply chain. Thus far it has focused on servicing CANDU reactors, but now we have the potential to expand into SMRs.
I first became interested in the CANDU reactor after working as a manufacturing engineer for one of the major fuel and tooling suppliers of Ontario Power Generation and Bruce Power. I witnessed firsthand the sophistication and quality of the nuclear supply chain in Ontario, being particularly impressed by the technical expertise and skilled workers in the industry.
The CANDU reactor is the unsung hero of the Canadian energy industry: one of the world’s safest nuclear reactors, exported around the world, and producing around 60 per cent of Ontario’s electricity, as well as 40 per cent of New Brunswick’s.
Having visited machine shops across Ontario, it’s evident that Canadians should take pride that the expertise and technology required for the safe generation of nuclear energy is available here in Canada.
As Canada looks to grow its nuclear output to achieve net-zero goals, its well-established engineering and manufacturing capabilities can make it a leader in the global expansion of nuclear energy as other nations work to make their COP28 declaration a reality.
Canada has two major advantages. The first is that it is a globally significant producer of uranium. We already export uranium from our incredible reserves in northern Saskatchewan and fabricate unenriched uranium fuel for CANDU. Canadian uranium will be an important ingredient in the success and sustainability of a nuclear renaissance, especially for our allies.
The second is that we have an established and active supply chain. While new nuclear builds have slowed dramatically in the western world — a result of the fallout from Chernobyl and Fukushima, as well as competition from cheap natural gas — Bruce Power and OPG are in the midst of major refurbishments to extend their operations until 2064 and 2055, respectively.
Bruce Power has successfully completed the first unit refurbishment on schedule and within budget, with ongoing work on the second unit. OPG has accomplished refurbishments for two out of its four units at Darlington, with the latest unit completed ahead of schedule and under budget. These multibillion-dollar refurbishments have actually grown our nuclear supply chain and demonstrate that it’s firing on all cylinders.
SMRs are the next phase of nuclear technology. Their size and design make them well suited for high production and modular construction. Investing in the supply chain for SMRs now positions Canada for significant economic gains.
OPG plans to build four GE-Hitachi BWRX-300 reactors, with the first slated for service as early as 2028. This first-of-a-kind investment will help identify and overcome design challenges and develop its own supply chain. That will benefit not only their project but those that follow suit.
SaskPower is planning to proceed with the same SMR design, as well as the first pilot globally of the Westinghouse eVinci microreactor; New Brunswick is moving ahead with the ARC-100, both for its existing nuclear site at Point Lepreau as well as in the Port of Belledune; and OPG and Capital Power recently announced a partnership to explore a nuclear reactor in Alberta, including the potential for the BWRX-300.
While the bulk of the nuclear supply chain is currently located in Ontario, other provinces have already been investing in the development of local capacity.
All this activity sets Canada up to leverage first-mover advantage and become a significant global provider of BWRX-300 components. Canada will not only see the economic benefits during initial construction but also through sustained demand for replacement parts in the future.
Nuclear energy has already made a significant contribution to the Canadian economy. In 2019, a study commissioned by the Canadian Nuclear Association and the Organization of Canadian Nuclear Industries showed that the nuclear industry accounted for $17 billion of Canada’s annual GDP annually and has created over 76,000 jobs.
Notably, 89 per cent of these positions were classified as high-skilled, and over 40 per cent of the workforce was under 40. This study, conducted before the announcement of SMR plans, was followed by a more recent report from the Conference Board of Canada on the economic impact of OPG’s SMR initiatives. The study found that the construction of just four SMRs at OPG could boost the Canadian GDP by $15.3 billion (2019 dollars) over 65 years and sustain approximately 2,000 jobs annually during that period.
Public perception of nuclear is improving. In 2023, the percentage of Canadians wanting to see further development of nuclear power generation in Canada grew to 57 per cent compared with 51 per cent in 2021.
As well, the Business Council of Canada has voiced its support for nuclear expansion, emphasizing Canada’s strategic advantages: political and public backing across the spectrum, coupled with a rich history of nuclear expertise.
Nuclear energy is dispatchable, sustainable and a proven technology. As nations move to achieve their climate goals, it has one other major benefit: a supply chain that is wholly western and in Canada’s case almost totally domestic.
While the critical minerals and manufactured goods required for batteries, wind and solar energy rely heavily on China and other politically unstable or authoritarian countries, nuclear provides energy independence. Canada is well positioned to help our allies improve their energy security with our strong, competitive nuclear supply chain.
Sasha Istvan is an engineer based in Calgary, with experience in both the nuclear supply chain and the oil and gas sector.
Business
Federal government should finally cut Trudeau-era red tape

From the Fraser Institute
If Prime Minister Carney really wants to show he’s committed to “Building Canada” he’d ceremoniously defenestrate Bill C-48, scap the cap on Canadian Oil and Gas related greehhouse gas emissions, and ax the so-called Clean Electricity Regulations
As pretty much everyone knows, Canada has a building problem. Whether it’s provincial building of housing or infrastructure, or national building of highways, pipelines or energy production facilities, Canada can seemingly not get things built no matter how many companies and investors propose projects (or how many newspaper opinion columns or public opinion polls shows that people want things built).
The Carney government appears to recognize this problem and recently introduced Bill C-5. Of course, appearances can be deceiving. Superficially, a lot of what’s in the proposed bill sounds good: facilitating free trade and labour mobility inter-provincially, and ostensibly streamlining government’s regulatory powers to facilitate the timely building of projects deemed to be in Canada’s national interests. Who could be against that?
Per the government, the “Bill seeks to get projects in the national interest built by focusing on a small number of executable projects and shifting the focus of federal reviews from ‘whether’ to build these projects to ‘how’ to best advance them.” Again, looks great, but even a cursory reading by a legal layman reveals the fact that, in reality, little has changed in regard to the approval of major building projects in Canada. Just as it is now, under the new regime, the prime minister’s office (and designees elsewhere in government) ultimately have carte blanche in deciding whether or not projects of significance can be built in Canada, under what timeline, and based on whatever criteria they deem appropriate.
All that is better than nothing, of course, but words (particularly political words) are cheap and actions more valuable. If Prime Minister Carney really wants to show he’s committed to “Building Canada” he’d ceremoniously defenestrate Bill C-48 (a.k.a. the “Tanker Ban Bill”), which came into effect last year under the Trudeau government and changed tanker regulations off British Columbia’s northern coast, torpedoing any prospects of building oil export pipelines on Canada’s west coast.
He could also scrap the cap on Canadian oil and gas-related greenhouse gas emissions (introduced by the Trudeau government in 2024) and regulations (also introduced in 2024) for methane emissions in the oil and gas sector, both of which will almost inevitably raise costs and curtail production.
Finally, the prime minister could ax the so-called “Clean Electricity Regulations” that will likely drive electricity rates through the roof while ushering in an age of less-reliable electricity supply and less building of conventional energy-generation from natural gas, a fuel far more reliable than Canada’s fickle winds and often-tepid sunlight. By driving up energy costs across Canada and through the entire chain of production and service economies, these regulations (again, enacted by the Trudeau government) will make it more expensive to build anything anywhere in Canada.
Prime Minister Carney has made some nice noises seemingly recognizing that Canada has a building problem, particularly with regard to energy projects, and Bill C-5 makes equally nice (yet ill-defined) noises about regulatory reform in the energy and natural resource sectors. But Canada doesn’t have a shortage of nebulous government pronouncements; it has an overdose of regulatory restrictions preventing building in Canada. He should show real seriousness and eliminate the raft of Trudeau-era red tape stifling growth and development in Canada.
And sooner is better than later. Canada’s biggest economic competitors (not only the United States) are not sitting on their red-taped hands watching their economies decline.
Business
Potential For Abuse Embedded In Bill C-5

From the National Citizens Coalition
By Peter Coleman
“The Liberal government’s latest economic bill could cut red tape — or entrench central planning and ideological pet projects.”
On the final day of Parliament’s session before its September return, and with Conservative support, the Liberal government rushed through Bill C-5, ambitiously titled “One Canadian Economy: An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act.”
Beneath the lofty rhetoric, the bill aims to dismantle interprovincial trade barriers, enhance labour mobility, and streamline infrastructure projects. In principle, these are worthy goals. In a functional economy, free trade between provinces and the ability of workers to move without bureaucratic roadblocks would be standard practice. Yet, in Canada, decades of entrenched Liberal and Liberal-lite interests, along with red tape, have made such basics a pipe dream.
If Bill C-5 is indeed wielded for good, and delivers by cutting through this morass, it could unlock vast, wasted economic potential. For instance, enabling pipelines to bypass endless environmental challenges and the usual hand-out seeking gatekeepers — who often demand their cut to greenlight projects — would be a win. But here’s where optimism wanes, this bill does nothing to fix the deeper rot of Canada’s Laurentian economy: a failing system propped up by central and upper Canadian elitism and cronyism. Rather than addressing these structural flaws of non-competitiveness, Bill C-5 risks becoming a tool for the Liberal government to pick more winners and losers, funneling benefits to pet progressive projects while sidelining the needs of most Canadians, and in particular Canada’s ever-expanding missing middle-class.
Worse, the bill’s broad powers raise alarms about government overreach. Coming from a Liberal government that recently fear-mongered an “elbows up” emergency to conveniently secure an electoral advantage, this is no small concern. The lingering influence of eco-radicals like former Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, still at the cabinet table, only heightens suspicion. Guilbeault and his allies, who cling to fantasies like eliminating gas-powered cars in a decade, could steer Bill C-5’s powers toward ideological crusades rather than pragmatic economic gains. The potential for emergency powers embedded in this legislation to be misused is chilling, especially from a government with a track record of exploiting crises for political gain – as they also did during Covid.
For Bill C-5 to succeed, it requires more than good intentions. It demands a seismic shift in mindset, and a government willing to grow a spine, confront far-left, de-growth special-interest groups, and prioritize Canada’s resource-driven economy and its future over progressive pipe dreams. The Liberals’ history under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, marked by economic mismanagement and job-killing policies, offers little reassurance. The National Citizens Coalition views this bill with caution, and encourages the public to remain vigilant. Any hint of overreach, of again kowtowing to hand-out obsessed interests, or abuse of these emergency-like powers must be met with fierce scrutiny.
Canadians deserve a government that delivers results, not one that manipulates crises or picks favourites. Bill C-5 could be a step toward a freer, stronger economy, but only if it’s wielded with accountability and restraint, something the Liberals have failed at time and time again. We’ll be watching closely. The time for empty promises is over; concrete action is what Canadians demand.
Let’s hope the Liberals don’t squander this chance. And let’s hope that we’re wrong about the potential for disaster.
Peter Coleman is the President of the National Citizens Coalition, Canada’s longest-serving conservative non-profit advocacy group.
-
conflict1 day ago
‘They Don’t Know What The F*ck They’re Doing’: Trump Unloads On Iran, Israel
-
conflict2 days ago
War over after 12 days? Ceasefire reached between Israel, Iran
-
Business1 day ago
While China Hacks Canada, B.C. Sends Them a Billion-Dollar Ship Building Contract
-
Business1 day ago
Canada should already be an economic superpower. Why is Canada not doing better?
-
Bjorn Lomborg1 day ago
The Physics Behind The Spanish Blackout
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta poll shows strong resistance to pornographic material in school libraries
-
Business23 hours ago
Potential For Abuse Embedded In Bill C-5
-
International2 days ago
Iran targets U.S. military in Qatar, attacks thwarted