Conservatives Tell Liberals Canada Can’t Fight a U.S. Trade War With Major Projects Stretching Into the 2030s

35,000+ smart investors are already getting financial news, market signals, and macro shifts in the economy that could impact their money next with our FREE weekly newsletter. Get ahead of what the crowd finds out too late. Click Here to Subscribe for FREE.

Canada’s response to its escalating trade conflict with the United States is increasingly becoming a debate about time. Ottawa says it is rebuilding the country’s economic foundations by opening new export routes, accelerating energy projects and expanding infrastructure that can connect Canadian resources with markets beyond the United States. Conservatives argue that many of those projects will arrive too late to address the pressure businesses are facing now.

That divide surfaced sharply in the House of Commons on September 23, when Conservative MP Sandra Cobena pointed to projects such as the Port of Churchill expansion, Gull Island hydro development, LNG facilities and additional Vancouver port capacity. Her argument was straightforward: a trade war unfolding today cannot be answered solely with infrastructure that may not be fully operational until well into the next decade.

The Conservatives Are Turning Project Timelines Into a Trade-War Argument

Cobena, the Conservative MP for Newmarket—Aurora, framed the issue during Question Period around the gap between political urgency and construction reality. She pointed to the Port of Churchill, where Ottawa is still developing a broader expansion strategy; the Gull Island hydroelectric project, expected to come online around 2036 or 2037; LNG developments with delivery schedules extending into the next decade; and additional container capacity at the Port of Vancouver. Her conclusion was that Canada could not confront a trade war using what she called “business as usual timelines.”

The criticism targets one of the central promises of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s economic strategy. His government has repeatedly argued that Canada needs to become less economically dependent on the United States by developing new trade corridors, energy infrastructure and export capacity. The disagreement is therefore less about whether Canada needs infrastructure than about when that infrastructure becomes useful. A project announced or approved today can attract investment and create construction jobs relatively quickly, but its full trade benefits may remain years away.

Canada’s Dependence on the U.S. Makes the Timing More Than a Political Talking Point

The scale of Canada’s exposure to the American market explains why infrastructure timelines have become politically potent. Statistics Canada reported that 71.7% of Canadian merchandise exports went to the United States in 2025. That was down noticeably from 75.9% in 2024, but it still means that roughly seven out of every 10 dollars in Canadian goods exports depended on one destination.

There has been measurable diversification. Merchandise exports to countries other than the United States rose 17.2% in 2025, while broader government trade data show the non-U.S. share of Canadian goods and services exports reaching its highest level in decades. That gives Ottawa evidence that businesses are already finding additional customers. Still, commodities such as energy, minerals and agricultural products require more than new contracts. They need pipelines, rail capacity, electricity, terminals and ports capable of moving large volumes. That is where the Conservative argument gains its practical focus: diplomatic agreements can be signed relatively quickly, but physical trade infrastructure generally cannot be created on the same timetable.

Port of Churchill Shows How a Strategic Idea Can Still Be Years From Its Final Form

The Port of Churchill is perhaps the clearest example of the difference between strategic potential and an operational megaproject. Ottawa’s Port of Churchill Plus concept envisions much more than improvements to the existing Manitoba port. The plan includes upgrading the Hudson Bay Railway, exploring an all-weather road, developing a possible energy corridor and adding marine icebreaking capacity that could support a longer or potentially year-round shipping season.

Those ambitions could make Churchill considerably more important to Canadian trade. It is Canada’s only deepwater Arctic port connected to the North American Class 1 rail network, while its Hudson Bay location provides Prairie exporters with a potential route toward Europe. The Arctic Gateway Group that owns the port and railway is Indigenous-led and represents 41 First Nations and northern communities. Yet Ottawa still describes Churchill Plus as a “transformative strategy,” with governments, Indigenous partners and potential investors developing the individual projects required to make the larger vision work. Cobena’s statement that there is no firm completion date reflects that early-stage reality.

Gull Island Is Huge — But Its Most Important Benefits Are Still a Decade Away

Gull Island demonstrates why some major projects simply cannot provide an immediate answer to current trade pressures. The proposed hydroelectric facility on Labrador’s Churchill River would have generating capacity of roughly 2,700 megawatts and is expected to produce about 12 terawatt-hours of electricity annually. Ottawa says it is expected to be online in 2036 or 2037.

The project is part of a much larger package involving Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec and the federal government. Ottawa announced up to $10 billion in federal financial support and investments in August 2026 for initiatives including Gull Island, upgrades and expansion at Churchill Falls, new transmission infrastructure and power needed to unlock additional critical-minerals development in the Labrador Trough. The combined construction program has been valued at nearly $70 billion. From the government’s perspective, infrastructure on that scale is designed to reshape Canada’s economy for decades rather than merely respond to one tariff dispute. From the Conservative perspective, however, a 2036–37 in-service date illustrates the problem with presenting long-duration nation-building projects as an answer to a trade confrontation already affecting businesses.

Canada’s LNG Story Includes Both Near-Term Projects and 2030s Projects

Liquefied natural gas makes the timing debate more complicated because Canada’s LNG expansion is not moving on a single schedule. LNG Canada Phase 1 began exports from Kitimat in 2025, finally giving Western Canadian natural gas direct access to overseas markets rather than relying almost exclusively on pipelines into the United States. Other projects are significantly closer than the middle of the 2030s. Ottawa has said Woodfibre LNG could begin operating as early as 2027, while Cedar LNG is expected to start operations in 2028.

The largest additional developments take longer. Ksi Lisims LNG, a proposed $30-billion Indigenous-led project, has signed international supply agreements including a binding agreement with Germany’s Uniper that calls for first LNG deliveries in 2032. LNG Canada Phase 2 could double the Kitimat facility’s capacity, but as of 2026 its owners were still working toward a final investment decision. This creates an important distinction in the political argument. Conservatives can accurately point to major export capacity extending into the 2030s, while the government can accurately point to additional LNG capacity arriving considerably sooner.

Vancouver’s Planned Port Expansion Illustrates the Construction Challenge

The Port of Vancouver is especially important to Ottawa’s diversification strategy because it already serves as Canada’s largest marine trading gateway. The federal government says the port handles more cargo than the next five largest Canadian ports combined and facilitates roughly $350 billion in trade with around 170 countries. In 2025, it handled a record 170.4 million metric tonnes of cargo.

The centrepiece of its next major expansion is Roberts Bank Terminal 2 in Delta, British Columbia. The proposed three-berth container terminal would add about 2.4 million twenty-foot-equivalent units of annual capacity and increase the Port of Vancouver’s container-handling capacity by roughly 50%. The federal government approved the project environmentally in 2023 subject to hundreds of conditions, and it has since been folded into Ottawa’s broader Port of Vancouver Gateway Strategy. A Transport Canada briefing listed the first phase as scheduled to open in 2033. Ottawa has since taken steps intended to accelerate delivery, including referring the project to the Major Projects Office, but the timeline demonstrates why even highly advanced infrastructure can require years of permitting, engineering, procurement and construction.

The Liberals’ Answer Is That Canada Is Changing the Approval System Itself

The Carney government’s response to criticism about slow construction is not simply that major projects take time. Ottawa is attempting to shorten the federal portion of that process. On September 21, the government introduced Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act, alongside a new cabinet directive intended to move federal project reviews and permitting toward what it describes as “one project, one decision, in one year.”

Under the proposed approach, federal departments would conduct reviews concurrently rather than forcing proponents through multiple sequential federal processes. Ottawa says the one-year clock would begin once proponents have supplied the required information and studies. Provincial jurisdiction would remain intact, Indigenous consultation obligations would continue and major projects would still face technical work, financing decisions and construction after regulatory approval. The government says 27 nation-building initiatives have been referred to the Major Projects Office since September 2025, representing roughly $200 billion in investment and a possible pathway toward $500 billion in future private-sector investment. The political test will be whether those procedural changes produce noticeably faster projects on the ground.

The Real Test Is Whether Canada Can Build for 2035 While Protecting the Economy in 2026

Canada’s infrastructure strategy is tied to a much larger economic objective: doubling exports to non-U.S. markets by 2035. Budget documents estimate that reaching that goal could eventually add roughly $300 billion to non-U.S. exports. Ottawa has backed the strategy with measures including a $5-billion Trade Diversification Corridors Fund and a $1-billion Arctic Infrastructure Fund designed to improve ports, railways, roads, airports and northern transportation links.

But the parliamentary clash highlights an unavoidable difference between short-term trade policy and long-term economic restructuring. Tariffs can change within days. Export contracts can sometimes be redirected within months. A hydroelectric dam, LNG terminal, new railway corridor or major container terminal operates on a very different clock. That means projects scheduled for the 2030s can be important to reducing Canada’s structural dependence on the United States without necessarily providing immediate relief to industries affected by the present dispute. Ottawa’s challenge is therefore two-track: manage the economic consequences of the current Canada-U.S. confrontation while proving that its longer-term infrastructure strategy can move from announcements and approvals to operating assets faster than Canada has historically managed.

This Options Discord Chat is The Real Deal

While the internet is scoured with trading chat rooms, many of which even charge upwards of thousands of dollars to join, this smaller options trading discord chatroom is the real deal and actually providing valuable trade setups, education, and community without the noise and spam of the larger more expensive rooms. With a incredibly low-cost monthly fee, Options Trading Club (click here to see their reviews) requires an application to join ensuring that every member is dedicated and serious about taking their trading to the next level. If you are looking for a change in your trading strategies, then click here to apply for a membership.