If there\u2019s one aspect of federal governance in which Prime Minister Mark Carney has really excelled in these last few months, it\u2019s in the publication of lengthy, high-production \u201cstrategies\u201d liberally spiced with words such as \u201cbold\u201d and \u201cambitious.\u201d<\/p>\n
The year 2026 has yielded no less than six such plans, on topics ranging from food security to nature.<\/p>\n
The easy criticism of the trend is that the strategies all read like campaign platforms. They\u2019re filled with grand visions of the future, but are often very short on specifics.<\/p>\n
The counterpoint is that it can occasionally be valuable for a government to signal a \u201cstrategic vision.\u201d The Canadian uranium mining sector, for instance, publicly said their job was made easier<\/a> by the Carney government\u2019s release of a Nuclear Energy Strategy.<\/p>\n Below, a quick guide to what is being produced in this new golden age of federal strategies.<\/p>\n The Nuclear Energy Strategy<\/p>\n The government of then prime minister Justin Trudeau was known to occasionally issue statements or budget directives touting the Canadian nuclear sector. The 2024 federal budget, for instance, pledged to make Canada a \u201cglobal nuclear leader\u201d and support the development of \u201csmall, modular reactors.\u201d<\/p>\n For the most part, however, Canada\u2019s well-developed nuclear competency was largely sidelined in favour of federal programs boosting solar, wind and other renewables.<\/p>\n So the mere existence of a federal report raving about Canadian nuclear power plants and promising to make more of them was heartily welcomed by the atomic sector, as the Carney government generally holds the reins on whether these projects get approved.<\/p>\n One section of the strategy pledged to \u201cenable construction of up to ten new large-scale reactors within Canada.\u201d Another to \u201cdouble uranium exports from 2024 to 2035.\u201d<\/p>\n But as with virtually any document out of Ottawa these days, even the nuclear strategy had to include a few lines about reconciliation. Canada\u2019s nuclear strategy must \u201cincrease meaningful Indigenous participation in nuclear projects, including equity partnerships and capacity-building.\u201d<\/p>\n The National Food Security Strategy<\/p>\n This strategy was released on June 11, just a week before Statistics Canada would confirm that Canadian groceries were rising in price<\/a> faster than any other commodity.<\/p>\n The 27-page strategy spends a lot of time simply restating the problem. Page three declares \u201cCanada\u2019s future food security will be based on our ability to build a system where food is more affordable.\u201d Page five says that rising food prices are \u201cmaking it harder for many Canadians and their families to access sufficient nutritious food at an affordable price.\u201d<\/p>\n As to how all of this might be remedied, the National Food Security Strategy has two recommendations: \u201cMore choice\u201d and \u201cmore control.\u201d \u201cGreater choice and control will mean More Canada,\u201d it concludes.<\/p>\n In a theme running across many of these strategies, it contains no new government policy. Rather, it\u2019s simply a laundry list of existing federal actions that may help deliver cheaper food, including this summer\u2019s suspension of the Fuel Excise Tax.<\/p>\n Canada\u2019s Defence Industrial Strategy<\/p>\n This is easily the most serious of the various strategies. Released in February, it itemizes a goal (build out the Canadian military industry), lays out a budget for that goal ($180 billion by 2035), and even specifies who will be responsible for achieving that goal (a new body called the Defence Industrial Agency).<\/p>\n What\u2019s more, defence procurement is one area in which it\u2019s actually quite useful for Ottawa to release something in writing declaring its plans for the future. As the report states, \u201cone of the fundamental challenges facing Canadian industry has been the lack of clear and predictable demand signals and commitments from government.\u201d<\/p>\n The strategy is thus a \u201cclear,\u00a0long-term\u00a0demand signal\u201d assuring Canadian military contractors will no longer be as flaky on procurement.<\/p>\n In a critique published in the Financial Post, retired naval officer Vice-Admiral Mark Norman mostly had praise for the plan, saying its main drawback was only that Canada may not have the 125,000 skilled workers necessary to deliver what was otherwise \u201cthe most ambitious industrial policy this country has produced in a generation.\u201d<\/p>\n The National Artificial Intelligence Strategy <\/p>\n The subtitle of this report, released June 8, is \u201cAI for all.\u201d The gist is that Canada should have more AI in more places, and that such AI should be made nicer to alleviate fears about its adoption. The motto is \u201csafe, reliable, and sovereign AI.\u201d<\/p>\n To this end, several sections are devoted towards how artificial intelligence will help Canada reach its various \u201cequity\u201d and reconciliation goals.<\/p>\n The strategy promises to \u201censure Indigenous peoples have agency in shaping AI development locally and internationally,\u201d and warns of \u201cthe disproportionate exposure and impacts of AI harms to equity-seeking groups.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cGiven our diverse and multicultural society, our approach to AI must acknowledge and support this rich diversity,\u201d it reads.<\/p>\n The artificial intelligence sector is currently dominated by major firms such as OpenAI and Anthropic. The National Artificial Intelligence Strategy dismisses these providers as \u201chegemons and hyperscalers,\u201d and pledges to instead help subsidize the development of a Canadian AI sector that will be kind, equitable and respectful to \u201cour customs, our history, and our heritage.\u201d<\/p>\n The Walrus magazine published an entire feature<\/a> summing up all the AI experts who hated the strategy. Their basic critique being that it encourages universal adoption of a new technology on the promise that the federal government will ensure said technology works as intended. As one said, \u201cright now, we are encouraging people to fly, adding harnesses later, and accepting that sometimes the flight just goes somewhere completely random.\u201d<\/p>\n A Force of Nature: Canada\u2019s Strategy to Protect Nature<\/p>\n This strategy is particularly heavy on declarative statements such as \u201cnature is part of our daily lives,\u201d \u201cnature is foundational to Canadian identity\u201d and \u201cnature underpins much of our economic prosperity.\u201d<\/p>\n In prior instances where the Liberal government made measurable promises on conservation, they quickly came to regret them. The best example being a 2019 promise to plant two billion trees by 2030. Ottawa managed just one tenth<\/a> of that before the program was quickly scrapped in 2025.<\/p>\n Canada\u2019s Strategy to Protect Nature avoids this by committing the federal government only to three vague \u201cpillars\u201d: \u201cProtecting nature in Canada,\u201d \u201cbuilding Canada well,\u201d and \u201cvaluing nature and mobilizing capital.\u201d<\/p>\n By adhering to all three pillars, Canada will \u201cachieve results,\u201d it reads.<\/p>\n A National Strategy for an Electrified Canadian Economy<\/p>\n