The pipeline is filling, and the mandate is clear. As infrastructure demands surge across Ontario, the province is leaning on industry stakeholders to deliver at a defining moment of growth and renewal.
“We are absolutely in the midst of an infrastructure moment,” said Matti Siemiatycki, director of the Infrastructure Institute at the University of Toronto. “We’ve actually been in a moment for the last 10 years, but what’s different now is the balance between talk and action has shifted, and that shift is becoming more pronounced. There’s a real impatience and a desire to move quickly and at scale,” he added.
Ontario’s ambitions are building by the day. Where billion-dollar megaprojects once made for big headlines, it’s more common to see announcements made for initiatives that are orders of magnitude larger. “Now, we’re into $5 billion and $10 billion projects, and they’re being talked about as if they’re routine, which signals a fundamental change in both expectations and delivery pressure,” said Siemiatycki.
This is no longer a question of whether Ontario will build, but whether it can build fast enough – and effectively enough – to meet the scale of its own ambitions. This mounting scale and urgency are being driven by more than traditional planning cycles. Geopolitical shifts, trade pressures, and climate change challenges have underscored the value of reliable infrastructure systems (e.g., transportation, energy, communication, water, and sanitation) in supporting a resilient and self-reliant economy.
“There’s a confluence of goals to which infrastructure is being seen as the solution,” said Steven Crombie, the senior director of public affairs at the Ontario Road Builders’ Association. “Transit, energy, housing, state of good repair – all these demands are converging over the next decade, and they’re all competing for attention at the same time.”
Colliding priorities
The mission for Ontario’s infrastructure is two-fold: maintaining aging assets while expanding capacity to meet future demand. A glance across the pipeline reflects that dual focus on expansion and renewal – from the construction of Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass to the extension of the Yonge North Subway line, potential tunnelling along Highway 401, and the creation of key trade corridors in the Province’s Ring of Fire. The result is a system being asked to do two things at once – expand for the future while catching up on the past.
Rehabilitation continues to dominate the workload as aging infrastructure from the 1970s and 1980s comes due for repair and replacement, placing ongoing strain on available resources. From her vantage point as vice president of Tomlinson Infrastructure, Graziela Girardi says this attention to infrastructure asset renewal is both necessary and unavoidable.
“Much of the infrastructure was built in the ’70s and ’80s, so there’s been a strong focus on repairing and replacing those assets, and that work is absolutely necessary, particularly as those systems continue to age,” she said. “If the budget does not keep pace with the need, repairs get deferred, conditions worsen, and the long-term cost only increases.”
In short, says Siemiatycki, the tab is finally landing on Ontario’s aging infrastructure. “Expansion projects are important, but maintaining existing infrastructure is just as critical, particularly in rural and northern Ontario where options are limited,” he said. “Highways like Highway 11 and Highway 17 are vital economic corridors, and any disruption can have significant ripple effects on trade and the broader economy, especially for goods movement. Ensuring these assets remain in a state of good repair is essential.”
In many cases, that work is less visible, but no less critical, than the headline-grabbing megaprojects. There’s another layer to Ontario’s infrastructure moment. With record-breaking weather events becoming more of the norm, there is an escalating need to prepare Ontario’s assets for the climate challenges to come.
“These capital plans are in the billions of dollars and represent tens, if not hundreds, of billions in infrastructure needs just related to climate adaptation,” said Crombie.
Opening the wallet
Ontario may have big plans, but some wonder if its funding matches its ambitions, particularly given the industry’s rising costs. As Crombie notes, the Ministry’s rehabilitation funding has remained essentially flat at about $1.5 billion annually, “while construction inflation has significantly outpaced the consumer price index,” creating a widening gap.
In real terms, that means today’s funding is delivering less infrastructure than it did a decade ago. Less work can be done today, even if nominal budgets appear stable.
“There’s broad recognition that this needs to be addressed, not only by increasing the budget, but by indexing it to construction costs going forward,” said Crombie. Without that adjustment, the pressure doesn’t disappear – it shifts downstream, where projects are delayed, scaled back, or forced to absorb additional risk.
Deciding where to start
Ontario faces a near-endless list of aging assets in need of repair alongside growing pressure to build new infrastructure, creating difficult prioritization decisions. Choosing which projects to fund and pursue is a tension point in and of itself – and one that will likely persist over the coming years, as trade-offs become unavoidable.
“Infrastructure entails making hard choices; if you allocate scarce resources to one project, it means you’re not building another, and each project confers benefits on some people and costs on others,” said Siemiatycki. In that environment, prioritization becomes as important as funding itself.
Every investment is also a trade-off, he continues, “and just because something is big doesn’t mean it’s necessarily good.” These difficult trade-offs can motivate governments to extend consultations or move decisions through multiple layers of review to reduce the risk of making the wrong move.
“The real value comes from building the right project, in the right place, and ensuring it connects with the broader system, rather than simply building for the sake of it,” said Siemiatycki. “That’s what ultimately delivers the benefit.”
Adapting procurement models
If this is an execution moment, then how projects are delivered becomes just as important as which projects are selected. Ontario’s infrastructure moment is prompting a fresh look at established procurement models to identify where delivery strategies can be strengthened for all parties.
The industry is seeing this shift in action. Over the years, project owners have shifted back and forth between design-bid-build and P3 models, such as design-build-finance-maintain, as priorities change. Now, says Siemiatycki, the industry is moving again. “What we’re seeing more recently is a move toward more flexible approaches like progressive design-build and alliance models,” he said.
Construction manager/general contractor (CMGC) models are emerging as a popular choice for large projects. It’s a more collaborative approach, Crombie explains, where the construction manager works closely with the client to establish more accurate pricing.
We have found ways in Canada to make it slow and painful to deliver just about everything.
Matti Siemiatycki, Infrastructure Institute, University of Toronto
“This reduces the gap between initial price expectations and final project costs,” he added, which helps to manage risk on both sides. These models aren’t just about efficiency – they reflect a broader shift toward shared accountability in delivering complex infrastructure.
Still, says Siemiatycki, procurement models are only as effective as the people behind them. “We’ve been so focused on the delivery model, as if picking the right model will take care of everything,” he said, “but it’s about how you create trust, manage relationships, and how decisions are made in real time. Those are skills that haven’t necessarily been emphasized.”
For this reason, Siemiatycki believes there are benefits to creating more leadership training opportunities for project leaders, such as the one he is on the verge of launching at the University of Toronto. “You obviously need technical proficiency, but alongside that, you also need leadership skills,” he said. “Building that capacity would go a significant way toward improving project delivery, especially on complex projects.”
A call for consistency
There are several factors that make Ontario’s infrastructure moment a difficult one to meet, particularly from a business perspective. For one, says Crombie, an inconsistent pipeline of projects coming to market makes it difficult for road builders and other infrastructure stakeholders to maintain the teams and resources needed to pursue new opportunities.
“What government can do in the very short term is ensure that there is a steady pipeline of projects that continue to come to market – and of all sizes and of all regions – so that the industry itself remains robust,” he said, emphasizing predictability. For contractors, that predictability isn’t a luxury – it’s what allows them to invest in people, equipment, and long-term capacity.
“When we have ebbs and flows in investment, organizations are forced to upsize and downsize rapidly,” said Crombie. “And then what happens is that when projects come to market, they’re not as equipped as they otherwise could have been.”
Diversity of projects is equally important, says Girardi, especially when it comes to ensuring investments are distributed evenly throughout the province and not concentrated in one region. “There’s a lot of investment happening, especially around the GTA, but outside of that, the flow of work is much less consistent – like in Eastern Ontario, where we haven’t seen a steady pipeline of projects in recent years,” she said.
“Sustainability of work is critical. Companies need a steady flow of projects to maintain their operations, their workforce, and their presence in a region. If you’re only building one bridge a year, that’s not enough to sustain a business. You can’t attract and retain people in the industry if the work isn’t stable,” she added. “When things slow down, people leave – and when projects return, companies are forced to rebuild their teams.”
Bottlenecks and speed bumps
Even with stronger alignment and a more consistent pipeline, significant barriers remain. Pipeline inconsistencies and the resulting labour shortages are only some of today’s industry restraints. As many in the field can relate, the system is bogged down by increasingly multiplying and duplicating rules and regulations. This often leads to delays, disagreements, or decision paralysis when it comes to factors such as permitting, approvals, environmental considerations, and Indigenous engagement, all of which take time.
Individually, these steps may be justified – but collectively, they can slow progress to a pace that no longer matches the urgency of the moment. “We have found ways in Canada to make it slow and painful to deliver just about everything,” said Siemiatycki.
Further speed bumps surface when funding is available, but the projects aren’t ready to go, creating mismatches between capital and execution. Or when stakeholders lack coordination in the early phases of work, resulting in problems with design and planning that inevitably show up later down the road.
“If enough time isn’t spent on design, those issues show up during construction,” said Girardi. “Then, you’re stopping work, asking questions, and trying to resolve problems in real time – which slows everything down and adds cost.”
Full disclosure
Lack of information can also impede Ontario’s infrastructure plans. And whether because of poor coordination or the realities of working on decades-old infrastructure, Girardi says it is a familiar issue. In an environment where timelines are tight and margins are under pressure, those unknowns become more than technical challenges – they become business risks.
We’ve been so focused on the delivery model, as if picking the right model will take care of everything, but it’s about how you create trust, manage relationships, and how decisions are made in real time. Those are skills that haven’t necessarily been emphasized.
Matti Siemiatycki, Infrastructure Institute, University of Toronto
“When there’s less information available at the bidding stage, whether it’s soil conditions or what’s underground, you’re forced to make assumptions,” said Girardi. “If those assumptions don’t hold, then you’re dealing with additional costs, delays, and potential disputes.”
Unpredictability is a factor in any project, but it can be more pronounced in the province’s denser, more urban environments. Using roadworks in Toronto as an example, Girardi said, “As soon as roadwork begins, crews often encounter conditions that were not identified in advance, such as utilities or other underground constraints. Each time this happens, work must pause so the team can assess the situation and coordinate with multiple stakeholders, which creates delays across the project.”
The answer is in alignment
Ontario’s infrastructure moment is a call for stronger collaboration among all its construction stakeholders. Promisingly, there are signs that industry and government are coming together to address the roadblocks and speed bumps that may impede successful outcomes. Speaking from his public-sector dealings at ORBA, Crombie said, “There’s strong alignment right now between ORBA, senior ministry officials, and the political side of government on the need for continued infrastructure investment.”
For one example, he explains, collaboration on amendments to the general conditions, dispute resolution processes, or health and safety management.
“There are many areas where we work closely with senior officials, but when we have alignment between ministry officials, bureaucrats, and political leadership, it’s fantastic. It’s an opportunity ORBA shouldn’t pass up, and I believe they’ve been working very hard to build that alignment.”
With stronger alignment comes stronger, longer-term planning. This, perhaps above all else, is key in a time of unprecedented infrastructure demands, where coordination matters.
“Infrastructure is kind of like chess – you have to be thinking three moves ahead,” said Siemiatycki. “If you approach it one move at a time – making announcements for political reasons or short-term convenience – you might get a quick win and a bit of a sugar high, but just like in chess, the person thinking three moves ahead is going to come out on top. Infrastructure has to connect.”
Sequencing is no doubt key – as road builders can attest. Even when new roads or road repairs may benefit a community, poor sequencing can result in rework and delays that sour public opinion.
“The thing that drives people crazy about road building is when there’s no coordination,” said Siemiatycki. “They repave your street one year, then three months later, the hydro crew comes in, followed by sewer work, then gas. Suddenly, you’ve had three cuts in six months for different projects, and you’re left wondering why it wasn’t coordinated in the first place.”
Inspiration from outside our borders
Ontario is far from alone in its infrastructure needs. Within Canada and beyond its borders, there is a push to hone in on the right projects, procurement processes, and delivery methods to achieve similar objectives – and often under similar pressures.
Companies need a steady flow of projects to maintain their operations, their workforce, and their presence in a region … You can’t attract and retain people in the industry if the work isn’t stable. When things slow down, people leave.
Graziela Girardi, Tomlinson Infrastructure
To that end, there is a benefit to looking outside our borders – be it across the pond to the UK, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Spain, France, or Turkey – for lessons in infrastructure planning and delivery, particularly in how systems are structured. The differences are less about technical ability, says Siemiatycki, and more about planning culture, how disputes are handled, and how technical expertise is structured within institutions. That said, there is no single model to copy, as each region adapts to its own context.
“There are a number of lessons to be learned, but again, there are reasons why our system has developed over generations,” said Siemiatycki. “We likely need a Canadian solution to address the problems we’re facing.”
What we need to get right
The moment is here, and the clock is ticking. As Ontario pushes ahead with the construction and rehabilitation of its vital infrastructure, it will need to focus on strategies, expertise, and streamlined processes that support solid planning and long-term perspectives, ensuring projects connect and deliver value. The challenge isn’t identifying what needs to be done – it’s executing consistently across a system under increasing strain. It’s no small ask, but the industry is no stranger to rising to the challenge.
“I’d say that, without a doubt, the industry is capable of rising to the challenge,” said Crombie. “At the core of every successful construction organization is the ability to adapt. Contractors deal with a wide range of variables that are often beyond their control, such as fluctuations in project volume and broader market conditions. Managing that uncertainty is built into the fabric of the industry, and it’s what gives me confidence that we’ll be able to navigate the challenges ahead.”
Both Siemiatycki and Girardi share that same confidence in the industry’s ability to meet the moment, citing its continual evolution and growing sophistication.
“There is far more structure, documentation, and disciplined project management in place today than there was 20 years ago,” said Girardi, adding, “The industry has become much more sophisticated, and we have a strong and knowledgeable workforce on the contractor side. I am confident the industry is well equipped to meet the challenges ahead.”
The capacity exists within the industry. Whether the systems around it can match that capacity will ultimately define what this moment becomes.
