Most Canadians Don't See Pipelines as 'Be All-End All', Carney Declares
Canada's energy future need not begin and end with pipelines, Prime Minister Mark Carney said in a major media interview Tuesday, just hours after King Charles III read a Speech from the Throne that envisioned the country as the "world's leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy."
In conversation with CBC's Power & Politics host David Cochrane, the PM "reiterated he believes the industry should not revolve solely around the conventional oil and gas pipelines that have long fuelled political debate out West," CBC reports.
"Carney said his new government will be focused on diversifying the energy sector beyond its roots in Alberta's oilpatch to include other, clean energy resources from across the country," the national broadcaster writes. "He did not rule out pipelines as part of the discussion, but said he doesn't believe most Canadians see those projects as the be all-end all option."
"It's remarkable. In some circles, this conversation starts and ends with pipelines," Carney told Cochrane.
"But that's what it has become politically," Cochrane replied.
View our latest digests
"No, that is not what it's become politically," Carney retorted. "That is not what it's become for Canada. Canada as a nation."
"Canadians, yes, they want energy pipelines that make sense," the PM added. "They also want connections between our clean grids. They want actually less carbon, so they want carbon capture and storage... they want broader [mineral exporting] corridors, for example... that open up whole swaths of the country to new trade so that we are sovereign in the most important components of the future."
Last Friday, in what CBC described as a "boisterous speech" to a sold-out business audience in Calgary, newly-appointed Energy Minister Tim Hodgson stoked fears that climate impacts, environmental assessment, and Indigenous consent might be shunted aside in the major "nation-building" projects the government has pledged to pursue.
"Energy is power," Hodgson told participants. "Energy is Canada's power. It gives us an opportunity to build the strongest economy in the G7, guide the world in the right direction, and be strong when we show up at a negotiation table."
Hodgson pledged a two-year approval window for major projects, rather than five, declaring that "I want to be very clear. In the new economy we are building, Canada will no longer be defined by delay. We will be defined by delivery."
But while Calgary Herald columnist Chris Varcoe followed up Hodgson's remarks with a list of oil and gas projects that should be on Ottawa's priority list, two lawyers at Torys LLP see a different set of priorities taking shape.
"With Prime Minister Carney and Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre offering contrasting climate strategies, the election outcome sets the course for how Canada navigates its climate transition," write Torys associate Caroline Marful and partner Tyson Dyck, in a post originally published by the Institute of Corporate Directors. "Carney's win signals continuity, but also renewal-and a sharpened focus on investment-driven climate action."
Marful and Dyck foresee the new government operating through executive and regulatory power if a minority parliament makes it more difficult to pass legislation, and list three "policy anchors and priorities" that Team Carney will likely pursue-stronger carbon markets through an enhanced industrial carbon pricing regime, advancing carbon dioxide removal technologies, and introducing a carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAMs) as a tariff on carbon-intensive imports.
"Carney's platform promised the development of CBAMs as a protective measure for Canada's energy-intensive and trade-exposed sectors," they write. "However, CBAMs are diplomatically delicate. Without coordination among major trading partners, they risk sparking protectionist backlash."
Climate analysts also caution that CBAMs risk perpetuating historical inequities to Global South nations by shutting them out of trade deals among wealthier countries.
While a Canadian carbon border adjustment isn't likely to materialize in the near term, the Torys lawyers say, "the inclusion of CBAMs in the [Liberals' election] platform signals a maturing climate-trade agenda."
The post cites clean investment tax credits (ITCs) and the former Trudeau government's long-delayed cap on oil and gas sector emissions as "two additional flashpoints" to watch. In a blog post Wednesday, the Canadian Climate Institute identified industrial carbon pricing and the clean electricity ITCs as two of four quick wins the government should pursue in its first 100 days, along with methane regulations and a made-in-Canada climate taxonomy for the financial sector.
Source: The Energy Mix
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
2 hours ago
- Toronto Star
U.S. ambassador says Canadians facing device searches, detainment ‘not a pattern'
OTTAWA — The American ambassador to Canada is pushing back on Ottawa's travel advice, saying his country doesn't search phones at the border and arguing some Americans travelling here are having a tough time. 'We welcome Canadians to come in and invest, to spend their hard-earned Canadian dollars at U.S. businesses,' U.S. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra told The Canadian Press in an interview Friday. 'If a Canadian has had a disappointing experience coming into the United States, I'm not denying that it happened, but I'm saying it's an isolated event and it is not a pattern.' ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW In April, Ottawa updated its advice to Canadians travelling to the United States to warn them about the possibility they might be detained if denied entry. 'Expect scrutiny at ports of entry, including of electronic devices,' reads the new guidance. There have been reports of Canadians facing intensified scrutiny at the border, having phones searched and, in some cases, being detained. Hoekstra insisted concerns about device searches are not grounded in reality. 'Coming to the U.S., that's a decision for the Canadians to make. Searching devices and all of that is not a well-founded fear. We don't do that. America is a welcoming place,' he said. He said some Americans have expressed similar concerns about Canada. 'I've heard that from Americans coming into Canada as well, OK? Saying, 'You know, we've not received a warm reception when we've gotten to Canadian customs,'' he said. When asked if these reports from American travellers involve arbitrary phone searches and lengthy detainment, Hoekstra said there are consular cases of Americans complaining to the embassy about the Canada Border Services Agency. ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW 'We've said, 'OK this may have been an isolated event. There may have been a Canadian border person who was having a bad day, and thought they'd take it out on, you know, somebody across the border,'' he said. In a statement, the CBSA said its officers follow a code of conduct and the federal ethics code that both require them to treat everyone equally, and the agency investigates any complaints of mistreatment. 'Employees are expected to conduct themselves in a way that upholds the values of integrity, respect and professionalism at all times,' wrote spokeswoman Karine Martel. 'Treating people with respect, dignity and fairness is fundamental to our border services officers' relationship with the public and a key part of this is serving all travellers in a non-discriminatory way.' Hoekstra said travel to the U.S. is up to individuals. 'If you decide that you're not going to come down or whatever, that's your decision and you're missing an opportunity. There are great things to see in America,' Hoekstra said. He also noted the case of CNN journalist Christiane Amanpour, who recently said she prepared to visit the U.S. last month as if she was 'going to North Korea' — with a 'burner phone' that didn't carry any personal information — only to experience a warm welcome. ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW 'It's like, (let's) get past the rhetoric and let's look at the real experiences that people are having here,' Hoekstra said. Airlines have been cutting flights between Canada and the U.S. due to a slump in demand, and Flight Centre Travel Group Canada reported a nearly 40 per cent drop in flights between the two countries year-over-year in February. A survey in early May conducted by Leger Marketing for the Association for Canadian Studies found 52 per cent of respondents feel that 'it is no longer safe for all Canadians travelling to the United States,' with 29 per cent disagreeing and 19 per cent saying they were unsure. Roughly the same proportion said they personally feel unwelcome in the U.S. LGBTQ+ groups have opted against attending World Pride events in Washington and United Nations events in New York, citing scrutiny at the border as the Trump administration scales back protections for transgender and non-binary people. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 7, 2025. Politics Headlines Newsletter Get the latest news and unmatched insights in your inbox every evening Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. Please enter a valid email address. Sign Up Yes, I'd also like to receive customized content suggestions and promotional messages from the Star. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Politics Headlines Newsletter You're signed up! You'll start getting Politics Headlines in your inbox soon. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page.
CTV News
3 hours ago
- CTV News
Why Tom Mulcair is calling this year's G7 Summit ‘the most important in a generation'
Why Tom Mulcair is calling this year's G7 Summit 'the most important in a generation' CTV News political commentator Tom Mulcair explains why he believes the upcoming G7 Summit is the most important in a generation.
Toronto Star
7 hours ago
- Toronto Star
Why Toronto's streets keep ending up as a battleground — and what the fight should really be about
The big number 25 % the percentage of customers that business owners believed drove to access their stores along Bloor Street, according to a 2017 study. The actual number was less than 10 per cent. Hey, did you hear the story about the group fighting a proposed change to a Toronto street? They're really worked up about it, claiming that the proposal from Toronto city hall will devastate small businesses, bring traffic to a standstill, and maybe even usher in a 'Mad Max'-style apocalypse. 'Wait, which street?' you might be wondering. And the answer is, well, a whole lot of them. I've seen so darn many of these street fights in my decade-plus covering Toronto city hall, with the civic equivalent of knock-down drag-out brawls occurring again and again. And the street fighters just keep coming. Last week, an advocacy group dubbed the Downtown Concerned Citizens Association held a press conference to state its opposition to a bike lane extension planned for the Esplanade, between Yonge and Market Streets. 'Bike lanes restrict road space,' the group declared, according to a report by the CBC. 'Bike lanes have turned streets into parking lots, with residents unable to shop, get their kids to events, and seriously impact emergency services and Wheel-Trans.' Their opposition follows a similar — and at least partly AI-aided — uproar over city hall's plans to install transit-priority lanes on Bathurst Street and Dufferin Street. And a local tiff over a bit of bike infrastructure on North York's Marlee Avenue. And the ongoing fight over keeping bike lanes on Bloor Street, Yonge Street and University Avenue, where even Premier Doug Ford got involved. Go back further and there are more examples. Remember the street fighters who claimed prioritizing the King streetcar would mark the end of King West? Or the 'citizen's revolt' over bike lanes on Woodbine Avenue? Or the ' Save Our St. Clair' group that sued to try to stop the construction of the streetcar right-of-way on St. Clair? Heck, you can even go back to the '90s, when opposition groups along Spadina Avenue warned that removing the angled on-street parking to make way for dedicated streetcar lanes would somehow destroy the vibrancy of the street. They really loved those angled parking spaces. The frustrating thing isn't just the sheer repetition of the street fight stories, but also that the pile of accumulated data from these same fights never seems to change anything. Because when you do look at the record, the record is clear: where these kinds of projects have been allowed to go forward, and where traffic has been given enough time to adjust to the new street layouts, the result has been basically fine. The uproar and opposition inevitably fade away. People get used to the new bike lanes or the new transit lanes. The apocalyptic warnings are forgotten about. The apocalypse never arrives. At this point, with so many fights waged — not just in Toronto, but in other cities, too — you'd think there'd be at least a handful of examples where the dire warnings proved prophetic. Where bike lanes, bus lanes and the removal of some on-street parking led directly to boarded-up storefronts and permanently gridlocked traffic. But I've struggled to find real case studies that document that kind of catastrophic failure in any city anywhere in the world. ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW The repeated claim that transit lanes and bus lanes will destroy businesses deserves a special call-out because it seems to be based on a perception problem. The Centre for Active Transportation, for example, found via a 2017 study that Bloor Street retailers believed that about 25 per cent of their customers arrived via car. The actual percentage? Less than 10 per cent. Part of the issue might be that merchants were about five times more likely to drive to work than their customers. They drive, so they assume their customers do too. Meanwhile, data suggests the transit priority project on King Street and the bike lanes on Bloor Street actually led to increased retail spending. Go figure. None of this should be read as a suggestion that Toronto city hall and its plans are always perfectly on point. The transportation department tends to make change harder than it has to be. On Bloor West, for example, opposition to the bike lanes was likely made more intense by the baffling decision to install the lanes without making adjustments to signal timing at intersections. And the department is generally still not fast enough at addressing clear bottlenecks that could be eased with minor tweaks. Toronto's street fighters would be better served by focusing their energy on getting city hall to address those kinds of specific issues more quickly and efficiently, rather than always trying to land a knockout blow against any kind of change. When your punches are this weak, it's probably time to stop throwing hands.
