Eby cool to Smith's proposal to revive Northern Gateway
Article content
OTTAWA — British Columbia Premier David Eby isn't saying 'no' to Alberta counterpart Danielle Smith's pitch to revive the cancelled Northern Gateway pipeline project, but his evasiveness on the topic speaks volumes.
Eby was quick to steer the discussion to 'points of agreement' when asked about Northern Gateway Thursday at the Western Premiers' Conference in Yellowknife.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
2 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
The problem with politicians' pet projects
Governments of all political stripes in Canada are making the most of the economic crisis triggered by U.S. President Donald Trump's whiplash-inducing tariff decisions. From the Ontario PCs to the BC NDP, the economic disruption has provided cover for governments to push their pet projects to the front of the line so that they build, baby, build. Ontario Premier Doug Ford wants to construct the world's longest traffic tunnel under Highway 401 and is calling on Ottawa to scrap a federal law that assesses the environmental impact of major projects so that he can meet his long-held ambition to develop mines in the 'Ring of Fire.' B.C. Premier David Eby has already passed contentious legislation this spring to eliminate environment assessments for a string of energy projects and to fast-track approvals for critical mineral mines. He now wants Ottawa to help pay for a transmission line to connect those potential projects – and while Ottawa has its wallet open, he'd also like some substantial cash for a replacement of the aging Massey tunnel that presents a choke point on Highway 99. And the federal Liberals are talking about a fast track for nation-building projects. All of this, naturally, in the name of unlocking Canada's economic potential. New Democrats, Liberals, and Conservatives all seem to have ended up at the same place: Those sitting around a cabinet table ought to decide which projects get built in a hurry, and which ones will have to wade through the existing regulatory mire. Andrew Coyne: The premiers as nation-builders? Colour me skeptical Campbell Clark: Should Canada build a pipeline to the West or the East? Prime Minister Mark Carney's One Canadian Economy bill, introduced Friday, proposes to create an office to streamline approvals for 'nation-building' projects such as ports, critical mineral mines and trade corridors. Projects that get on the list will be prioritized – leaving behind those that don't win favour. His criteria are vague enough to allow elected officials to play favourites. Nation-building projects are those that strengthen Canada's autonomy, resilience and security, and offer 'undeniable benefits to Canada.' Projects with Indigenous backing and clean growth potential will get a boost up the ladder. Mr. Carney invited the premiers to submit their preferred projects for consideration, making for a very jolly meeting of the First Ministers on June 2 because as it happened, the leaders all had arrived with their own parochial definitions of the national interest. Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew wants infrastructure funding for the Port of Churchill. Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston wants Ottawa's backing to develop offshore wind energy. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has revived her province's push for a new bitumen pipeline to the Pacific. The premise for this activity is that Canada's current regulatory framework is broken, that environmental assessments take too long, and that cabinets need special powers to ensure that projects are built in a timely way. Editorial: Ottawa should look to B.C.'s fast-track blueprint for big projects Editorial: Free the market for renewable energy in Alberta What if, instead of politicians advancing their political pet projects, they instead tackled the underlying problem? The private sector will necessarily power much of this nation-building. There is much alignment with Ottawa's ambitions, but some subtle differences. The Business Council of Canada has called for efforts to fast-track strategic infrastructure in response to the economic challenges now facing the nation as its major trading partner redraws the playing field. But the council isn't asking premiers to pick winners. It sees essential infrastructure projects as those that support energy and trade but also research and development infrastructure such as industrial labs. Business is asking governments to harmonize regulations across levels of government and eliminate bureaucratic bottlenecks that delay strategic investments. There is duplication; get rid of it. Environmental assessments can be managed more efficiently; reform the system. And the Crown can find ways to better execute the constitutional duty to consult and accommodate First Nations. Canada's productivity decline has many causes, but one of the most obvious is the penchant of governments to subsidize favoured industries rather than undertake the less glamorous work of tearing down barriers to private sector investment. A regulatory fast lane for pet projects is just a new spin on that tired and failed approach.
National Post
2 hours ago
- National Post
FIRST READING: How Canada's Trump-spiting plan to build pipelines is already evaporating
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Prime Minister Mark Carney, right, meets with British Columbia Premier David Eby at the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia in Victoria on Monday, April 7, 2025. Photo by THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick First Reading is a Canadian politics newsletter curated by the National Post's own Tristin Hopper. To get an early version sent directly to your inbox, sign up here. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Back in January, something near-unbelievable happened. One of Canada's most vocal and influential anti-pipeline activists said that maybe pipelines weren't such a bad idea. Stewart Phillip, grand chief of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, told reporters that he had changed his mind on Northern Gateway, a proposed $8-billion heavy oil pipeline to Kitimat, B.C., that Philip had worked for years to destroy. The spur for the epiphany was U.S. President Donald Trump pledging an all-out trade war with Canada. 'I would suggest that if we don't build that kind of infrastructure, Trump will,' said Philip. This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays) By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again The backlash was immediate, and Philip would end up reversing himself within 24 hours. The Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs rushed out a statement clarifying that they still opposed 'fossil fuel pipelines,' and quoted Phillip as saying 'I do not support resuscitating dead projects.… I sincerely apologize for any confusion on this point.' But Phillip's one-day odyssey as a pipeline booster would turn out to be a template for what was to come. Despite a brief glimmer of possibility that Canada would start building oil pipelines to spite Trump, the last few months have been a whirlwind of Canadian figures returning to their old anti-oil positions almost immediately. 'If you're not buying oil and gas from Canada and British Columbia, the alternative is Venezuela,' said B.C. Premier David Eby on Feb. 6 in a direct appeal for Canada to start selling more of everything to non-U.S. customers, including oil. Eby even made glowing reference to the recently completed Trans Mountain pipeline, a project his own B.C. NDP predecessor, John Horgan, had actively tried to sink. Where Horgan had called the pipeline a bringer of 'catastrophic oil spills,' Eby now said Trans Mountain was a 'critically important' means to 'ensure our sovereignty.' 'It doesn't matter what the product is, we should be looking at how we get that product to other markets,' he said. The comments were arguably the high-water mark of a flurry of public enthusiasm for new export pipelines. It didn't matter which coast; Canadians suddenly wanted a way to get more Alberta oil into tankers. Liberal MP François-Philippe Champagne, who is now minister of finance, said on Feb. 9 that his government's 2019 decision to cancel a pipeline to the Atlantic Coast should probably be reversed. 'Things have changed … you cannot be in the past,' he said. Even in famously anti-pipeline Quebec, Premier François Legault conceded that the political winds might be shifting. This advertisement has not loaded yet. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. 'What Mr. Trump is doing may change the situation in the future. So, if there is a social acceptability, we will be open to these kinds of projects,' he said on Feb. 3. A Feb. 10 poll by the Angus Reid Institute found that a record 68 per cent of Canadian respondents now favoured the Energy East pipeline, a project to bring Alberta crude to ports on the Atlantic Coast. Northern Gateway got the thumbs-up from 55 per cent of respondents, against just 25 per cent who said they opposed it. A month later, in March, a Nanos poll found that a new pipeline was suddenly one of the most popular pieces of public policy in the country. Three quarters of Canadians endorsed a 'national energy corridor which would have a pipeline to move Canadian oil and gas from Alberta to Eastern Canada.' The context for all of this was the beginning of Trump's trade war against Canada, and his frequent threats to annex the country as the 51st state. Canadian politicians of all stripes began embracing the idea of shifting the Canadian economy away from its historical reliance on U.S. exports. And in any strategy to decouple Canada from the U.S., arguably the most impactful thing Canada could do would be to sell its oil elsewhere. Oil is not only Canada's most valuable export, but it's an export almost entirely dependent on U.S. customers. More than 97 per cent of Canadian oil exports leave the country via a pipeline heading to the U.S. The only way Canadian oil can ever find its way to non-U.S. customers is via the occasional tanker filling up either at a Newfoundland offshore platform or via the Trans Mountain terminus in Burnaby. There's no immediate evidence that the Canadian public has soured on its enthusiasm for some sort of Trump-spiting oil export pipeline. As recently as April, a poll commissioned by Bloomberg News found 77 per cent of Canadians not only supportive of a new pipeline, but of one that would be 'government-funded.' But it's a different story at the political level, where specific proposals to actually build and approve a new pipeline are already being met with hedging or new conditions. In mid-May, Prime Minister Mark Carney said he would support 'just doing one pipe,' but only if there was 'consensus.' When he was asked this week in Saskatoon about whether his vision for 'nation-building projects' included an oil pipeline, he said that any such project would need to be filled with 'decarbonized' barrels of oil — a term that seemed to confuse environmentalists and oil advocates alike. Then, on Friday, Carney said nothing was getting built without 'a consensus of all the provinces, and Indigenous people.' In Quebec, opponents haven't even needed a specific pipeline proposal to start mobilizing against it. 'We will not allow the government to build a pipeline through Quebec,' Bloc Québécois MP Patrick Bonin said in the House of Commons this week. But probably the most dramatic about-face was Eby. At a premiers' meeting last month, Eby dodged questions about whether he would support a revived Northern Gateway project, saying that getting 'heavy oil to tidewater' was an Alberta priority. 'My priority is to … decarbonize and drive our economy in British Columbia,' he said. This is Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree at the precise moment where he said that he didn't know what an 'RPAL' is. Anandasangaree is now in charge of the Liberals' various ongoing gun control programs, and the Conservatives asked the question because an RPAL is a pretty rudimentary term in Canadian gun law. It stands for 'restricted possession and acquisition licence,' and it's the certification required to own a handgun in Canada. Anandasangaree also didn't know what 'CFSC' is. It's the Canadian Firearms Safety Course, the mandatory government training required of all Canadian gun owners. Photo by ParlVu The Liberals have reintroduced a measure that would extend Canadian citizenship to people who have never lived in Canada – and may not even speak either of the official languages. Under the new terms, anyone looking to claim inherited Canadian citizenship needs only one parent who is themselves a Canadian and has lived in the country for a cumulative 1,095 days. So, in extreme case, this technically extends citizenship to the children of people who left the country as toddlers. This wasn't the Liberal government's idea, though. It's the result of an Ontario Superior Court decision ruling that a 'first generation limit' on inherited Canadian citizenship was unconstitutional. Specifically, the court found that the measure violated the Charter right to freedom from discrimination based on 'national or ethnic origin,' since being born outside Canada is technically a kind of national origin. As the decision reads, 'it treats differently those Canadians who became Canadians at birth because they were born in Canada from those Canadians who obtained their citizenship by descent on their birth outside of Canada.' Canada is still in a trade war with the U.S., of course. The U.S. still has six active tariff packages aimed at Canada, including a 50 per cent tariff on steel and aluminum passed just this week. But while new tariffs used to be met with loud, public condemnations, this time around Prime Minister Mark Carney is keeping relatively quiet, reportedly because he's working out some kind of deal with the Trump White House. Photo by Photo by JIM WATSON /AFP via Getty Images Get all of these insights and more into your inbox by signing up for the First Reading newsletter.
National Post
3 hours ago
- National Post
Adam Pankratz: David Eby's CleanBC initiative a greater hit to economy than Trump's tariffs
Article content Open any book on politics and you will find that, in Canada, the NDP stands for the New Democratic Party. In British Columbia under David Eby, the acronym needs to be updated to — Not Delivering Prosperity. Article content Since Eby and his government took over in 2022, British Columbia has been an economic basket case. The deficit projection for 2025 was revised upwards in March to $10.9 billion — a record — which followed hot on the heels of the 2024 deficit of $9.1 billion — also a record until 2025 stole the deficit crown. The result in April was a downgrade to BC's credit rating from AA to A+. By any measure, the outlook is grim, as total debt for the province is predicted to soar by 70 per cent over the next three years. Article content Article content The ruling NDP and Premier David Eby have been quick to blame economic woes on Donald Trump and his tariff policies. While tariffs are no doubt hurting B.C. — as they are all of Canada — this tactic is already tired. In truth, the damage appears to be mostly self-inflicted, caused by poor budgeting and economic policy driven by ideology rather than actual economics. Article content Article content At the B.C. Chamber of Commerce AGM on June 4th, Ken Peacock, the former Chief Economist at the Business Council of B.C., presented analysis indicating the NDP's CleanBC initiative has actually been a far greater hit to the province's sputtering economy than any tariffs. From 2019-2024 it cost B.C. $29.3 billion in lost GDP and is projected to cost the province a further $109.7 billion between now and 2029. That's David Eby's economic leadership in action: ideology torpedoing economic prosperity for hard working British Columbians. Article content Eby and the NDP will of course point to the fact that they have passed Bill 14 and 15. Bill 15, the Infrastructure Projects Act, is ostensibly a bill to speed up major infrastructure project development, particularly in the resource industry. Eby and the NDP say the bills are 'critically important' to respond to a 'rapidly evolving situation' (read Trump) rather than acknowledge their need as a result of the NDP's actions in creating a provincial economic dud. Bill 15 gives cabinet sweeping powers to override existing regulations for projects in the provincial interest and fast-track them to permitting. It has been met with serious pushback from B.C. Municipalities and from First Nations who claim it ignores their voices and dismisses their rights. Article content Article content While any business which has tried to work in the province's economically critical resource sector may applaud the notion of a government finding ways to stop B.C.'s quagmire of delays and regulatory hell, the bill fails to address the real problem and merely hands unmerited power to a small group of NDP ideologues. This is always the Eby NDP way: power consolidation for decision making. Article content Article content The problem should be obvious to any free-market supporter. Bill 15 does not reignite B.C.'s economy by streamlining regulation for private enterprise; it merely allows cabinet to pick and choose which projects it will decide to ram through any further regulatory oversight. This is ripe for abuse and political interference. It is a pay-to-play system where randomness and arbitrary decisions based on cabinet whims, without clear process, will become the norm. Eby's NDP claim the bill brings investment clarity, in fact, it does anything but. Article content The vague backroom modus operandi of the NDP is, however, consistent in one way. They echo the closed-door decision-making attempts and history of the NDP when deciding how the province's crown land will be used; something essential for investment and resource development. This important process has been shrouded in secrecy on multiple occasions. The latest announcement in this regard covers all of Northwestern B.C. including the mineral-rich Golden Triangle. As a result, nearly a third of British Columbia is now subject to a one year pause on new mining-tenure registrations. This is the exact of opposite of what attracts investment to the province and will send the critical dollars B.C. needs to friendlier investment regions. Article content David Eby's NDP has bankrupted the province and has no plan back for the simple reason that they cannot trust the free market to do its work. They are trapped in an ideologically-driven mindset which does not permit British Columbians to make full use of their own province. This arbitrary and regressive policy must change. Article content
