Any Downturn in Alberta’s Economy Would Inevitably Drag Canada’s Down With It

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

Is anyone paying attention?

Canada is heading straight for an economic iceberg, and the rest of the country doesn’t seem to grasp the gravity of the situation. Alberta – long the engine of Canada’s prosperity thanks to its oil and gas sector – is facing a serious decline because the Trudeau government is obsessed with its net-zero policies. And if Alberta falters, the ripple effects will drag down the entire nation. But are we too preoccupied with federal climate targets to recognize the risks staring us in the face?

The Trudeau government’s push for net-zero emissions by 2050 may look noble on paper, but the real-world cost could be catastrophic. The numbers don’t lie: according to a recent column by Troy Media contributor Lennie Kaplan, Alberta’s oil production could drop by a staggering 54 percent by 2050. That’s not just a provincial problem; it’s a national economic emergency waiting to happen.

Let’s cut through the jargon. Alberta makes up about 15 percent of Canada’s GDP. If Alberta’s economy shrinks by $32 billion – as projected – it would trigger a 1.2 percent drop in Canada’s GDP. For context, that’s a multi-billion-dollar hole in a country whose economy is, itself, already in severe decline.

Does Ottawa think a shrinking economy will put us in a stronger position to innovate and grow? Or are they content with turning Alberta into a sacrificial lamb on the altar of climate policy, ignoring the fact that this will make Canada less competitive on the world stage?

Then there’s the job market. Alberta’s energy sector employs thousands and indirectly supports tens of thousands more across Canada. By 2050, again according to Kaplan, Alberta could shed 198,000 jobs – five percent of its workforce. These aren’t just oil rig workers; they’re engineers, construction crews, transport workers, and more.

It gets worse. When Alberta’s economy shrinks, industries from coast to coast that depend on Alberta’s vitality will also take a hit. If even 10 to 15 percent of those job losses trickle across the country, we’re looking at another 20,000 to 30,000 Canadians joining the unemployment line. Yet, where is the urgency to address this looming crisis?

Alberta isn’t just a provincial powerhouse – it’s also a major contributor to federal revenues. Between 2025 and 2050, the province’s contributions could drop by $221 billion due to declining oil and gas revenues. That’s less money for healthcare, infrastructure, and social programs from coast to coast.

For a federal government that already struggles to balance its books, the loss of up to $40 billion in federal tax contributions from Alberta is a fiscal disaster in the making. Where do they expect to make up that shortfall? Higher taxes? Slashed services? Or maybe another round of federal borrowing to kick the can down the road?

Alberta’s oil and gas isn’t just a provincial asset – it’s a critical part of Canada’s trade balance. In 2022, energy exports made up 20 percent of Canada’s total exports. Cut that by more than half, and you’re gutting Canada’s international trade position.

A $70 to 80 billion hit to export revenue could balloon the country’s trade deficit, further devaluing the Canadian dollar and making imports more expensive. In short, this isn’t just bad news for Alberta – it’s an economic calamity that could send shockwaves through every corner of the country.

And let’s not forget the federal equalization program. Alberta has long been a “have” province, contributing far more than it gets back. But if Alberta’s economy falters, it could soon be knocking on Ottawa’s door for handouts.

Imagine the political firestorm if Alberta becomes a “have-not” province, competing for federal support with the very provinces that have relied on its success. The strain on equalization could pit regions against each other, creating a toxic political environment when unity is more crucial than ever.

Does Ottawa even care?

Alberta’s decline isn’t just Alberta’s problem. It’s a Canadian problem. The Trudeau government’s climate obsession needs to take this into account. We cannot afford to sacrifice Alberta’s economic engine without dragging the rest of the country down with it.

What’s the plan to balance climate goals with economic reality? So far, there’s been little more than vague promises and short-term thinking. If Ottawa doesn’t wake up to the real-world consequences of Alberta’s decline, we’re all in for a harsh economic reckoning.

It’s time for our leaders to prioritize pragmatic solutions over virtue signalling. Because if Alberta goes down, the rest of Canada won’t be far behind.

First published here.

Troy Media is an editorial content provider to media outlets and its own hosted community news outlets across Canada.

Up Next

Unleashing Canada’s competitive advantage in energy and natural resources

Don't Miss

The Carbon Tax ship is sinking

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

While Ohtani marches into MLB history, Nippon league’s shame lingers

Crime / 12 hours ago

RCMP Bust Industrial-Scale Superlab Outside Toronto

Opinion / 16 hours ago

A Nation of Announcements: Canada’s Government of Empty Promises

Alberta

B.C. would benefit from new pipeline but bad policy stands in the way

Published on October 25, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari

Bill C-69 (a.k.a. the “no pipelines act”) has added massive uncertainty to the project approval process, requiring proponents to meet vague criteria that go far beyond any sensible environmental concerns—for example, assessing any project’s impact on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors.”

In case you haven’t heard, the Alberta government plans to submit a proposal to the federal government to build an oil pipeline from Alberta to British Columbia’s north coast.

But B.C. Premier Eby dismissed the idea, calling it a project imported from U.S. politics and pursued “at the expense of British Columbia and Canada’s economy.” He’s simply wrong. A new pipeline wouldn’t come at the expense of B.C. or Canada’s economy—it would strengthen both. In fact, particularly during the age of Trump, provinces should seek greater cooperation and avoid erecting policy barriers that discourage private investment and restrict trade and market access.

The United States remains the main destination for Canada’s leading exports, oil and natural gas. In 2024, nearly 96 per cent of oil exports and virtually all natural gas exports went to our southern neighbour. In light of President Trump’s tariffs on Canadian energy and other goods, it’s long past time to diversify our trade and find new export markets.

Given that most of Canada’s oil and gas is landlocked in the Prairies, pipelines to coastal terminals are the only realistic way to reach overseas markets. After the completion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion (TMX) project in May 2024, which transports crude oil from Alberta to B.C. and opened access to Asian markets, exports to non-U.S. destinations increased by almost 60 per cent. This new global reach strengthens Canada’s leverage in trade negotiations with Washington, as it enables Canada to sell its energy to markets beyond the U.S.

Yet trade is just one piece of the broader economic impact. In its first year of operation, the TMX expansion generated $13.6 billion in additional revenue for the economy, including $2.0 billion in extra tax revenues for the federal government. By 2043, TMX operations will contribute a projected $9.2 billion to Canada’s economic output, $3.7 billion in wages, and support the equivalent of more than 36,000 fulltime jobs. And B.C. stands to gain the most, with $4.3 billion added to its economic output, nearly $1 billion in wages, and close to 9,000 new jobs. With all due respect to Premier Eby, this is good news for B.C. workers and the provincial economy.

In contrast, cancelling pipelines has come at a real cost to B.C. and Canada’s economy. When the Trudeau government scrapped the already-approved Northern Gateway project, Canada lost an opportunity to increase the volume of oil transported from Alberta to B.C. and diversify its trading partners. Meanwhile, according to the Canadian Energy Centre, B.C. lost out on nearly 8,000 jobs a year (or 224,344 jobs in 29 years) and more than $11 billion in provincial revenues from 2019 to 2048 (inflation-adjusted).

Now, with the TMX set to reach full capacity by 2027/28, and Premier Eby opposing Alberta’s pipeline proposal, Canada may miss its chance to export more to global markets amid rising oil demand. And Canadians recognize this opportunity—a recent poll shows that a majority of Canadians (including 56 per cent of British Columbians) support a new oil pipeline from Alberta to B.C.

But, as others have asked, if the economic case is so strong, why has no private company stepped up to build or finance a new pipeline?

Two words—bad policy.

At the federal level, Bill C-48 effectively bans large oil tankers from loading or unloading at ports along B.C.’s northern coast, undermining the case for any new private-sector pipeline. Meanwhile, Bill C-69 (a.k.a. the “no pipelines act”) has added massive uncertainty to the project approval process, requiring proponents to meet vague criteria that go far beyond any sensible environmental concerns—for example, assessing any project’s impact on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors.” And the federal cap on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions exclusively for the oil and gas sector will inevitably force a reduction in oil and gas production, again making energy projects including pipelines less attractive to investors.

Clearly, policymakers in Canada should help diversify trade, boost economic growth and promote widespread prosperity in B.C., Alberta and beyond. To achieve this goal, they should put politics aside, focus of the benefits to their constituents, and craft regulations that more thoughtfully balance environmental concerns with the need for investment and economic growth.

Alberta

Alberta introduces bill allowing province to reject international agreements

Published on October 25, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Under the proposed law, international treaties or accords signed by the federal government would not apply in Alberta unless approved through its own legislation.

Alberta’s Conservative government introduced a new law to protect “constitutional rights” that would allow it to essentially ignore International Agreements, including those by the World Health Organization (WHO), signed by the federal Liberal government.

The new law, Bill 1, titled International Agreements Act and introduced Thursday, according to the government, “draws a clear line: international agreements that touch on provincial areas of jurisdiction must be debated and passed into law in Alberta.”

Should the law pass, which is all but certain as Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s Conservatives hold a majority government, it would mean that any international treaties or accords signed by the federal government would not apply in Alberta unless approved through its own legislation.

“As we return to the legislature, our government is focused on delivering on the mandate Albertans gave us in 2023 to stand up for this province, protect our freedoms and chart our path forward,” Smith said.

“We will defend our constitutional rights, protect our province’s interests and make sure decisions that affect Albertans are made by Albertans. The federal government stands at a crossroads. Work with us, and we’ll get things done. Overstep, and Alberta will stand its ground.”

According to the Alberta government, while the feds have the “power to enter into international agreements on behalf of Canada,” it “does not” have the “legal authority to impose its terms on provinces.”

“The International Agreements Act reinforces that principle, ensuring Alberta is not bound by obligations negotiated in Ottawa that do not align with provincial priorities,” the province said.

The new Alberta law is not without precedent. In 2000, the province of Quebec passed a similar law, allowing it to ignore international agreements unless approved by local legislators.