Economy
Fixing the Trudeau – Guilbeault Policy Mess May Take Longer Than We’d Like – Here’s Why
From EnergyNow.ca
By Jim Warren
By spring 2024 it was pretty clear the Liberal government was headed for palliative care. A Leger poll on May 25 and an Abacus poll June 10 showed the Conservatives with a 20 point lead over the Liberals.
As the likelihood of their imminent defeat increased, the Trudeau Liberals stepped up the implementation of legislation and regulations inimical to the gas and petroleum industries. Their efforts in 2024 included legislation limiting freedom of speech for companies and individuals who publicize environmental progress in the oil and gas sector (aka Bill C-59). The speech-muzzling measure became law on June 21.
Around the same time, Environment and Climate Change Minister, Steven Guilbeault was busy shepherding two particularly ominous regulatory packages through to finalization. One set of regulations supported Canada’s Clean Electricity Regulations—intended to eliminate the use of coal and natural gas in the production of electricity with staged decommissioning deadlines between 2035 and 2050. The second package finalized the rules for the natural gas and oil industries emissions cap intended to restrict production and growth in those industries, to take effect in 2026.
The regulations weren’t finalized until the month before the House shut down for the holidays, just weeks before Justin Trudeau’s political career was put on life support.
The green policy stampede extended to the international stage. Never mind deficits and debt, the Liberals found plenty of cash to enhance their status as world class environmental luminaries.
At November’s COP29* conference at Baku, Azerbaijan, Guilbeault and Canada’s Ambassador for Climate Change (who knew we had one?), Catherine Stewart signed us on to 15 pledges to take action on fighting climate change. Around half of the promises were merely motherhood and apple pie statements, concessions to the environmentally woke who attend these sorts of international conferences.
But several of the commitments made on our behalf came with price tags. I’m still unclear on exactly which line item in a federal budget, legislative authority or policy statement authorized the spending.
Canada’s COP29 delegation launched the $2 billion GAIA project. Apparently we are cost sharing the project with Mitsubishi. The official government report on the conference doesn’t indicate how much of the $2 billion Canada is kicking in.
Canada also showcased its green bona fides by contributing to the effort to finance the green transition and climate change adaptation in poor countries—a task expected to require developed countries to collectively spend $110 billion to $300 billion per year by 2035. Our delegation announced Canada would lead by example, making a $1billion donation to the effort.
Guilbeault and Stewart gave $10 million to Conservation International’s “Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area” project. They “invested” another $2.5 million in the World Wildlife Fund’s “Building Resilient Communities through Marine Conservation in Madagascar” project.
Guilbeault may indeed be angling for that UN job I mentioned in my last EnergyNow column. Read it Here Canada made a $1.25 million payment directly to the office of UN Secretary General, António Guterres. The donation is supposed to assist Guterres in his efforts to encourage countries to get their “Nationally Determined Contributions” handed in on time.
In a podcast conversation with Jordan Peterson several months ago, Danielle Smith noted the accelerated pace of the Liberal government’s announcement and implementation of new environmental policies detrimental to Alberta’s oil and gas sectors and the economies of both Alberta and Canada.
Smith said one of the effects of enacting so many new environmental measures would be to make it extremely difficult for the next government to reverse them all in its first term. This probably was one of the reasons behind the rush to get so much done this past year.
Peterson added a psychological dimension to the discussion. He suggested Guilbeault and Trudeau were behaving like wounded narcissists. They were acting like egomaniacs who recognized their time in office was coming to an end and wanted to do as much as possible in the time they had left to pad their reputations as “do or die” climate warriors. They were striving to guarantee their legacies as planet-saving heroes.
They are probably both right. But Smith’s assessment speaks more directly to the practical challenges a new Conservative government will confront while trying to unwind the morass of legislation and regulations needlessly hampering the growth of environmentally responsible resource development in the west. It is an effort by the outgoing government to make their anti-oil legacy tamper proof.
Simply wading through the legislative quagmire and assessing where reform is most urgent and readily achievable will take time and effort. The wheels of parliament can turn slowly. No doubt some of the bureaucrats employed by the Liberals are true believers—frightened of the “impending climate apocalypse” and unlikely to expedite changes to environmental legislation and regulations. And, there could be multi-year contracts with consultants and other suppliers and long-term funding arrangements with companies and NGOs that will be difficult to unwind.
Let’s not forget the inevitable legal challenges that will threaten to hold up the reform process. Environmental groups and other special interests can be expected to use the courts to block efforts to reverse Liberal government policy. Ideally, the new government will cut off funding support for anti-oil environmental groups. Then at least supporters of the gas and petroleum sectors won’t be sued by activists funded with our tax dollars.
Then there are all the other important things governments are required to do and a limited amount of time to do them—drafting fiscally responsible budgets and dealing with the possibility of US tariffs on our exports come to mind as things near the top of the to-do list.
The highly anticipated Poilievre government may not be able to move as far and fast in reversing the Trudeau-Guilbeault legacy as we might like. They will face immense challenges and should be given a fair bit of slack if they can’t fix everything early in their first term.
*COP stands for Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The framework was adopted by the countries attending the UN sponsored Rio Earth Summit held at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. The number in COP29 indicates it is the 29th annual post-Rio conference of the parties.
From the Fraser Institute
At a time when Canadians are grappling with epic housing supply and affordability challenges, the data show that homebuilding continues to come up short in some parts of the country including in several metro regions where most newcomers to Canada settle.
In both the Greater Toronto area and Metro Vancouver, housing starts have languished below levels needed to close the supply gaps that have opened up since 2019. In fact, the last 12-18 months have seen many planned development projects in Ontario and British Columbia delayed or cancelled outright amid a glut of new unsold condominium units and a sharp drop in population growth stemming from shifts in federal immigration policy.
At the same time, residential real estate sales have also been sluggish in some parts of the country. A fall-off in real estate transactions tends to have a lagged negative effect on construction investment—declining home sales today translate into fewer housing starts in the future.
While Prime Minister Carney’s Liberal government has pledged to double the pace of homebuilding, the on-the-ground reality points to stagnant or dwindling housing starts in many communities, particularly in Ontario and B.C. In July, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) revised down its national forecast for housing starts over 2025/26, notwithstanding the intense political focus on boosting supply.
A slowdown in residential construction not only affects demand for services provided by homebuilders, it also has wider economic consequences owing to the size and reach of residential construction and the closely linked real estate sector. Overall, construction represents almost 8 per cent of Canada’s economy. If we exclude government-driven industries such as education, health care and social services, construction provides employment for more than one in 10 private-sector workers. Most of these jobs involve homebuilding, home renovation, and real estate sales and development.
As such, the economic consequences of declining housing starts are far-reaching and include reduced demand for goods and services produced by suppliers to the homebuilding industry, lower tax revenues for all levels of government, and slower economic growth. The weakness in residential investment has been a key factor pushing the Canadian economy close to recession in 2025.
Moreover, according to Statistics Canada, the value of GDP (in current dollars) directly attributable to housing reached $238 billion last year, up slightly from 2023 but less than in 2021 and 2022. Among the provinces, Ontario and B.C. have seen significant declines in residential construction GDP since 2022. This pattern is likely to persist into 2026.
Statistics Canada also estimates housing-related activity supported some 1.2 million jobs in 2024. This figure captures both the direct and indirect employment effects of residential construction and housing-related real estate activity. Approximately three-fifths of jobs tied to housing are “direct,” with the rest found in sectors—such as architecture, engineering, hardware and furniture stores, and lumber manufacturing—which supply the construction business or are otherwise affected by activity in the residential building and real estate industries.
Spending on homebuilding, home renovation and residential real estate transactions (added together) represents a substantial slice of Canada’s $3.3 trillion economy. This important sector sustains more than one million jobs, a figure that partly reflects the relatively labour-intensive nature of construction and some of the other industries related to homebuilding. Clearly, Canada’s economy will struggle to rebound from the doldrums of 2025 without a meaningful turnaround in homebuilding.
Jock Finlayson
Ship containers are stacked at the Panama Canal Balboa port in Panama City, Saturday, Sept. 20, 2025. The Panama Canals is one of the most significant trade infrastructure projects ever built. CP Images photo
From the Canadian Energy Centre
Q&A with Gary Mar, CEO of the Canada West Foundation
Building a stronger Canadian economy depends as much on how we move goods as on what we produce.
Gary Mar, CEO of the Canada West Foundation, says economic corridors — the networks that connect producers, ports and markets — are central to the nation-building projects Canada hopes to realize.
He spoke with CEC about how these corridors work and what needs to change to make more of them a reality.
Gary Mar, CEO of the Canada West Foundation. Photo for the Canadian Energy Centre
CEC: What is an economic corridor, and how does it function?
Gary Mar: An economic corridor is a major artery connecting economic actors within a larger system.
Consider the road, rail and pipeline infrastructure connecting B.C. to the rest of Western Canada. This infrastructure is an important economic corridor facilitating the movement of goods, services and people within the country, but it’s also part of the economic corridor connecting western producers and Asian markets.
Economic corridors primarily consist of physical infrastructure and often combine different modes of transportation and facilities to assist the movement of many kinds of goods.
They also include social infrastructure such as policies that facilitate the easy movement of goods like trade agreements and standardized truck weights.
The fundamental purpose of an economic corridor is to make it easier to transport goods. Ultimately, if you can’t move it, you can’t sell it. And if you can’t sell it, you can’t grow your economy.
CEC: Which resources make the strongest case for transport through economic corridors, and why?
Gary Mar: Economic corridors usually move many different types of goods.
Bulk commodities are particularly dependent on economic corridors because of the large volumes that need to be transported.
Some of Canada’s most valuable commodities include oil and gas, agricultural commodities such as wheat and canola, and minerals such as potash.
Rail cars carry commodities through Saskatchewan. Photo courtesy CN Rail
CEC: How are the benefits of an economic corridor measured?
Gary Mar: The benefits of economic corridors are often measured via trade flows.
For example, the upcoming Roberts Bank Terminal 2 in the Port of Vancouver will increase container trade capacity on Canada’s west coast by more than 30 per cent, enabling the trade of $100 billion in goods annually, primarily to Asian markets.
Corridors can also help make Canadian goods more competitive, increasing profits and market share across numerous industries. Corridors can also decrease the costs of imported goods for Canadian consumers.
For example, after the completion of the Trans Mountain Expansion in May 2024 the price differential between Western Canada Select and West Texas Intermediate narrowed by about US$8 per barrel in part due to increased competition for Canadian oil.
This boosted total industry profits by about 10 per cent, and increased corporate tax revenues to provincial and federal governments by about $3 billion in the pipeline’s first year of operation.
CEC: Where are the most successful examples of these around the world?
Gary Mar: That depends how you define success. The economic corridors transporting the highest value of goods are those used by global superpowers, such as the NAFTA highway that facilitates trade across Canada, the United States and Mexico.
The Suez and Panama canals are two of the most significant trade infrastructure projects ever built, facilitating 12 per cent and five per cent of global trade, respectively. Their success is based on their unique geography.
Canada’s Asia-Pacific Gateway, a coordinated system of ports, rail lines, roads, and border crossings, primarily in B.C., was a highly successful initiative that contributed to a 48 per cent increase in merchandise trade with Asia from $44 million in 2006 to $65 million in 2015.
China’s Belt and Road initiative to develop trade infrastructure in other countries is already transforming global trade. But the project is as much about extending Chinese influence as it is about delivering economic returns.
Piles of coal awaiting export and gantry cranes used to load and unload containers onto and from cargo ships are seen at Deltaport, in Tsawwassen, B.C., on Monday, September 9, 2024. CP Images photo
CEC: What would need to change in Canada in terms of legislation or regulation to make more economic corridors a reality?
Gary Mar: A major regulatory component of economic corridors is eliminating trade barriers.
The federal Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act is a good start, but more needs to be done at the provincial level to facilitate more internal trade.
Other barriers require coordinated regulatory action, such as harmonizing weight restrictions and road bans to streamline trucking.
By taking a systems-level perspective – convening a national forum where Canadian governments consistently engage on supply chains and trade corridors – we can identify bottlenecks and friction points in our existing transportation networks, and which investments would deliver the greatest return on investment.
Bizarre Decisions about Nicotine Pouches Lead to the Wrong Products on Shelves
Alberta government’s plan will improve access to MRIs and CT scans
RFK Jr’s argument for studying efficacy of various vaccines
No Jobs Clause: Liberals Under Fire Over Stellantis Deal in Fiery Committee Showdown
-
Alberta2 days agoMark Carney Has Failed to Make Use of the Powerful Tools at His Disposal to Get Oil Pipelines Built
-
Business1 day agoCarney shrugs off debt problem with more borrowing
-
Daily Caller2 days agoEx-Terrorist Leader Goes On Fox News, Gives Wild Answer About 9/11
-
Energy2 days agoFor the sake of Confederation, will we be open-minded about pipelines?
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoMaintenance Mania: Since When Did Pro Athletes Get So Fragile?
-
Alberta1 day agoWhen Teachers Say Your Child Has Nowhere Else to Go
-
Automotive1 day agoThe high price of green virtue
-
MAiD2 days agoQuebec has the highest euthanasia rate in the world at 7.4% of total deaths