Economy
Governments across Canada should prioritize energy infrastructure—including pipelines

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Elmira Aliakbari
In a recent meeting with Prime Minister Mark Carney, the provincial premiers discussed major infrastructure and energy projects to be fast-tracked through a new federal approval process. While the general sentiment was that the meeting was productive and collaborative, the British Columbia government seemingly shot down Alberta’s proposed pipeline to B.C.’s northern coast. This political resistance to new pipeline infrastructure overlooks the positive potential impact such projects could have for Canada and beyond.
Prime Minister Carney plans to table legislation that would create a new major projects office tasked with reducing approval times from five to two years, among other measures. Major projects must meet numerous criteria before deemed in the “national interest” and expedited. The premiers have compiled a short-list of projects for consideration though the full list has not been publicly released.
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s proposed pipeline would transfer bitumen to the Port of Prince Rupert in B.C., which would open up access to Asian markets. B.C. Deputy Premier Niki Sharma, who attended the recent meeting in place of B.C. Premier David Eby, said the proposal has “no proponent” at this stage and that her government plans to focus on “shovel-ready projects.”
And it isn’t just the Eby government resisting the project—Steven Guilbeault, a member of Carney’s cabinet, recently dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure, including to B.C.’s coast, based on incorrect information about the Trans Mountain pipeline’s capacity and future oil demand.
Again, this political resistance ignores key facts about Canada’s energy sector, including our current overreliance on a single customer. Currently, 97 per cent of our oil exports go to the United States. This heavy reliance on the U.S. market has made Canada vulnerable to U.S. policy changes, as highlighted by the recent threat of tariffs on Canadian energy. Expanding pipeline infrastructure—both westward, as proposed by Premier Smith, and eastward—would help us diversify our export market and allow Canada to reach customers in Asia and Europe.
And pipeline expansion is not just about exports; it’s also about enhancing energy security at home. Some parts of our country, namely Ontario and Quebec, remain heavily dependent on U.S. pipelines to meet their energy needs. Specifically, due to the lack of an west-east pipeline dedicated to oil, for more than 70 years Canadian oil extracted in Alberta has passed through the U.S. via Enbridge’s network before returning to Ontario.
Finally, this discussion shouldn’t be limited to oil. There is and will continue to be strong demand for liquefied natural gas (LNG) in many parts of the world, including in Asia, for many years to come, which presents Canada with a significant opportunity to become a major LNG exporter and provide cleaner-burning fuel to countries such as China and India. However, building the necessary infrastructure (pipelines and LNG terminals) is critical if we’re serious about seizing this opportunity.
Governments across Canada should support critical energy infrastructure, including pipelines. This means putting politics aside and recognizing the importance of infrastructure in expanding export opportunities, ensuring energy security, reducing global emissions and creating prosperity across the country.
Business
Potential For Abuse Embedded In Bill C-5

From the National Citizens Coalition
By Peter Coleman
“The Liberal government’s latest economic bill could cut red tape — or entrench central planning and ideological pet projects.”
On the final day of Parliament’s session before its September return, and with Conservative support, the Liberal government rushed through Bill C-5, ambitiously titled “One Canadian Economy: An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act.”
Beneath the lofty rhetoric, the bill aims to dismantle interprovincial trade barriers, enhance labour mobility, and streamline infrastructure projects. In principle, these are worthy goals. In a functional economy, free trade between provinces and the ability of workers to move without bureaucratic roadblocks would be standard practice. Yet, in Canada, decades of entrenched Liberal and Liberal-lite interests, along with red tape, have made such basics a pipe dream.
If Bill C-5 is indeed wielded for good, and delivers by cutting through this morass, it could unlock vast, wasted economic potential. For instance, enabling pipelines to bypass endless environmental challenges and the usual hand-out seeking gatekeepers — who often demand their cut to greenlight projects — would be a win. But here’s where optimism wanes, this bill does nothing to fix the deeper rot of Canada’s Laurentian economy: a failing system propped up by central and upper Canadian elitism and cronyism. Rather than addressing these structural flaws of non-competitiveness, Bill C-5 risks becoming a tool for the Liberal government to pick more winners and losers, funneling benefits to pet progressive projects while sidelining the needs of most Canadians, and in particular Canada’s ever-expanding missing middle-class.
Worse, the bill’s broad powers raise alarms about government overreach. Coming from a Liberal government that recently fear-mongered an “elbows up” emergency to conveniently secure an electoral advantage, this is no small concern. The lingering influence of eco-radicals like former Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, still at the cabinet table, only heightens suspicion. Guilbeault and his allies, who cling to fantasies like eliminating gas-powered cars in a decade, could steer Bill C-5’s powers toward ideological crusades rather than pragmatic economic gains. The potential for emergency powers embedded in this legislation to be misused is chilling, especially from a government with a track record of exploiting crises for political gain – as they also did during Covid.
For Bill C-5 to succeed, it requires more than good intentions. It demands a seismic shift in mindset, and a government willing to grow a spine, confront far-left, de-growth special-interest groups, and prioritize Canada’s resource-driven economy and its future over progressive pipe dreams. The Liberals’ history under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, marked by economic mismanagement and job-killing policies, offers little reassurance. The National Citizens Coalition views this bill with caution, and encourages the public to remain vigilant. Any hint of overreach, of again kowtowing to hand-out obsessed interests, or abuse of these emergency-like powers must be met with fierce scrutiny.
Canadians deserve a government that delivers results, not one that manipulates crises or picks favourites. Bill C-5 could be a step toward a freer, stronger economy, but only if it’s wielded with accountability and restraint, something the Liberals have failed at time and time again. We’ll be watching closely. The time for empty promises is over; concrete action is what Canadians demand.
Let’s hope the Liberals don’t squander this chance. And let’s hope that we’re wrong about the potential for disaster.
Peter Coleman is the President of the National Citizens Coalition, Canada’s longest-serving conservative non-profit advocacy group.
Business
Canada should already be an economic superpower. Why is Canada not doing better?

From Resource Works
Tej Parikh of the Financial Times‘s says Canada has the minerals but not the plan
Tej Parikh is the economics editorial writer for The Financial Times, a British daily newspaper. He joins our Stewart Muir for a Power Struggle interview. And we include in the following report some points from a guest column by Parikh in Canada’s National Post, which carried the headline ‘How Canada can unlock its economic superpower potential.’
Parikh begins the Power Struggle interview with this: “There’s an enormous economic potential here, very much the same geographic advantages that have underpinned America’s economic emergence over the last 100 years. . . . Given everything we understand about the advantages that countries need to grow, why is Canada not doing better economically?” He added: “When you break it down and you look at why income per capita in Canada has perhaps not increased as fast as we might expect on the basis of those advantages, it really kind of breaks down to three components. One is investment, so how much capital goes into the country?
The second is labour, and not just the amount, the size of the workforce you have, but how well you utilize the workforce. And then the third component is something that economists like to call a total-factor productivity, which is essentially your innovative ability and your ability to bring together capital and people. “And when you look at Canada as opposed to other large economies . . . you begin to see that actually there are a lot of restrictions in Canada, not just because of its vast geography but because of regulation, that it actually can’t combine its capital and labour as productively as it could.
“It’s about creating those supply chains and critical minerals that the Western world is currently short of. Given it (Canada) has these vast raw material resources, there is a massive scope for it to become even more integrated into Western supply chains in particular and to become a supplier of these things.” From Parikh’s National Post column: “The country is energy independent, with the world’s largest deposits of high-grade uranium and the third-largest proven oil reserves. It is also the fifth-largest producer of natural gas.Canada boasts a huge supply of other commodities too, including the largest potash reserves (used to make fertilizer), over one-third of the world’s certified forests and a fifth of the planet’s surface freshwater. Plus, it has an abundance of cobalt, graphite, lithium and other rare earth elements, which are used in renewable technologies. “But the nation has lacked the visionary leadership and policy framework to capitalize on its advantages.”
Watch the full interview here:
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day ago
What Connor Should Say To Oilers: It’s Not You. It’s Me.
-
Business1 day ago
Federal fiscal anchor gives appearance of prudence, fails to back it up
-
Business1 day ago
Trump reins in oil markets with one Truth Social post
-
Business1 day ago
The Passage of Bill C-5 Leaves the Conventional Energy Sector With as Many Questions as Answers
-
Business1 day ago
The U.S. Strike in Iran-Insecurity About Global Oil Supply Suddenly Makes Canadian Oil Attractive
-
conflict2 days ago
Americans abroad told to stay alert as Iran threatens retaliation
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta poll shows strong resistance to pornographic material in school libraries
-
Banks1 day ago
Scrapping net-zero commitments step in right direction for Canadian Pension Plan