Connect with us

Economy

Ottawa’s Regulatory Assault on the Extraction Sector and Its Impact on Investment

Published

9 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

Business investment is a foundational requirement for a prosperous economy. It provides the resources to establish new companies, expand existing ones, and invest in new factories, machinery, and technologies. Business investment in Canada has declined markedly for over a decade. It is a major reason why Canadian living standards are stagnating in absolute terms and declining relative to many peer countries, particularly the United States.1

One factor behind declining business investment is the heavy regulatory burden imposed by the current federal government on the extraction sector, which includes: mining, quarrying, and oil and gas. Since 1990, this sector averaged 17.3 percent of total non-residential business investment, and reached as high as 28.7 percent of the total in 2013.2

The federal government has been particularly critical of the oil and gas sector. As an example of such sentiment, in a 2017 speech Prime Minister Trudeau said it would take time to “phase out” the oil sands, indicating the long-term goal of the federal government to eliminate the fossil fuel industry (Muzyka, 2017). The prime minister’s comments were followed by a number of new regulations that directly or indirectly targeted the oil and gas sector:

• In 2019, Bill C-69 amended and introduced federal acts to overhaul the governmental review process for approving major infrastructure projects (Parliament of Canada, 2018). The changes were heavily criticized for prolonging the already lengthy approval process, increasing uncertainty, and further politicizing the process (Green, 2019).

• In 2019, Bill C-48 changed regulations for vessels transporting oil to and from ports on British Columbia’s northern coast, effectively banning such shipments and thus limiting the ability of Canadian firms to export (Parliament of Canada, 2019).

• Indications from the federal government that a mandatory hard cap on GHG emissions would eventually be introduced for the oil and gas sector. In 2023, such a cap was introduced (Kane and Orland, 2023), excluding other GHG emitting sectors of the economy (Watson, 2022).

• In early 2023, the government announced new fuel regulations, which will further increase the cost of fuels beyond the carbon tax (ECCC, 2023).

• In late 2023, with limited consultation with industry or the provinces, the Trudeau government announced major new regulations for methane emissions in the oil and gas sector, which will almost inevitably raise costs and curtail production (Tasker, 2016).

The growing regulatory burden has a number of implications that impede or even prohibit oil and gas investment, by increasing costs and uncertainty, making it less attractive to invest in Canada. Both a 2022 survey of mining companies and a 2023 survey of petroleum companies identified the same three risks as inhibiting investment in Canadian provinces—uncertainty over disputed land claims, protected areas, and environmental regulations.3

It is also important to recognize that the Trudeau government introduced a carbon tax in 2016, which conceptually should replace regulations related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions such as those listed previously rather than be an additional policy lever used to manage GHG emissions.4

The regulations discussed above, as well as direct decisions by the federal government had tangible effects on the oil and gas sector:

• In late 2016, the Northern Gateway pipeline running from northern Alberta to Kitimat, British Columbia was cancelled by the Trudeau government, further limiting the ability of firms in Alberta to get their products to export markets (Tasker, 2016).

• In 2017, TransCanada Corp. cancelled its $15.7 billion Energy East pipeline, which would have transported oil from Alberta to Saint John, New Brunswick. The project was cancelled in large measure due to changes in national policy regarding the approval of large infrastructure projects (Canadian Press, 2017).

• While the Trans Mountain pipeline from Edmonton to Burnaby, BC was approved, Kinder Morgan exited the project in 2018 due to uncertainties and questions about the economics of the project, forcing the Trudeau government to take the ownership. The cost of the project has since increased by more than four times the original estimate to $30.9 billion (Globe and Mail Editorial Board, 2023).

• In 2019, US-based Devon Energy announced plans to exit Canada’s oilsands to pursue more profitable opportunities in the United States (Healing, 2019).

• In 2020, Teck Resources abandoned its $20 billion Frontier oilsands mine in Alberta because of increasing regulatory uncertainty (Connolly, 2020).

• In 2020, Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway decided not to invest $4 billion in Saguenay LNG, a liquified natural gas plant and pipeline, due to political and regulatory risks (CBC News, 2020).

The divestitures above are not an exhaustive list. Other companies including Norwegian Equinor (formerly Statoil), France’s TotalEnergies SE (formerly Total SA), US-based Murphy Oil, and ConocoPhillips have all reduced their investments in Canada’s oil and gas sector.

The government’s mounting regulations and hostilities towards the oil and gas sector did not go unnoticed outside of Canada. A 2018 article in The Economist listed the many failures to develop pipeline infrastructure in Canada to bring much-demanded oil and gas to market. Indeed, the piece called it a “three-ring circus” that risked “alienating foreign investors who are already pulling back from Canada” (Economist, 2018).

It is first important to acknowledge the overall decline in business investment in Canada since 2014. Overall, total non-residential business investment (inflation-adjusted) declined by 7.3 percent between 2014 and 2022.5, 6

The decline in business investment in the extractive sector (mining, quarrying, and oil and gas) is even more pronounced. Since 2014, business investment excluding residential structures and adjusted for inflation has declined from $101.9 billion to $49.7 billion in 2022, a reduction of 51.2 percent (figure 1).7


A similar decline in business investment of 52.1 percent is observed for conventional oil and gas, falling from $46.6 billion in 2014 to $22.3 billion in 2022 (inflation-adjusted) (figure 1). In percentage terms the decline in non-conventional oil extraction was even larger at 71.2 percent, falling from $37.3 billion in 2014 to $10.7 billion in 2022.8

Simply put, the declines in the extraction sector are larger than the total decline in overall non-residential business
investment between 2014 and 2022, indicating the magnitude of the overall effect of the decline in business investment in this sector.

The importance of business investment to the health of an economy and the rising living standards of citizens cannot be overstated. One of the major challenges facing Canadian prosperity are regulatory barriers, particularly in the oil and gas sector.

In that light, much of the regulatory burden added over the last eight years to the oil and gas sector should simply be eliminated. In some ways this is already being forced on the federal government through court decisions. For instance, in October of 2023, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that parts of Bill C-69 were unconstitutional as they infringed on areas of exclusive provincial jurisdiction, requiring revisions to the Act (Dryden, 2023).

A careful and clear analysis is needed of the costs and benefits of the regulatory measures imposed on the oil and gas sector, including Bill C-48, the recent methane regulations, and the emissions cap. Based on this analysis, the regulatory measures should be adjusted to help improve the ability of Canada’s energy sector to attract and retain investment.

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

Business

Trump’s dismantling of USAID is his biggest blow against the Deep State yet

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

Elon Musk’s DOGE has shut down USAID, immediately ceasing U.S. government funding of NGOs backing digital tyranny, mass migration, the ‘LGBTQ’ agenda, abortion – and a host of ‘regime change’ operations.

Donald Trump’s new administration has begun to dismantle globalist network funding of the policies of social revolution across the West – and beyond. With the revelations on the shuttering of USAID, Americans now know whose money is behind the Deep State: theirs. 

Trump’s war on the Deep State has shocked the establishment. Elon Musk’s DOGE has shut down  USAID, immediately ceasing U.S. government funding of NGOs backing digital tyranny, mass migration, the “LGBTQ” agenda, abortion – and a host of “regime change” operations including the funding of the origins of COVID-19 and the impeachment of Donald Trump himself.  

These projects, and many more, were all paid for with U.S. taxpayer’s money through USAID. 

This Deep State network of finance, influence and the subversion of democracy in the U.S., Britain, Europe and beyond remained unchanged in every election – until this one.  

USAID, The U.S. Agency for International Development, “disbursed over 72 billion dollars last year,” according to a Newsweek report in October 2024, which described the now-defunct agency as “by far the world’s largest provider of humanitarian aid.” 

So where is this “aid” going? 

 

… and what sort of “humanitarian” projects has it been aiding? 

“USAID is notorious for funding the most horrifying projects known to mankind,” as Mike Benz explains.   

USAID’s “humanitarian” work included funding and directing the template for global digital governance in Ukraine, with its DIIA app, and funding the World Economic Forum which promotes the same agenda:  

Its humanitarian efforts extended to sponsoring anti-Catholic propaganda in Ireland: 

 

As Glenn Beck has pointed out, USAID was a major sponsor of abortion:  

Here is a picture of ISIS terrorists in Syria in a USAID tent:

USAID was also funding “globalist propaganda” on the U.K.’s state broadcaster:

Independent journalist Michael Shellenberger reported, “From 2004-2022, USAID was the largest U.S. government funder of EcoHealth Alliance, the group that funded the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which likely started the COVID pandemic.” 

 

USAID sought to undermine and overthrow traditional and conservative national governments in Eastern Europe – and replace them with liberal-globalist ones:  

 

Dmitry Arestovich, the former right-hand man to Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky, now says USAID pressured the Ukrainian President into the war: 

 

USAID funded “sterilization projects” in Peru: 

 

And as LifeSiteNews reported in December 2024, USAID pressured African nations to change pro-life laws and promote mass abortions, but that did not stop Fr. James Martin from bewailing its demise. 

 

USAID also paid “race rioters” to engage in violent protests in Africa: 

 

At home, USAID sponsored the prosecution of U.S. citizens by “Soros-funded prosecutors”:

 

…and, as former Trump State Department staffer Mike Benz also asks, “Why did USAID pay $20 million to hit piece journalists to dig up dirt on Rudy Giuliani and use that dirt as the basis to impeach the sitting U.S. President in 2019?” 

 

USAID was also giving “millions of dollars to Bill Kristol,” arch-neocon and founder of the permanent war “Project for a New American Century.”

 

The populist leader of El Salvador Nayib Bukele summed up the happy ending for the world that is the end of USAID.  

“Most governments don’t want USAID funds flowing into their countries because they understand where much of that money actually ends up. While marketed as support for development, democracy, and human rights, the majority of these funds are funneled into opposition groups, NGOs with political agendas, and destabilizing movements.” 

He explained how only “maybe 10% of the money reaches real projects that help people in need,” adding that “there are such cases” – but the remaining ninety percent, he says, “It is used to fuel dissent, finance protests, and undermine administrations that refuse to align with the globalist agenda. Cutting this so-called aid isn’t just beneficial for the United States; it’s also a big win for the rest of the world.” 

Donald Trump’s war on the Deep State has just begun. It is not merely concerned with saving America, but his “common sense revolution” is a cure for a world made sick by a global network of death, deception and digital tyranny. He is uprooting the hidden international system which has promoted “LGBT, open borders and war” – as Hungary’s Viktor Orbán defined the values of the former regime. 

This has been described as a “counter-revolution” by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, who says these are serious moves against the “Deep State… and its mirror image, the Deep Church.”

With a serious campaign underway to destroy the business model of the globalist system it is hard to see how the rainbow “church” of Fr. James Martin can survive its isolation in a world without the patronage, propaganda and power of a corrupt Deep State and its globalist networks. 

And the revolution does not stop with USAID. With moves to “purge” the FBI, audit the U.S. Treasury and all the agencies of the U.S. government, Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency is set to undertake a thorough cleanup of the White House and all it commands.  

You might say the swamp is being drained. 

However you frame it, what is happening here has never been seen in our lifetimes.  

The secret state which directed politics and policy in the West despite elections is being exposed, defunded and shut down. We may not only have meaningful elections in future, but a Western society free of the propaganda of social revolution whose toxic “new values” had one thing in mind: the replacement of Christian civilization with a global government no one could ever escape.  

Finally, after decades of destruction by design, things have really changed. For good. 

Continue Reading

Business

Trans Mountain Pipeline proving to be a generational opportunity

Published on

From Energy Now

Trans Mountain Pipeline System a Strategic Canadian Asset

On May 1, 2024, we began commercial operations of the expanded Trans Mountain pipeline. Building a system that increased capacity from approximately 300,000 to 890,000 barrels per day (bpd) is proving to be one of the most strategic investments Canada has ever made. It has allowed us to diversify Canada’s customers for our oil, which has increased revenues and provided Canada with trading options in the face of tariffs from our biggest trading partner, the United States.
While energy is targeted for a lower tariff of 10 per cent (at time of writing), we expect utilization of the Trans Mountain pipeline to grow as Canadian producers look to access markets without a tariff. When the expansion project was first proposed it had three main goals — to give more capacity for responsibly produced Canadian crude oil to grow and meet the energy needs of the world, to give Canadian oil access to global markets on the Pacific Rim, and to increase the value of Canadian oil through this market diversification. I am happy to share that we are achieving these goals.
On the first goal, crude oil production increased in 2024 as producers had greater capacity to ship, and this production is set to grow further in 2025. According to industry analysts, total crude oil production in Canada reached 5.3 million bpd in December 2023. It hit 5.4 million bpd in December 2024 and is expected to reach 5.6 million bpd by December 2025.
Since May 1, Trans Mountain has sent roughly half of the shipments from our marine terminal to countries other than the United States on the Pacific Rim, and half have gone to refineries on the west coast of the United States. In a recently released independent report by Alberta Central, economist Charles St-Arnaud highlights, “non-U.S. oil exports more than doubled in the second half of 2024.”
This increased access to international markets is what drives the third goal, allowing Canada to get a better price for our product. In the past, Canada had to sell crude oil into a single market, often at a steep discount or differential to the benchmark price. This has been a substantial transfer of wealth from Canada to another country.
With the startup of the expanded system, the discount on Canadian crude oil has improved. The price differential between Western Canada Select (WCS) and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) narrowed by about $10 in Q4 2024 versus Q4 2023. Analysts estimate this price uplift increased oil revenues by $10 billion since we began shipping oil through the expanded system.
We are in month 10 of commercial operations and are now identifying and investigating growth opportunities that would improve the throughput efficiency and increase the capacity of the expanded system, ideally in the next four to five years under the current regulatory regime. Execution of any project requires extensive collaboration and engagement with our business partners, governments, Indigenous peoples, community groups and other affected stakeholders. It also requires multiple levels of approvals by provincial and federal regulators.
While we see beneficial growth opportunities, before Trans Mountain or any other energy system can consider significant expansions or investments in Canada, our nation needs to find more efficiencies in effective engagement and our regulatory process. Given our evolving global energy landscape, increasing Canada’s ability to reach new markets to supply Canadian energy to other nations is becoming increasingly important.
Canada has a long history of being a stable provider of responsibly produced energy to the United States and, hopefully, this relationship will soon return to how it was before Feb. 1. However, we now have the opportunity to deliver our products to other nations on the Pacific Rim.
As stated before a committee of Parliament in 2024, the fiscal legacy of the Trans Mountain pipeline system for the Government of Canada will be achieved by being a disciplined seller. When the time is right, Canada can return the company to the private sector and receive full value for its investment. That is the goal of our entire team. That investment is proving to be the generational opportunity the federal government predicted it could be when it purchased the company. Canada’s leadership demonstrated the foresight to see this through and stepped up at a critical time to do what was good for the country.Trans Mountain is delivering what was promised, and as it turns out, just in time.

Mark Maki is chief executive of Trans Mountain.

Continue Reading

Trending

X