Stop The Cap On Oil And Gas

From Project Confederation

With the United Nations’s 28th Climate Change Conference in Dubai generating headlines, we all knew it was only a matter of time before Canada’s radical eco-activist Environment Minister did something stupid.

And here it is, from Steven Guilbeault himself:

“The Government of Canada’s plan to cap and reduce emissions from Canada’s largest emitting sector is ambitious, but practical. It considers the global demand for oil and gas — and the importance of the sector in Canada’s economy — and sets a limit that is strict, but achievable.”

That’s right, folks – the Oil and Gas emissions/production cap is finally upon us.

We launched a campaign last year, around this same time, warning that this was coming.

Now, we know just how bad it actually is.

If you already agree that we should Stop The Cap On Oil And Gas,
click here to sign the petition, but if you want more details, read on!

The framework that’s being proposed by the federal government would cap emissions at 35% – 38% below 2019 levels.

How exactly would this be done?

What will it cost?

No one knows.

The federal government just says that they’ll release the details via regulation sometime next year.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is livid, issuing a statement:

“[The announcement is an] intentional attack by the federal government on the economy of Alberta and the financial well-being of millions of Albertans and Canadians.”

“Justin Trudeau and his eco-extremist Minister of the Environment and Climate Change, Steven Guilbeault, are risking hundreds of billions of investments in Alberta’s and Canada’s economy.”

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe echoed Smith:

“[The cap] will have serious economic impacts on Canadians and limit our sustainable Canadian energy products from providing heat and electricity to the world.”

“Saskatchewan will protect our constitutional right to build our economy in accordance with the priorities of Saskatchewan families and businesses.”

The federal government has been in legal hot water lately over constitutional overreaches – with the Supreme Court deeming the Impact Assessment Act unconstitutional in October and the Federal Court ruling the plastics ban unconstitutional in November.

Ottawa has consistently ignored provincial jurisdiction on a wide range of issues, and their inability to stay in their constitutional lane has been a major source of tension with the provinces.

This emissions cap is just the latest example, as natural resource development is guaranteed to be the sole jurisdiction of the provinces in the Constitution of Canada.

As such, the emissions cap is clearly unconstitutional – but even if it wasn’t, it would be a terrible policy anyway.

First, it’s an admission by the government that the carbon tax – their signature climate change policy – is not working.

The entire purpose of the tax was to be a “market mechanism” to reduce emissions, and yet now they’re admitting that they need even more regulations to reduce emissions.

This cap is a direct and deliberate attack on western Canada’s oil and gas industry.

Remember – the cap will not apply to any industry other than oil and gas.

Ontario’s automotive industry, Quebec’s cement industry, and other high-emitting industries in other parts of Canada are not having their emissions capped.

The cap also excludes refineries – even though that is part of the oil and gas industry – because many of Canada’s refineries happen to be in regions of the country that mostly vote Liberal.

If the federal government were actually concerned about the environment, they would implement policies designed to reduce emissions across all industries and all regions of Canada.

Instead, the hypocritical and political nature of Ottawa’s climate agenda reveals their true intentions and undermines the credibility of their entire plan.

That’s why we’re renewing our campaign calling on the federal government to back off, respect the Constitution, and stop infringing on provincial jurisdiction.

If you agree, please sign our petition to Stop The Cap On Oil And Gas:

Josh Andrus
Executive Director
Project Confederation

Related Topics:#COP28 #DanilleSmith #JoshAndrus #ProjectConfederation #ScottMoe #StevenGuilbeault

Up Next

Freedom Convoy leaders’ lawyers argue there are five major ‘gaps’ in Crown’s case

Don't Miss

Federal government’s fiscal plan raises red flags

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

Manhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband

Canadian Energy Centre / 5 hours ago

Cross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project

Alberta / 5 hours ago

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Canadian Energy Centre

Cross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project

Published on June 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Canadian Energy Centre

Billions in government revenue and thousands of jobs across provinces

Announced in 2006, the Northern Gateway project would have built twin pipelines between Bruderheim, Alta. and a marine terminal at Kitimat, B.C.

One pipeline would export 525,000 barrels per day of heavy oil from Alberta to tidewater markets. The other would import 193,000 barrels per day of condensate to Alberta to dilute heavy oil for pipeline transportation.

The project would have generated significant economic benefits across Canada.

The following projections are drawn from the report Public Interest Benefits of the Northern Gateway Project (Wright Mansell Research Ltd., July 2012), which was submitted as reply evidence during the regulatory process.

Financial figures have been adjusted to 2025 dollars using the Bank of Canada’s Inflation Calculator, with $1.00 in 2012 equivalent to $1.34 in 2025.

Total Government Revenue by Region

Between 2019 and 2048, a period encompassing both construction and operations, the Northern Gateway project was projected to generate the following total government revenues by region (direct, indirect and induced):

British Columbia

Provincial government revenue: $11.5 billion
Federal government revenue: $8.9 billion
Total: $20.4 billion

Alberta

Provincial government revenue: $49.4 billion
Federal government revenue: $41.5 billion
Total: $90.9 billion

Ontario

Provincial government revenue: $1.7 billion
Federal government revenue: $2.7 billion
Total: $4.4 billion

Quebec

Provincial government revenue: $746 million
Federal government revenue: $541 million
Total: $1.29 billion

Saskatchewan

Provincial government revenue: $6.9 billion
Federal government revenue: $4.4 billion
Total: $11.3 billion

Other

Provincial government revenue: $1.9 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.4 billion
Total: $3.3 billion

Canada

Provincial government revenue: $72.1 billion
Federal government revenue: $59.4 billion
Total: $131.7 billion

Annual Government Revenue by Region

Over the period 2019 and 2048, the Northern Gateway project was projected to generate the following annual government revenues by region (direct, indirect and induced):

British Columbia

Provincial government revenue: $340 million
Federal government revenue: $261 million
Total: $601 million per year

Alberta

Provincial government revenue: $1.5 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.2 billion
Total: $2.7 billion per year

Ontario

Provincial government revenue: $51 million
Federal government revenue: $79 million
Total: $130 million per year

Quebec

Provincial government revenue: $21 million
Federal government revenue: $16 million
Total: $37 million per year

Saskatchewan

Provincial government revenue: $204 million
Federal government revenue: $129 million
Total: $333 million per year

Other

Provincial government revenue: $58 million
Federal government revenue: $40 million
Total: $98 million per year

Canada

Provincial government revenue: $2.1 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.7 billion
Total: $3.8 billion per year

Employment by Region

Over the period 2019 to 2048, the Northern Gateway Pipeline was projected to generate the following direct, indirect and induced full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs by region:

British Columbia

Annual average: 7,736
Total over the period: 224,344

Alberta

Annual average: 11,798
Total over the period: 342,142

Ontario

Annual average: 3,061
Total over the period: 88,769

Quebec

Annual average: 1,003
Total over the period: 29,087

Saskatchewan

Annual average: 2,127
Total over the period: 61,683

Other

Annual average: 953
Total over the period: 27,637

Canada

Annual average: 26,678
Total over the period: 773,662

Alberta

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Published on June 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.

Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.

His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.

On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.

To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.

The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”

Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.