Alberta
Cancelling Keystone XL cost thousands of jobs and billions in GDP: U.S. government report
Keystone facility at Hardisty, Alberta. Photo courtesy Getty Images
From the Canadian Energy Centre Ltd.
Politicians, Indigenous leaders, and labour unions criticized the cancellation for the significant consequences it could have for both Canada and the United States
There is no doubt that Keystone XL’s cancellation was a massive gut punch to Canada and its oil and gas industry. Now the analysis is out showing the impact it had on the United States.
Just a sliver over two years ago the U.S. government nixed the pipeline project which would have added an additional 830,000 barrels of oil per day into the U.S.
The pipeline, which was expected to be complete in 2023, would have provided thousands of jobs and billions in economic activity. In December, the U.S. Department of Energy released its congressionally mandated report on the matter, and it’s now known approximately how many jobs and billions of dollars were foregone due to the cancellation.
The highlighted impacts in the report show that about 20,000 potential construction jobs per year over a two-year period were lost.
The nixing of the project also had a direct impact on the U.S. GDP with a loss of $3.4 billion. Wages were also impacted, with an estimated loss of $2.05 billion in potential earnings.
While there have not been any government numbers released for Canadian job losses, TC Energy said at the time of the cancellation that 1,000 workers would be laid off due to the announcement. It was a missed opportunity to lower costs for U.S. consumers, according to the American Petroleum Institute. Indigenous groups were also impacted by the cancellation.
Dale Swampy, president of the National Coalition of Chiefs noted that “It’s quite a blow to the First Nations that are involved right now in working with TC Energy to access employment training and contracting opportunities.”
Natural Law Energy, an Indigenous-owned energy company, had signed an agreement to invest a $1 billion equity stake in the pipeline. This would have had the potential to create jobs and economic opportunity for Indigenous communities, Natural Law Energy said. More than $600 million in supply and employment agreements for Indigenous-owned companies were expected to come from the project’s construction.
While celebrated by many environmental groups, the decision to cancel Keystone XL was controversial on both sides of the border. Politicians, Indigenous leaders, and labour unions criticized the cancellation for the significant consequences it could have for both Canada and the United States.
Teamsters general president Jim Hoffa’s statement strongly encouraged the U.S. government to reconsider the decision. “This executive order doesn’t just affect U.S. Teamsters; it hurts our Canadian brothers and sisters as well who work on this project. It will reduce good-paying union jobs that allow workers to provide a middle-class standard of living to their families.”
Terry O’Sullivan, general president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America said, “By blocking this 100 percent union project, and pandering to environmental extremists, a thousand union jobs will immediately vanish, and 10,000 additional jobs will be foregone.”
The United States is the world’s largest importer of oil, and Canada is its top supplier. America will continue to rely on oil imports, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Absent Keystone XL, imports will come increasingly from other countries that may not have the same environmental and human rights standards as Canada.
From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill
Amid the tariff war, the price of West Texas Intermediate oil—a common benchmark—recently dropped below US$60 per barrel. Given every $1 drop in oil prices is an estimated $750 million hit to provincial revenues, if oil prices remain low for long, there could be big implications for Alberta’s budget.
The Smith government already projects a $5.2 billion budget deficit in 2025/26 with continued deficits over the following two years. This year’s deficit is based on oil prices averaging US$68.00 per barrel. While the budget does include a $4 billion “contingency” for unforeseen events, given the economic and fiscal impact of Trump’s tariffs, it could quickly be eaten up.
Budget deficits come with costs for Albertans, who will already pay a projected $600 each in provincial government debt interest in 2025/26. That’s money that could have gone towards health care and education, or even tax relief.
Unfortunately, this is all part of the resource revenue rollercoaster that’s are all too familiar to Albertans.
Resource revenue (including oil and gas royalties) is inherently volatile. In the last 10 years alone, it has been as high as $25.2 billion in 2022/23 and as low as $2.8 billion in 2015/16. The provincial government typically enjoys budget surpluses—and increases government spending—when oil prices and resource revenue is relatively high, but is thrown into deficits when resource revenues inevitably fall.
Fortunately, the Smith government can mitigate this volatility.
The key is limiting the level of resource revenue included in the budget to a set stable amount. Any resource revenue above that stable amount is automatically saved in a rainy-day fund to be withdrawn to maintain that stable amount in the budget during years of relatively low resource revenue. The logic is simple: save during the good times so you can weather the storm during bad times.
Indeed, if the Smith government had created a rainy-day account in 2023, for example, it could have already built up a sizeable fund to help stabilize the budget when resource revenue declines. While the Smith government has deposited some money in the Heritage Fund in recent years, it has not created a dedicated rainy-day account or introduced a similar mechanism to help stabilize provincial finances.
Limiting the amount of resource revenue in the budget, particularly during times of relatively high resource revenue, also tempers demand for higher spending, which is only fiscally sustainable with permanently high resource revenues. In other words, if the government creates a rainy-day account, spending would become more closely align with stable ongoing levels of revenue.
And it’s not too late. To end the boom-bust cycle and finally help stabilize provincial finances, the Smith government should create a rainy-day account.
From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson
In 2024, construction started on 47,827 housing units—the most since 48,336 units in 2007 when population growth was less than half of what it was in 2024.
Alberta has long been viewed as an oasis in Canada’s overheated housing market—a refuge for Canadians priced out of high-cost centres such as Vancouver and Toronto. But the oasis is starting to dry up. House prices and rents in the province have spiked by about one-third since the start of the pandemic. According to a recent Maru poll, more than 70 per cent of Calgarians and Edmontonians doubt they will ever be able to afford a home in their city. Which raises the question: how much longer can this go on?
Alberta’s housing affordability problem reflects a simple reality—not enough homes have been built to accommodate the province’s growing population. The result? More Albertans competing for the same homes and rental units, pushing prices higher.
Population growth has always been volatile in Alberta, but the recent surge, fuelled by record levels of immigration, is unprecedented. Alberta has set new population growth records every year since 2022, culminating in the largest-ever increase of 186,704 new residents in 2024—nearly 70 per cent more than the largest pre-pandemic increase in 2013.
Homebuilding has increased, but not enough to keep pace with the rise in population. In 2024, construction started on 47,827 housing units—the most since 48,336 units in 2007 when population growth was less than half of what it was in 2024.
Moreover, from 1972 to 2019, Alberta added 2.1 new residents (on average) for every housing unit started compared to 3.9 new residents for every housing unit started in 2024. Put differently, today nearly twice as many new residents are potentially competing for each new home compared to historical norms.
While Alberta attracts more Canadians from other provinces than any other province, federal immigration and residency policies drive Alberta’s population growth. So while the provincial government has little control over its population growth, provincial and municipal governments can affect the pace of homebuilding.
For example, recent provincial amendments to the city charters in Calgary and Edmonton have helped standardize building codes, which should minimize cost and complexity for builders who operate across different jurisdictions. Municipal zoning reforms in Calgary, Edmonton and Red Deer have made it easier to build higher-density housing, and Lethbridge and Medicine Hat may soon follow suit. These changes should make it easier and faster to build homes, helping Alberta maintain some of the least restrictive building rules and quickest approval timelines in Canada.
There is, however, room for improvement. Policymakers at both the provincial and municipal level should streamline rules for building, reduce regulatory uncertainty and development costs, and shorten timelines for permit approvals. Calgary, for instance, imposes fees on developers to fund a wide array of public infrastructure—including roads, sewers, libraries, even buses—while Edmonton currently only imposes fees to fund the construction of new firehalls.
It’s difficult to say how long Alberta’s housing affordability woes will endure, but the situation is unlikely to improve unless homebuilding increases, spurred by government policies that facilitate more development.
Tegan Hill
Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute
Austin Thompson
BREAKING: THE FEDERAL BRIEF THAT SHOULD SINK CARNEY
CHINESE ELECTION THREAT WARNING: Conservative Candidate Joe Tay Paused Public Campaign
Ottawa Confirms China interfering with 2025 federal election: Beijing Seeks to Block Joe Tay’s Election
Mark Carney Wants You to Forget He Clearly Opposes the Development and Export of Canada’s Natural Resources
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoTrump Has Driven Canadians Crazy. This Is How Crazy.
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoThe Anhui Convergence: Chinese United Front Network Surfaces in Australian and Canadian Elections
-
Automotive1 day agoHyundai moves SUV production to U.S.
-
Entertainment2 days agoPedro Pascal launches attack on J.K. Rowling over biological sex views
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoAs PM Poilievre would cancel summer holidays for MP’s so Ottawa can finally get back to work
-
2025 Federal Election1 day agoPoilievre Campaigning To Build A Canadian Economic Fortress
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoCarney Liberals pledge to follow ‘gender-based goals analysis’ in all government policy
-
armed forces13 hours agoYet another struggling soldier says Veteran Affairs Canada offered him euthanasia