Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Energy

Trump’s tariffs made Ottawa suddenly start talking about new east-to-west pipelines, but how long will it last?

Published

5 minute read

For years, oil pipelines have been a political fault line in Canada, with battles over environmental policies, economic development and national energy security. The Liberal government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, has sent mixed signals – championing climate goals while approving some energy projects like the Trans Mountain Expansion. But now, with a trade war looming over Canada, a surprising shift has occurred: a consensus across the political spectrum in favour of building new pipelines.

And it’s all due to one man: United States President Donald Trump.

Trump’s threat to impose a 10 percent tariff on Canadian energy and 25 percent on other Canadian exports has woken up Ottawa. Previously, Trudeau’s government made decisions that killed off big pipeline projects like Energy East. Bill C-69 was blamed for creating an uncertain regulatory environment that discouraged investment in pipelines.

But now, Liberal ministers are talking about revisiting those projects.

On February 6, Energy Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, a long-time climate crusader, surprised many when he said Canada is too dependent on the U.S. as an oil buyer and suggested Ottawa should consider a pipeline to Eastern Canada to diversify energy exports. He’d made similar comments in September and October 2024 when he said oil demand had peaked and pipelines were unnecessary.

The next day, it was reported that Industry Minister François-Philippe Champagne followed Wilkinson’s lead, saying Canada must reassess its energy infrastructure given Trump’s threat. He even suggested Quebec, which has long opposed pipelines, might be open to reconsidering Energy East.

Shortly after, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith seized the moment, urging Ottawa to restart talks on national energy infrastructure.

And then on February 9, Champagne again said Quebecers might have a different view on pipelines now that their economic security is at stake.

This is a stunning reversal. Just months ago Wilkinson and other Liberal officials were saying oil demand was declining and Canada should focus on renewables and electrification.

However, is this a real policy shift?

While some senior Liberals are suddenly in favour of pipelines, one key figure has been silent: Mark Carney, the front runner in the Liberal leadership race.

Carney has made climate action a central plank of his campaign, but says he supports the “concept” of an east-west pipeline.

His silence raises a big question: Are the Liberals really in favour of oil pipelines or is this just a reaction to Trump?

Despite Carney, Wilkinson and Champagne’s comments, big industry players remain skeptical. Pipeline projects take years of regulatory approval, billions of investment and political will at both the federal and provincial level. The Trudeau government’s track record has been one of obstacles, not encouragement, for big energy projects.

And some experts say pipeline companies may not be keen to jump back into the fray. TC Energy, the former proponent of Energy East, divested its oil pipeline business in 2023. Would a new pipeline proponent be willing to navigate the regulatory and political minefield that Ottawa itself created?

The political fallout could be immense.

If the Liberals go for pipelines, it will be one of the biggest policy reversals in Canadian energy history. It will also expose deep divisions within the party. Environmental groups and Liberal voters in urban centres will likely rage against such a shift while oil-producing provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan will remain skeptical of Ottawa’s new enthusiasm.

Meanwhile the Conservative Party, the only federal party that has always been in favour of pipelines, will find itself in an unusual position—watching the Liberals adopt its policies as their own.

In the next few weeks all eyes will be on Carney and the Liberal leadership race. If Carney keeps hedging on pipelines, it will be unclear if this new consensus is real or just political expediency in the face of Trump’s tariffs.

For now Canada’s pipeline debate is no longer about energy or the environment—it’s about sovereignty, trade and survival in an uncertain global economy. Will this consensus last beyond the immediate crisis?

Before Post

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

Energy

CAPP calls on federal government to reset energy policy before it’s too late

Published on

CAPP CEO warns that Canada’s energy advantage is slipping away through incrementalism and policy paralysis

The productivity fix starts with pragmatism

Lisa Baiton, President and CEO of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), told the B.C. Business Summit 2025 that Canada is in danger of squandering its global energy advantage through hesitation and half-measures. Representing the upstream oil, gas, and LNG producers that account for more than 20 percent of Canada’s total balance of trade, she said the sector directly employs 450,000 Canadians and supports more than 900,000 jobs nationwide.

“Our industry contributes over one-fifth of Canada’s entire balance of trade,” Baiton said. “Yet we’re operating in a global environment where state actors like Russia, China, and OPEC are weaponizing resources, controlling markets, and coercing trade. Even our closest ally, the United States, is reminding us that we can’t rely on a single customer.”

She argued that the world’s energy order is shifting in ways Canada has been slow to recognize. “Institutional investors are now talking less about energy transition and more about energy addition,” she said, citing Blackrock’s Larry Fink. “Global energy demand is rising across the north and south — and with the AI revolution driving new consumption — we’re going to need all forms of energy for decades to come.”

Baiton said that despite encouraging words from Ottawa about the importance of natural resources, policy still lags reality. “We have a prime minister who recognizes the role of oil and gas in national security and Indigenous reconciliation, but words alone don’t attract capital. Without a clear policy reset, Canada will miss the investment window.”

Incrementalism will be the death of us

Baiton’s warning was blunt: Canada’s productivity crisis and its policy gridlock are converging into a national risk. “We’ve woken up to the threats, but we’re falling back into our usual Canadianism — plodding along,” she said. “This window of opportunity won’t stay open long, and incrementalism will be the death of Canada.”

She said a “pragmatic policy reset” is required, one that reflects the resources Canada actually has and moves with speed. “Supernaturalism will be our death,” she said. “We have to get out of our own way.”

Baiton called for an overhaul of policies built during a previous decade aimed at making oil and gas “existential.” Canada, she said, now has a government that understands “you can’t have national security without energy security,” and that the resource sector is key to funding the military and rebuilding economic strength.

Oil and gas: Canada’s fastest path to growth

She pointed out that Canada ranks last among OECD nations in growth and competitiveness, and said oil and gas is “the only sector that can be leveraged fast enough” to reverse that trajectory. The industry, she added, is already a national leader in Indigenous partnerships.  It’s the largest employer of Indigenous peoples, the largest user of Indigenous supply chains, and a growing field for Indigenous private equity ownership.

But without a policy reset, Baiton said, that progress will stall. “We need to take on key policies like the proposed emissions cap, which is already scaring investors, and fix permitting timelines that run nine to sixteen years. In Germany, it took three years to build three LNG import terminals. In Canada, one project can take 21 years from discovery to dollar.”

The message from Baiton was clear: Canada must rediscover the discipline to build, not just talk about building. The productivity fix starts with speed, pragmatism, and confidence in Canada’s own energy advantage.

Continue Reading

Business

Trans Mountain executive says it’s time to fix the system, expand access, and think like a nation builder

Published on

Mike Davies calls for ambition and reform to build a stronger Canada

A shift in ambition

A year after the Trans Mountain Expansion Project came into service, Mike Davies, Senior Director of Marine Development at Trans Mountain, told the B.C. Business Summit 2025 that the project’s success should mark the beginning of a new national mindset — one defined by ambition, reform, and nation building.

“It took fifteen years to get this version of the project built,” Davies said. “During that time, Canadian producers lost about $50 billion in value because they were selling into a discounted market. We have some of the world’s largest reserves of oil and gas, but we can only trade with one other country. That’s unusual.”

With the expansion now in operation, that imbalance is shifting. “The differential on Canadian oil has narrowed by about $13 billion,” he said. “That’s value that used to be extracted by the United States and now stays in Canada — supporting healthcare, reconciliation, and energy transformation. About $5 billion of that is in royalties and taxes. It’s meaningful for us as a society.”

Davies rejected the notion that Trans Mountain was a public subsidy. “The federal government lent its balance sheet so that nation-building infrastructure could get built,” he said. “In our first full year of operation, we’ll return more than $1.3 billion to the federal government, rising toward $2 billion annually as cleanup work wraps up.”

At the Westridge Marine Terminal, shipments have increased from one tanker a week to nearly one a day, with more than half heading to Asia. “California remains an important market,” Davies said, “but diversification is finally happening — and it’s vital to our long-term prosperity.”

Fixing the system to move forward

Davies said this moment of success should prompt a broader rethinking of how Canada approaches resource development. “We’re positioned to take advantage of this moment,” he said. “Public attitudes are shifting. Canadians increasingly recognize that our natural resource advantages are a strength, not a liability. The question now is whether governments can seize it — and whether we’ll see that reflected in policy.”

He argued that governments have come to view regulation as a “free good,” without acknowledging its economic consequences. “Over the past decade, we’ve seen policy focus almost exclusively on environmental and reconciliation objectives,” he said. “Those are vital, but the public interest extends well beyond that — to include security, economic welfare, the rule of law, transparency, and democratic participation.”

Davies said good policy should not need to be bypassed to get projects built. “I applaud the creation of a Major Projects Office, but it’s a disgrace that we have to end run the system,” he said. “We need to fix it.”

He called for “deep, long-term reform” to restore scalability and investment confidence. “Linear infrastructure like pipelines requires billions in at-risk capital before a single certificate is issued,” he said. “Canada has a process for everything — we’re a responsible country — but it doesn’t scale for nation-building projects.”

Regulatory reform, he added, must go hand in hand with advancing economic reconciliation. “The challenge of our generation is shifting Indigenous communities from dependence to participation,” he said. “That means real ownership, partnership, and revenue opportunities.”

Davies urged renewed cooperation between Alberta and British Columbia, calling for “interprovincial harmony” on West Coast access. “I’d like to see Alberta see B.C. as part of its constituency,” he said. “And I’d like to see B.C. recognize the need for access.”

He summarized the path forward in plain terms: “We need to stem the exit of capital, create an environment that attracts investment, simplify approvals to one major process, and move decisions from the courts to clear legislation. If we do that, we can finally move from being a market hostage to being a competitor — and a nation builder.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X