Connect with us

Economy

Fossil fuels aren’t going anywhere, we benefit too much from them

Published

10 minute read

From the MacDonald Laurier Institute

By Chris Sankey

Indigenous people are finally reaping the rewards.

Over the last eight years we have experienced an unprecedented push from environmental activists to phase out fossil fuels. The Government of Canada seems to think it is possible. During question period in the Senate earlier this year, Sen. David Wells noted that, according to the Liberals, the energy transition “will cost $100-$125 billion per year at least to 2050,” and asked “When Canada only emits 1.5 per cent of global emissions, how does this expenditure make sense?”

Let me repeat that. $125 billion each year.

Who is going to pay for this? This is simply not possible, unless people want to see the Canadian economy in ruins.

Without fossil fuels, life as we know it would not be possible. State-of-the-art lifesaving medical equipment comes from fossil fuels and critical minerals from mining. Critical infrastructure, vehicles, planes, trains, container ships, ferries, and the billions of household necessities we buy from Canadian Tire, Walmart, Amazon and Ikea come from fossil fuels and help us function in our everyday lives. Without these needs we simply do not prosper.

Take for instance the environmental marches we see on our streets. The protesters seemingly have zero understanding of what makes their marches possible? Yes, fossil fuels. If you are going to protest for “Just Stop Oil,” then climate activists have to stop blocking traffic, because an idling vehicle is so much harder on the environment. And what about showing up in clothing and holding up signs made of hydrocarbons demonstrates your commitment to saving the planet? Hypocrisy? Absolutely.

From the moment we come out of our mother’s body, fossil fuels make our lives better. From cradle to grave, our lives are intertwined with fossil fuels. Just think of the act of giving birth. Chances are the mother was rushed to hospital in an ambulance, helicopter, plane, your personal vehicle, or taxi. As grandparents, siblings, uncles, aunts and cousins arrive at the hospital in their fossil fuel-powered cars and trucks smiling ear to ear welcoming the new baby to the family. They show up with gifts likely made from fossil fuels and critical minerals. If it is not made from fossil fuels, they were most definitely transported to the store using fossil fuels.

It is time we stop kidding ourselves that we can step away from the oil and gas wealth upon which our country benefits so much.

Only now, it will be Indigenous communities who are going to lead the multi-billion-dollar opportunity and put Canada at the front of global markets as a preferred supplier. For far too long, activist’s voice have been the determining factor in how governments make decisions on this necessary industry in our territories.

We need to make sure we have a framework that lays out a technology transition where we produce cleaner oil and gas by using new technology that will reduce emissions and grow our economies.

Since the Liberals were elected in 2015 everywhere we turn, our resource sector is being badly hurt. Forestry, fishing, oil and gas are screaming for more production, but federal regulations threaten to not only destroy the energy industry, but all industries with the emissions cap. Renewables are costing taxpayers billions in subsidies and it will not end there.

Indigenous people have always took care of the environment and grown our economies. From fishing, logging, farming and hunting, we used fossil fuels to make it happen.

Obviously, humans did not use fossil fuels prior to the industrial revolution and indigenous people made hunting weapons out of wood and stone. Life was challenging for our ancestors back then; life expectancy was short for all people.

Over time, technology in the energy sector changed for the better. I would be remiss if I did not include the fact that industry did not always have modern clean tech; emissions were high and cancer-causing effects were widespread. That introduced chemicals foreign to indigenous people. Like all things, newer and safer technology emerged. Making life much easier and convenient.

However, historically speaking indigenous people lived on fat and protein. Everything we ate was natural. Like all things that come and go, European contact forever changed our way of life. We were greatly impacted in every possible manner, from social, cultural, status and creed. But like we always have, we persevered like our ancestors wanted us too.

This is our turn to take our rightful place on the global stage. We are watching it play out in real time around the world. Energy and food security is the number one priority around the world. Indigenous communities near and far are leading the way in the pursuit of sustainable development, but government and activists are hindering our ability to progress.

It is important that Canadians be realistic when it comes to the use of oil and gas. All of us want to leave our planet better for the next generation. To do so, we must manage expectations. Many countries are just now finally transitioning to oil and gas from more environmentally harmful coal and countries like India will not be carbon neutral until 2070 or later.

Our country has an abundance of resources that the world wants. They are literally knocking on our door to get access to our wealth. We can help countries like China, India and Indonesia move away from burning coal and wood, and thereby help lift millions out of certain poverty, and improve their health.

New climate change technology has emerged in the energy sector, such as carbon capture and storage that will reduce and eliminate emissions and the need for diluent in oil pipelines. Our combination of Indigenous knowledge and history to the land makes for a stronger argument to partner with Indigenous communities.  Alignment amongst indigenous communities is key to securing a project. Proper alignment will de-risk a project and attract investment and industry to the table where we will have a seat and even equity.

Engagement with Indigenous communities is the solution. The vast majority of our people are not against development. We are only against development when we are excluded from the opportunities, or if the evaluation process was developed without Indigenous input.

It is not rocket-science. Include the people whose territory you want to build on. This is an opportunity to build relationships through meaningful dialogue and trust. We must have nation to nation dialogue and build leadership to leadership relationships.  No hidden agendas, just up-front, honest conversations about oil and gas and the costs and benefits of development.

I am tired of watching our people struggle. Our people do not want to watch the prosperity boat sail by Poverty Island. Markets do not wait for anyone. We cannot keep waiting for the right time. We cannot keep waiting for life to get better. First Nations can make it better by being at the economic table where our people can bring traditional knowledge to industry and make decisions in the best interests of our communities. Whether we agree or not in the first instance, we need to be in the room working towards a brighter future, because at the end of the day we all need rubber boots too.

Chris Sankey is a Senior fellow at the MacDonald Laurier Institute, a former Elected Councilor for the Lax Kw Alaams Band and Businessman.

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

Land use will be British Columbia’s biggest issue in 2026

Published on

By Resource Works

Tariffs may fade. The collision between reconciliation, property rights, and investment will not.

British Columbia will talk about Donald Trump’s tariffs in 2026, and it will keep grinding through affordability. But the issue that will decide whether the province can build, invest, and govern is land use.

The warning signs were there in 2024. Land based industries still generate 12 per cent of B.C.’s GDP, and the province controls more than 90 per cent of the land base, and land policy was already being remade through opaque processes, including government to government tables. When rules for access to land feel unsettled, money flows slow into a trickle.

The Cowichan ruling sends shockwaves

In August 2025, the Cowichan ruling turned that unease into a live wire. The court recognized the Cowichan’s Aboriginal title over roughly 800 acres within Richmond, including lands held by governments and unnamed third parties. It found that grants of fee simple and other interests unjustifiably infringed that title, and declared certain Canada and Richmond titles and interests “defective and invalid,” with those invalidity declarations suspended for 18 months to give governments time to make arrangements.

The reaction has been split. Supporters see a reminder that constitutional rights do not evaporate because land changed hands. Critics see a precedent that leaves private owners exposed, especially because unnamed owners in the claim area were not parties to the case and did not receive formal notice. Even the idea of “coexistence” has become contentious, because both Aboriginal title and fee simple convey exclusive rights to decide land use and capture benefits.

Market chill sets in

McLTAikins translated the risk into advice that landowners and lenders can act on: registered ownership is not immune from constitutional scrutiny, and the land title system cannot cure a constitutional defect where Aboriginal title is established. Their explanation of fee simple reads less like theory than a due diligence checklist that now reaches beyond the registry.

By December, the market was answering. National Post columnist Adam Pankratz reported that an industrial landowner within the Cowichan title area lost a lender and a prospective tenant after a $35 million construction loan was pulled. He also described a separate Richmond hotel deal where a buyer withdrew after citing precedent risk, even though the hotel was not within the declared title lands. His case that uncertainty is already changing behaviour is laid out in Montrose.

Caroline Elliott captured how quickly court language moved into daily life after a City Richmond letter warned some owners that their title might be compromised. Whatever one thinks of that wording, it pushed land law out of the courtroom and into the mortgage conversation.

Mining and exploration stall

The same fault line runs through the critical minerals push. A new mineral claims regime now requires consultation before claims are approved, and critics argue it slows early stage exploration and forces prospectors to reveal targets before they can secure rights. Pankratz made that critique earlier, in his argument about mineral staking.

Resource Works, summarising AME feedback on Mineral Tenure Act modernisation, reported that 69.5 per cent of respondents lacked confidence in proposed changes, and that more than three quarters reported increased uncertainty about doing business in B.C. The theme is not anti consultation. It is that process, capacity, and timelines decide whether consultation produces partnership or paralysis.

Layered on top is the widening fight over UNDRIP implementation and DRIPA. Geoffrey Moyse, KC, called for repeal in a Northern Beat essay on DRIPA, arguing that Section 35 already provides the constitutional framework and that trying to operationalise UNDRIP invites litigation and uncertainty.

Tariffs and housing will still dominate headlines. But they are downstream of land. Until B.C. offers a stable bargain over who can do what, where, and on what foundation, every other promise will be hostage to the same uncertainty. For a province still built on land based wealth, Resource Works argues in its institutional history that the resource economy cannot be separated from land rules. In 2026, that is the main stage.

Resource Works News

Continue Reading

Business

Dark clouds loom over Canada’s economy in 2026

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Jock Finlayson

The dawn of a new year is an opportune time to ponder the recent performance of Canada’s $3.4 trillion economy. And the overall picture is not exactly cheerful.

Since the start of 2025, our principal trading partner has been ruled by a president who seems determined to unravel the post-war global economic and security order that provided a stable and reassuring backdrop for smaller countries such as Canada. Whether the Canada-U.S.-Mexico trade agreement (that President Trump himself pushed for) will even survive is unclear, underscoring the uncertainty that continues to weigh on business investment in Canada.

At the same time, Europe—representing one-fifth of the global economy—remains sluggish, thanks to Russia’s relentless war of choice against Ukraine, high energy costs across much of the region, and the bloc’s waning competitiveness. The huge Chinese economy has also lost a step. None of this is good for Canada.

Yet despite a difficult external environment, Canada’s economy has been surprisingly resilient. Gross domestic product (GDP) is projected to grow by 1.7 per cent (after inflation) this year. The main reason is continued gains in consumer spending, which accounts for more than three-fifths of all economic activity. After stripping out inflation, money spent by Canadians on goods and services is set to climb by 2.2 per cent in 2025, matching last year’s pace. Solid consumer spending has helped offset the impact of dwindling exports, sluggish business investment and—since 2023—lacklustre housing markets.

Another reason why we have avoided a sharper economic downturn is that the Trump administration has, so far, exempted most of Canada’s southbound exports from the president’s tariff barrage. This has partially cushioned the decline in Canada’s exports—particularly outside of the steel, aluminum, lumber and auto sectors, where steep U.S. tariffs are in effect. While exports will be lower in 2025 than the year before, the fall is less dramatic than analysts expected 6 to 8 months ago.

Although Canada’s economy grew in 2025, the job market lost steam. Employment growth has softened and the unemployment rate has ticked higher—it’s on track to average almost 7 per cent this year, up from 5.4 per cent two years ago. Unemployment among young people has skyrocketed. With the economy showing little momentum, employment growth will remain muted next year.

Unfortunately, there’s nothing positive to report on the investment front. Adjusted for inflation, private-sector capital spending has been on a downward trajectory for the last decade—a long-term trend that can’t be explained by Trump’s tariffs. Canada has underperformed both the United States and several other advanced economies in the amount of investment per employee. The investment gap with the U.S. has widened steadily since 2014. This means Canadian workers have fewer and less up-to-date tools, equipment and technology to help them produce goods and services compared to their counterparts in the U.S. (and many other countries). As a result, productivity growth in Canada has been lackluster, narrowing the scope for wage increases.

Preliminary data indicate that both overall non-residential investment and business capital spending on machinery, equipment and advanced technology products will be down again in 2025. Getting clarity on the future of the Canada-U.S. trade relationship will be key to improving the business environment for private-sector investment. Tax and regulatory policy changes that make Canada a more attractive choice for companies looking to invest and grow are also necessary. This is where government policymakers should direct their attention in 2026.

Continue Reading

Trending

X