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

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.

Author:

Kenneth P. Green

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Up Next

Years Of Media Misdirection Over Biden Mental State Are Unraveling Before Our Eyes

Don't Miss

Popes To Progressives: Crushing Dissent To Protect The Green Gospel

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

Zelensky, not Trump, instigated Oval office clash

Daily Caller / 2 hours ago

All Epstein Files Are In, Attorney General Reveals What Will Go Public Starting Thursday

Daily Caller / 3 hours ago

US Pauses Military Aid To Ukraine

Business

Carney’s carbon madness

Published on March 3, 2025

Dan McTeague

Dan McTeague

Well, we are in quite the pickle.

In nine plus years as prime minister, Justin Trudeau has waged a multi-front war on the consumption and production of hydrocarbon energy, and, with that, on our economy, our quality of life, and our cost of living.

Trudeau zealously pursued and implemented anti-energy policies, most infamously the consumer Carbon Tax, but let’s not forget his so-called ”Clean Fuel” regulations; his Industrial Carbon Tax; his proposed emissions caps; his Electric Vehicle subsidies and mandates; Bill C-59, which bans businesses from touting the environmental positives of their work if it doesn’t meet a government-approved standard; and various other pieces of legislation which make the construction of new pipelines nearly impossible and significantly reduces our ability to sell our oil and gas overseas.

Every one of these policies can be traced back to the pernicious Net Zero ideology which informs them, and in which Trudeau and his bosom buddies — Gerald Butts, Steven Guilbeault, Mark Carney, etc — remain true believers.

And yet, despite those policies contributing to his party’s collapsing poll numbers and Trudeau’s unceremonious ouster, the Liberals are on the verge of naming as his replacement Mark Carney, one of the very Trudeau consiglieri who got us into this mess in the first place!

Now, Carney is currently doing everything in his power to downplay and dance around those aspects of his career which voters might find objectionable. He’s making quite a habit of it, in fact. And on the energy file, he’s being especially misleading, walking back his long-time support of the Carbon Tax — he’s said it has “served a purpose up until now” — and claiming that he intends to repeal it, while finding other ways to “make polluters pay.”

This is nonsense. In fact, Carney is a Carbon Tax superfan, and, if you listen to him closely, his actual critique of the Trudeau tax isn’t that it has made it more expensive to heat our homes, gas up our cars, and pay for our groceries (which it has.) It’s that it is too visible to voters. His vow to “make polluters pay” means, in fact, that he intends to “beef up” Trudeau’s less discussed Industrial Carbon Tax, targeting businesses, which will ultimately pass the cost down to consumers.

He’s even discussed enacting a Carbon tariff, which would apply to trade with countries which don’t adopt the onerous Net Zero policies which he wants to force on Canada.

That’s just who Mark Carney is.

And, unfortunately, Donald Trump’s tariff threats have provoked a “rally round the flag” sentiment, enabling the Liberals to close the polling gap with the Conservatives, with some polls currently showing them neck-and-neck. Which is to say, there is a possibility that, whenever we get around to having an election, anti-American animus could keep the Liberals in power, and propel Carney to the top job in our government.

This is, in a word, madness.

Let us not forget that it was the Liberals’ policies — especially their assault on our “golden goose,” the natural resource sector — which left us in such a precarious fiscal state that Trudeau felt the need to fly to Mar-a-Lago and tell the newly elected president that a tariff would “kill” our economy. That’s what provoked Trump’s “51st state” crack in the first place.

Access to U.S. markets will always be important for Canadian prosperity — they, by leaps and bounds, are our largest trading partner, after all — but without the Net Zero nonsense, we could have been an energy superpower, providing an alternative source of oil and natural gas for those countries leary about relying for energy on less-environmentally conscious, human-rights-abusing petrostates. We could have filled the void created by Russia, when they made themselves a pariah state in Europe by invading Ukraine.

In short, we might have been set up to negotiate with the Trump Administration from a position of strength. Instead, we’re proposing to double-down on Net Zero, pledging allegiance to a program which will make us less competitive and more likely to be steamrolled by major powers, including the U.S. but also (and less frequently mentioned) China.

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face! And all in the name of nationalism.

Here’s hoping we wise up and change course while there’s still time. Because, in the words of America’s greatest philosopher, Yogi Berra, “It’s getting late early.”

Dan McTeague is President of Canadians for Affordable Energy.

Dan McTeague

Support Dan’s Work to Keep Canadian Energy Affordable!

Canadians for Affordable Energy is run by Dan McTeague, former MP and founder of Gas Wizard. We stand up and fight for more affordable energy.

Donate Now

Business

Tariffs by Tuesday: Trump Says There Is ‘No Room Left’ For Any Negotiations On Postponing Tariffs On Mexico, Canada

Published on March 3, 2025

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Nicole Silverio

President Donald Trump said Monday that there is “no room left” for any negotiations on postponing tariffs on Mexico, Canada or China in response to their handling of the immigration and fentanyl crisis.

Trump initially planned to impose 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada and a 10% tariff on China over its role in allowing illegal immigration and fentanyl to pour into the U.S. in record numbers. After postponing these tariffs for a month after Mexico and Canada caved to his requests, the president said he has fully made up his mind to officially impose these tariffs this upcoming Tuesday.

“No room left for Mexico or for Canada. No, the tariffs [are] all set, they go into effect tomorrow,” Trump said. “And just so you understand, vast amounts of fentanyl have poured into our country from Mexico and as you know, also from China where it goes to Mexico and goes to Canada and China also had an additional 10 [percent], so it’s 10 + 10, and it comes in from Canada and it comes in from Mexico and that’s a very important thing to say.”

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!

WATCH:

Trump postponed the tariffs on Feb. 3 after Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau caved to his requests by increasing their efforts to tackle illegal immigration and fentanyl. Sheinbaum deployed 10,000 National Guard soldiers to the U.S.-Mexico border while Trudeau invested $1.3 billion to crackdown on illegal migration and appointed a “Fentanyl Czar” to oversee a $200 million effort against the drug.

The president announced in a Feb. 27 Truth Social post that he planned to double the tariffs on China to 20% and move forward with the tariffs on Mexico and Canada over the “very high and unacceptable levels” of drugs pouring into the U.S.

“We cannot allow this scourge to continue to harm the USA, and therefore, until it stops, or is seriously limited, the proposed TARIFFS scheduled to go into effect on MARCH FOURTH will, indeed, go into effect, as scheduled,” Trump said. “China will likewise be charged an additional 10% Tariff on that date. The April Second Reciprocal Tariff date will remain in full force and effect. Thank you for your attention to this matter. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”

These three countries are being slapped with tariffs as the U.S. suffers a fentanyl epidemic, with over 21,000 pounds of the deadly drug being seized at the southern border in the fiscal year 2024, according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Border agents have seized over 5,400 pounds in the 2025 fiscal year thus far.

At the U.S.-Canadian border, officials encountered over 11,000 pounds of drugs in the 2024 fiscal year and over 3,200 pounds have so far been seized in the 2025 fiscal year, according to CBP data. Over 60,000 pounds and 55,000 pounds of drugs were seized in the 2022 and 2023 fiscal years.

U.S. border officials also encountered over 8.5 million migrants at the southern border during the four fiscal years of former President Joe Biden’s administration. Border crossings at the northern border skyrocketed with over 198,000 encounters and nearly 19,000 arrests occurring in the 2024 fiscal year.