Carney, Poilievre both back new pipelines with different but similar plans

The idea of a pipeline from Alberta to Eastern Canada to protect national energy interests might make political sense right now, but does it make financial sens

Federal party leaders are renewing calls to expand Canada’s pipeline network, thrusting a long-dormant debate over eastbound oil infrastructure back into the spotlight.

In Calgary on Wednesday, Liberal Leader Mark Carney unveiled a plan to position Canada as a “world energy superpower,” calling for new pipelines — including one to Eastern Canada.

“Today, I am announcing a comprehensive plan to make Canada the world’s leading energy superpower,” Carney said.

“We can’t lose sight of the imperative to ensure the long-term competitiveness of our conventional energy sector.

“My Liberal government will establish a major federal project office with a clear mandate (and) issue a decision after a single review on a project within two years instead of five.”

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, who has long championed oil and gas development, had a similar message, pledging to repeal Bill C-69, lift production caps, and approve major energy projects in under six months if elected.

“I’m announcing the Canada First National Energy Corridor,” Poilievre said Monday.

“A pre-approved corridor that will allow our incredible businesses to build pipelines, transmission lines, rail lines, and countless other kinds of infrastructure that we need to break our dependence on the Americans,”

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith signalled her province is prepared to underwrite pipeline construction.

In a speech last week, she said Alberta would offer up to 200,000 barrels of bitumen royalties in kind to help get a project started.

“We’re prepared to step up and say, ‘You want to build a pipeline? We’re in,‘” Smith said.

“We want pipelines built. … We can be first in; we can be last in to bridge the gaps.”

Even Quebec Premier François Legault, whose province rejected the now-defunct Energy East pipeline in 2017, suggested his government is open to reconsidering.

“We are open to these kinds of projects, but we need to have a social acceptance in Quebec,” Legault said.

That softening tone is mirrored by some Quebec residents.

“When you are talking decades for anything to get approved, companies are not interested in that,” said Montreal resident Colin Gagnon.

“When that reality changes in Canada, I have no idea — but it needs to.”

Economist Andrew Leach, however, cautioned that the economics of a cross-country pipeline remain unfavourable.

“Is Alberta willing to accept a discount to world prices that’s large enough to pay for that shipment and still make it attractive to eastern refiners? The answer is probably not, unless you can’t go anywhere else,” Leach said in an interview.

He said the economics favour pipelines heading west but added that national security concerns could shift the balance in favour of reviving the eastern route.

“The pure economics go west. The national security question — now you really start looking hard at that eastern right of way, at least to get you to Iroquois and sort of the Quebec-Ontario border,” Leach said.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) said in a statement Canada remains over-reliant on the United States for its domestic energy needs and must take steps to address that vulnerability.

“We rely on pipelines that run through the United States to get Canadian oil to Quebec and Ontario refineries while those two provinces also depend on the U.S. for half of their natural gas,” said Lisa Baiton, president and CEO of CAPP.

“Strengthening market access and trade relationships from coast to coast requires a comprehensive policy reset to attract project proponents to invest in energy infrastructure and get projects to completion within market-friendly timelines.

“Rather than championing single projects, governments should focus on creating the right environment to attract private investment into nation-building infrastructure projects that will provide market diversification for Canadian products, tariff-proof our country, and protect our sovereignty.

But not everyone is convinced more pipelines are the answer.

Stephen Legault with Environmental Defence said new projects are expensive, slow to build, and offer diminishing returns as global oil demand declines.

“The last time we built a pipeline, it ended up costing Canadian taxpayers $34 billion. … And it didn’t accomplish the goal that it had set out to achieve,” Legault said.

“The world right now is shifting away from oil and gas.”

He acknowledged concerns over energy security but said renewable resources offer a better solution.

“If we truly wanted to have security within our own borders for our own energy, we would be accelerating renewable resource development — wind and solar," he said.

The original Energy East proposal by TransCanada was scrapped in 2017 amid mounting regulatory and political hurdles.