Why Carney\u2019s pipeline gamble is a bad bet for Canadian taxpayers<\/p>\n
EXPERT COMMENT<\/p>\n
Tensions with the US and Alberta are leading Prime Minister Carney to back new oil and gas infrastructure. Smoothing the path to electrification would be a better use of public funds.<\/p>\n
Since taking office in January 2025, Prime Minister Mark Carney has steered Canada\u2019s energy policy away from reducing emissions towards increasing fossil fuel exports.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Some would argue that he had little choice. The Canadian economy is under pressure amidst the trade war launched by the administration of President Donald Trump. Carney took office with a mandate to de-risk Canada from the increasingly hostile United States, which buys over 90 per cent<\/a> of Canada\u2019s crude oil exports, and practically all its natural gas exports.<\/p>\n Additionally, the prime minister had to address a significant domestic issue: relations between Ottawa and Alberta, the province responsible for three-quarters of Canadian oil and gas production<\/a>, had become increasingly toxic.<\/p>\n But Carney\u2019s pivot may backfire, for one simple reason. The new markets Canada<\/a> is relying upon for export growth will not buy imported oil and gas forever. And they may reduce their consumption sooner than anticipated.\u00a0<\/p>\n Pouring taxpayer money into export infrastructure, largely to the benefit of foreign companies, doesn\u2019t de-risk Canada\u2019s economy. It risks swapping dependence on the US for other uncertain foreign markets.\u00a0<\/p>\n