North American leaders are finding it difficult to cajole oil executives into making risky long-term investments.
No, we’re not referring to President Trump’s efforts to convince American energy giants to invest in Venezuela’s long neglected oil industry.
We’re referring to recent statements by the head of Canadian energy major Enbridge about its unwillingness to invest in a pipeline to move Alberta’s oil to Canada’s west coast.
“I don’t think investors or the infrastructure companies should be taking on the risk of development in jurisdictions that have historically created a challenge,” Enbridge CEO Gregory Ebel said in a mid-February earnings call.
Ebel reminded listeners that Enbridge poured $600 million into the Northern Gateway pipeline, only to have the government’s approval invalidated due to Ottawa’s failure to consult First Nations. From Ebel’s perspective, “the rug was pulled out from underneath.”
“So that’s not the type of risk that we’re looking to take on at this time. We don’t need to with all the other opportunities,” Ebel added.
Premier Danielle Smith must be sorely disappointed to hear this.
Enbridge is one of just three companies chosen by the Alberta government to provide technical advice on a proposal for a new oil pipeline to the B.C. coast.
That proposal is due by July 1, according to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that Alberta and Ottawa signed in November.
The MOU commits Alberta to advancing the development of a pipeline by the private sector. And it commits Ottawa to declaring that pipeline a priority and referring it to its newly formed Major Projects Office.
In the call, Ebel said the MOU was “very encouraging,” but not enough to encourage his battle-scarred company to invest.
“Obviously, there’s been lots of signs and signals. I think what we’re looking for is actually concrete actions,” he said.
Ebel’s statements may also come as a surprise — and disappointment — to Ottawa, which launched the Major Projects Office in one of the Carney government’s first acts. The office exists to get “nation-building” projects built faster by accelerating regulatory processes and helping coordinate financing.
For our part, we are disappointed but unfortunately not surprised to see that the MOU and Major Projects Office have not been enough to make a homegrown global pipeline leader invest in its home country.
In October, we wrote that the Major Projects Office is, at best, a short-term solution. What Canada really needs is broad, structural reforms to improve the business environment for all — not just a few hand-selected projects Ottawa favours.
For those in doubt over whether such broader reforms are needed, consider this: in the World Bank Group’s recently released 2025 Business Ready report, Canada ranked 33rd for regulatory framework, behind such notable economies as Armenia, Costa Rica, Rwanda and Azerbaijan.
According to the report, a country’s regulatory framework is considered one of three foundational pillars affecting a country’s business and investment climate. (Canada ranked, by contrast, 8th, in both of the other two key pillars: public services and operational efficiency.)
Unfortunately, we have seen no signals from Ottawa so far that it is contemplating such broader reforms.
Short of such efforts, desperate policymakers may find themselves catering to the specific demands of specific companies.
In the earnings call, Ebel spelled out, for example, what types of concrete actions Enbridge is looking for.
In addition to a need for a commitment of stable policy, he mentioned possible government backstopping of a project until it is built.
We would be strongly opposed to such a measure. Maintaining an unclear and haphazard regulatory framework and then providing financial backstops when projects fail would be an egregious dereliction of duty on the part of politicians.
Instead, the government should be clear about the project parameters and approvals, and should fulfill its obligations, such as First Nations consultations. Once granted, its approvals should not be withdrawn.
Ebel also noted that the outcome of Alberta and Ottawa’s negotiations over an industrial carbon charge would be critical.
“That’s going to be super important for our customers, producers to get a feel for whether or not Canada is competitive enough for them to continue to see the kind of growth that we’ve been seeing,” he said.
Now, you may hope Ottawa scraps the industrial carbon charge, or not. But we don’t want corporations swaying these types of policy decisions, simply because Ottawa is desperate to achieve its goal of diversifying trade.
Quick fixes will only work for so long. At some point, Canada is going to need to do the difficult work of structural reforms. The question is: for a self-professed generational leader, is Prime Minister Carney up for the challenge?
If we could only have a government working for the people of canada instead of making it for themselves.
You hit the nail right on. Time for all Canadians to wake up! Read policies carefully before voting. Not just hair and socks, and who can handle Trump?