pc28����

The next morning, on his way into the new cabinet’s first meeting on Parliament Hill, former environment minister Steven Guilbeault — the freshly appointed Canadian identity and culture minister whose pronouncements often inspire condemnation from pro-fossil fuel Conservatives — cast doubt on whether there’s a good case for new pipelines in Canada.

A short time later, Buckley Belanger, the new Liberal MP from northern Saskatchewan appointed as Carney’s secretary of state for rural development, circled back on the issue by praising the prime minister’s plan to help provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan approve more pipelines for the fossil-fuel industry.

“He is reaching out to a lot of the provinces in a partnership mode, and I think it’s an exciting time for our oil and gas sector,” Belanger told reporters, before declaring he is in favour of new fossil-fuel pipelines.

The mixed signals from the heart of the new Liberal government highlight how, on major political and economic issues like climate and energy policy, the precise orientation of the Carney administration remains a question. Will this new iteration of a Liberal government plow forth with a climate agenda that its detractors blame for scuppering economic growth, especially out West, where fuel is added to the ever-glowing embers of Alberta separatism? Or will it soften regulations and policies in pursuit of what Carney hailed this week as his epoch-defining strategy for industrial transformation?

The murkiness means some industry players are cautiously optimistic the new government will pave the way for fossil fuel expansion, while Alberta’s premier and federal Conservatives blast it for allegedly standing in the way of that development. At the same time, climate policy experts and advocates are wondering what could change in the federal government’s drive to slash greenhouse gas emissions by almost half over the next decade.��

“We don’t really know. A lot of the pieces have been kind of thrown up in the air,” said Marlo Raynolds, a board member of the Pembina Institute and former chief of staff to Liberal environment ministers Catherine McKenna and Jonathan Wilkinson.��

Adding to the questions is Carney’s decision to remove Wilkinson from cabinet, a move Raynolds said “raises a number of flags” given the Vancouver MP’s experience in the environment and natural resources portfolios for the Liberal government.

His replacement at natural resources is Tim Hodgson, the former chair of Hydro One, who worked with Carney when the prime minister was governor of the Bank of Canada. Hodgson’s resume also includes three years on the board of MEG Energy, an oilsands producer headquartered in Calgary.��

That caught the eye of some players in oil and gas country, who hope Hodgson’s experience in the sector is a harbinger of a shift at the federal level. (Hodgson’s office did not make him available for an interview this week.)

“That’s a real win for the energy sector,” said Adam Legge, president of the Business Council of Alberta, referring to Hodgson as the “best possible choice” for natural resources minister.��

Legge also noted that Carney, in an interview with CTV this week, suggested his government might alter policies that Conservatives and pro-fossil fuel groups have heavily criticized: the federal Impact Assessment Act for major development projects, and the planned regulatory cap on emissions from the oil and gas sector.��

Asked about those comments, Guilbeault was noncommittal. “These are important conversations that we will need to have in the coming weeks,” he said.��

Legge said he took Carney’s comment as evidence of the prime minister’s “pragmatism,” and a positive signal to the fossil fuel sector.��

Others have twigged to Carney’s talk of making Canada an “energy superpower” in both clean and “conventional” sources — meaning fossil fuels — as evidence of a new, more pro-oil and gas direction from the Liberals. Speaking Thursday at the B7 summit of business groups from G7 countries in Ottawa, Lisa Baiton, president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, said she was “encouraged” by Carney’s comments.��

At the same time, however, Legge echoed criticism from the Alberta government of Carney’s pick for environment minister, Toronto—Danforth MP Julie Dabrusin. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said she was “very concerned” about Dabrusin’s previous work as Guilbeault’s parliamentary secretary when he was environment minister, while Smith’s chief of staff, Rob Anderson, noted that Dabrusin’s says she has taken a “strong stance against oilsands expansion.” 

“Fire … meet gas,” Anderson on X.��

For Legge, it amounts to diverging perspectives in the same Liberal cabinet, leaving it unclear where the government will land on certain climate and energy policies.��

“I worry there will be a standoff and a stalemate at the cabinet table,” he said. ”(Carney) is going to have to override some of the environmental views that are still very prevalent at the cabinet table.” 

Naturally, environmental advocates have the opposite view. Caroline Brouillette, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada, said the government should stop what appears to be an “all of the above” approach to energy development and follow through on regulations like the emissions cap that are designed to ensure the fossil-fuel sector contributes a fairer share to Canada’s progress toward its 2030 emissions target of at least 40 per cent below 2005 levels.��

Canada’s said national greenhouse gas pollution was down 8.5 per cent from 2005 levels in 2023, with decreases in most economic sectors offset in part by an increase in emissions from oil and gas, driven largely from expanded production in the Alberta oilsands.��

Brouillette argued Canada — one of the world’s top emitters, responsible for 1.41 per cent of global emissions in 2023, according to — shouldn’t “double down” on more fossil fuel production, especially after Carney rolled back the consumer carbon price and still hasn’t specified how his government would hit the climate targets.��

“Definitely, Carney has to pick a lane,” said Brouillette.��

Raynolds, from the Pembina Institute, said “it’s clear that the climate crisis has taken a back seat to the immediate crisis we’re all facing,” referring to the U.S. trade war. But scientists have warned time is running out for the world to stave off the damaging extremes of climate change, with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change calling for “unprecedented changes in all aspects of society” to avoid the worst in a landmark 2019 .��

“The big challenges around climate — it’s not like those have disappeared,” Raynolds said.��