ADAMS: Pipeline to Nowhere: Carney's Political Theatre Leaves Albertans Holding the Bag

Prime Minister Mark Carney was in Alberta yesterday to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Premier Danielle Smith that reopens the possibility of a northern export pipeline—a dormant idea, and for good reason, for more than a decade.

The right-wing establishment media is calling it a “pipeline deal.”

It is nothing of the sort.

What Carney and Smith have produced is a framework that indulges Alberta's long-standing desire for another path to tidewater, but the real shift is far more damning. By even entertaining the idea of a new bitumen corridor to the B.C. northwest coast, Carney has forfeited any legitimate claim to climate leadership. This MOU quietly pushes climate policy deadlines from 2030 to 2050—kicking the can so far down the road that the children of Generation Alpha and Beta will be the ones wrestling with the consequences.

It’s climate delay disguised as climate diplomacy. And it is the worst kind of political theatre: the kind that produces no results but still manages to damage the country.

Here’s what’s actually happening, and why Canadians—especially Albertans—should be concerned.

Carney's Climate Credibility Ends Here

For years, Mark Carney has been hailed as a climate advocate, the banker who “gets it,” the technocratic grown-up ready to steer Canada toward a low-carbon future. That image ended yesterday. The moment Carney opened the door to a new heavy-oil pipeline project, he accepted the central premise of Alberta's political right-wing: that the future prosperity of both Alberta and Canada lies in expanding fossil fuel infrastructure. By doing so, he lent credibility to the most reckless climate cynicism in the country. Even worse, the MOU's language attempts to move the climate policy horizon from 2030—where it belongs—to 2050, where it becomes a problem for grandchildren of people not yet born. This is not leadership; it's procrastination.

One of this MOU's marquee features is its emphasis on large-scale carbon capture projects, particularly those tied to the Pathways Alliance. It is positioned as the technological lifeline that will reconcile Alberta's oil ambitions with Canada's climate promises. It's time to be honest: carbon capture is not a climate plan. It is, at best, a niche industrial process. At worst, it is a costly delusion. Carbon capture has one genuinely productive application: producing plastics and certain industrial materials. Outside that? It is staggeringly expensive, wildly inefficient, and almost always requires government subsidies to be economically viable. Most captured carbon today goes right back into enhanced oil recovery—i.e., it is used to extract more oil. If the goal is to reduce emissions, carbon capture is a money pit.

If the goal is to pretend to reduce emissions while keeping the status quo intact, then sure, carbon capture looks like a miracle cure. The MOU's embrace of carbon capture is not a climate solution. It's a political fig leaf, one that helps both governments pretend that real climate policy can wait. And the price tag will fall squarely on Canadian taxpayers.

Danielle Smith's Economic “Vision” Has Stagnated Alberta. and Carney Is Trying to Prove It

There is a simpler explanation for what Carney is doing, and it has nothing to do with pipelines or climate policy. This is political staging. Since her Wildrose Party days, Danielle Smith has told Albertans that Ottawa is sole the obstacle preventing Alberta from becoming an economic powerhouse. She has blamed federal regulations, federal climate plans, federal “interference,” and federal “gatekeeping.” Carney's move appears designed to call her bluff.

Smith has repeatedly demanded that Ottawa “get out of the way.” And so, Carney is doing exactly that, offering Smith the stage she says she wants, and allowing her economic platform to stand on its own two legs.

The problem? It can't. Smith's economic plan is a patchwork of slogans, nostalgia for boom times that will not return, and magical thinking about oil markets that no longer exist. Alberta's economic stagnation did not begin with Justin Trudeau and it will not end with Mark Carney. It stems from years of provincial governments refusing to diversify the economy and chasing investment that global markets have already priced out. Carney knows this. And he seems prepared to let the consequences play out publicly.

To Carney's credit, it's clever politics. It's also deeply irresponsible.

Political Theatre That Hurts Albertans

While Carney and his supporters may believe he is exposing the hollowness of Smith's agenda, the fallout will not land on her. It will land on the people she governs.

This kind of political theatre inflames Alberta's most radical fringe movements. It strengthens the Grant Abraham-led United Party and the Alberta Republicans—not because they will ever win a seat in the House of Commons, but because they can shape the narrative. They can push conspiratorial ideas about Ottawa's intentions. They can escalate distrust in federal institutions. They can convert frustration into resentment and resentment into isolationism.

Carney is playing a high-risk political game in a province already dealing with disinformation, polarization, and a fragile relationship with Canada's national institutions.

When federal leadership amplifies instability—accidentally or otherwise—it is the public who pays.

What the MOU Actually Says (and Why That Matters Less Than You Think)

The MOU is being sold as a “historic opportunity.” In reality, it is a document full of conditions that are unlikely ever to be met.

To be clear, as of November 27th, 2025:

• There is no pipeline proposal.
• There is no pipeline route.
• There is no company willing to build a pipeline.
• There is no agreement from British Columbia.
• There is no consent from affected First Nations.
• There is no path to approval under current environmental law.
• There is no tanker ban exemption.

Every obstacle that killed the Northern Gateway corridor still exists. Many are stronger now.

Indigenous nations along the northwest coast have made their positions as clear as possible. Several have already signalled opposition to even discussing changes to the tanker ban or reopening the corridor. Under Canadian law, their consent is not optional. British Columbia's government has jurisdictional authority over the coastline and the marine environment. Their support is nonexistent.

So why sign the MOU at all? The same purpose of the numerous Declarations of Intent: stagecraft. Carney gets to appear cooperative while doing absolutely nothing, and Smith gets to claim a victory on social media. Both leaders get to posture for their respective constituencies. And Albertans get nothing.

The Real Economic Problem: No One Wants to Build It

Even if every political barrier vanished tomorrow, the pipeline still wouldn't be built. Why? Because there is no private-sector proponent.

Not one.

Companies are not avoiding the project because of ideology. They are avoiding it because global oil demand forecasts do not justify long-term megaprojects of this scale. The financial risk is astronomical as investors see high-cost bitumen infrastructure as a stranded asset risk. The regulatory timeline is unpredictable, and Indigenous opposition is certain.

The northern coast liability concerns are enormous, and the return on investment is too low to justify the trouble. Carney and Smith can sign as many MOUs as they like. Capital markets are unmoved.

Why the MOU Still Matters

The MOU does not create a pipeline future. But it does create political consequences:

• It shifts the national conversation backward: by debating decades-long abandoned pipeline routes at a moment when Canada should be urgently planning the transition out of oil dependency
• It legitimizes a false narrative about oil's long-term viability: by signalling to Canadians and Albertans that we still believe large new fossil infrastructure has a role in our future economy. It does not.
• It undermines Canada’s climate credibility: by sending the message that Canada is hedging, domestic deadlines are slipping, and policy certainty is eroding. Which sets a bad precedent for foreign policy
• It entrenches political polarization: by indulging a debate that cannot produce real outcomes, the MOU reinforces the myth that climate policy and Alberta’s prosperity are mutually exclusive.
• It weakens Alberta's long-term economic prospects: by ensuring the province cannot diversify because its political leadership keeps chasing infrastructure projects that the global economy has outgrown.

What Carney Should Have Done

Instead of indulging Smith's theatrics, Carney should have forced a choice:
govern responsibly or be held accountable.

That means:

• Making Alberta a full partner in the transition economy, not a museum for fossil policy nostalgia.
• Holding firm on 2030 climate deadlines.
• Rejecting any suggestion that new bitumen pipelines are compatible with a credible climate plan.
• Demanding real diversification commitments.
• Making economic honesty—rather than economic fantasy—the foundation of intergovernmental cooperation.

Smith does not need a stage. She needs to do her job. Albertans need a government that can navigate the real economy, not the one Smith imagines.

What Happens Next

In the coming months, we will learn whether this MOU has any real momentum. The answer is almost certainly no. A company would need to step forward. British Columbia would need to cooperate. Indigenous nations would need to consent. Regulators would need to approve. The tanker ban would need to be revisited.

Any single obstacle could kill the idea on its own.

More likely, nothing happens. The MOU will fade into the background as a talking point, a piece of political symbolism with no practical outcome.

But symbolism has consequences. And the symbolism here is unmistakable:
Mark Carney is willing to place climate goals, economic clarity, and interprovincial stability on the negotiating table for the sake of short-term political optics.

Canadians Deserve Better

This MOU does not build a pipeline. It builds confusion. It extends false hope. It delays necessary decisions. And it signals that Canada's political leaders still cannot bring themselves to level with the public about the world we live in and the future we face.

Danielle Smith is not being challenged; she is being indulged. Mark Carney is not demonstrating climate leadership; he is performing it. And Albertans—caught between magical thinking on one side and political theatre on the other—are left to carry the consequences.

Canada's future will not be built on MOUs, photo ops, or revived pipeline fantasies. It will be built on hard choices, honest conversations, and political leaders willing to deal with reality as it is, not as they wish it were.

Carney had an opportunity to demonstrate exactly that kind of leadership.

Instead, he opened the door to a dead project, delayed climate action by decades, validated Alberta's most unrealistic economic narratives, and gave fringe movements new oxygen.

Canada needed a statesman. It got a strategist. And Alberta, once again, will bear the cost.

This piece was written by an individual contributor and reflects the editorial position of The Provincial Times and Left Lane Media Group. Read our Content Policy here.