Danielle Smith has thrown down a gauntlet, a bold nation-building vision to unlock Canada's economic potential with a pipeline to the Pacific tidewater. On the other side stands BC Premier David Eby, arms crossed, dismissing the proposal as “not a real project.” One leader is talking about generational prosperity; the other is practicing the small politics of obstruction.This is more than an interprovincial squabble. It is a test of whether Canada works as a country. Will we remain a captive supplier to a single customer, selling our resources at a discount, or will we finally act like the energy superpower we are meant to be? Premier Eby’s stubbornness suggests he prefers the former..EDITORIAL: Alberta takes charge: Time for a new pipeline to the West Coast.At the heart of this debate is a simple, powerful fact that Canada is heavily reliant on the United States as the only customer for our energy products. This reliance costs us billions. As BC Conservative Leader John Rustad rightly points out, “We're selling, what, three-and-a-half to four million barrels a day — at a 20% to 30% discount — to the Americans. Enough of charity to the Americans. It's time we get our resources offshore and get proper prices for them.”Eby’s opposition is not just economically nonsensical. It is hypocritical. His government is actively championing other resource projects, including liquefied natural gas (LNG) ventures like LNG Canada and Ksi Lisims LNG. He argues those are “shovel-ready,” but every major project begins as an idea before it becomes a reality. By declaring Smith’s pipeline dead on arrival, Eby is ensuring it will never have the chance to become “shovel-ready.” His position is a self-fulfilling prophecy of inaction.Former Alberta premier Jason Kenney posted to social media that "David Eby is objectively a much bigger threat to confederation, and to the rule of law, than Alberta separatists" and "is actively undermining the Canadian Constitution with his ideological hostility to pipelines, and doing real damage to national unity and prosperity in the process.".The premier’s claim that the project is “taxpayer-funded” and lacks a private proponent is a red herring. Alberta has stated clearly that its role is to get the project through the initial regulatory gate, after which private proponents — with the backing of major pipeline operators Enbridge, Trans Mountain, and South Bow — are expected to take over. This is about providing the regulatory certainty that has been utterly absent in Canada for a decade. No private company will risk billions on a project that can be killed by a political whim.While the vocal opposition of coastal chiefs like Marilyn Slett is well-documented, it is not the whole story. Alberta’s Minister of Indigenous Relations Rajan Sawhney reported that after speaking with indigenous leaders in BC and Alberta, the “responses were different from what you may have expected about 10 years ago.” She noted, “There was more support than I had anticipated.”.FUSS / MUNRO: Government workers in Canada enjoy higher wages than private-sector counterparts.This should not be surprising. The indigenous-led resource economy is booming. The Haisla Nation’s Cedar LNG and the Nisga’a Nation’s Ksi Lisims LNG are testament to the power of partnership. These projects prove that environmental stewardship and economic prosperity are not mutually exclusive. They provide the “economic reconciliation and benefits to communities” that leaders have long demanded.The Indigenous Resource Network’s John Desjarlais senses this change, noting, “Sentiment has changed and evolved in the past six years.” When the federal tanker ban killed the proposed $16 billion Eagle Spirit project — an indigenous-led pipeline — it wasn't a win for indigenous rights. It was a veto against indigenous economic self-determination..Eby’s position also conveniently ignores the existing marine safety regime. The completion of the Trans Mountain expansion in 2024 doubled marine spill response capacity on the West Coast through a $170 million investment in new equipment and personnel. The tanker moratorium, known as Bill C-48, adds little real protection while sending a damaging message to global investors. It is a political symbol, not an environmental solution.So what is really holding us back? It is a failure of vision. Premier Eby sees a “distraction.” John Rustad and Danielle Smith see a nation-building project. The Business Council of British Columbia, representing over 200 companies, sees the moratorium as “unfair treatment” that “reinforces Canada’s over-reliance on the U.S. market.”.SLOBODIAN: Canada rewards terror, America confronts it.By standing in the way, David Eby is not protecting British Columbia. He is protecting a status quo that sells Alberta oil at a discount and forces Canada to beg for markets. He is, perhaps unintentionally, acting as the leading advocate for American energy interests. It is a curious position for a premier of a Canadian province.Canadians deserve leaders who look at a map and see possibility, not obstacles. We need a federal government willing to repeal the archaic tanker ban and a BC premier with the courage to cross this bridge. The path to prosperity is clear. It’s time for Eby to get out of the way..Due to a high level of spam content being posted in our comment section below, all comments undergo manual approval by a staff member during regular business hours (Monday - Friday). Your patience is appreciated.
