Terry Burton is a retired veteran of Alberta’s oil and heavy construction industry, and a former member of the Alberta Apprenticeship Board.The new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the federal government and Alberta is being celebrated in some quarters as a breakthrough. In reality, it is another example of Ottawa releasing a document heavy on aspiration and light on substance — an agreement so vague that nearly any party involved can interpret it as they choose, delay it as they wish, or obstruct it when it suits them.The federal government claims it still “holds the cards” constitutionally, yet the Prime Minister has made clear that British Columbia and the Coastal First Nations must be “on side” for the agreement to proceed. What that actually means remains undefined. No thresholds, no timelines, no mechanisms. An obligation without content nor solid direction.Canada cannot afford another exercise in political theatre. Yet that is what this MOU increasingly appears to be..PINDER: The West’s breaking point — how Canada’s emissions policies expose a rigged federation.A Pipeline of UncertaintyIf we want major energy and infrastructure projects to advance, clear rules and predictable processes are essential. This MOU offers neither. Its commitments are so broad, its promises so conditional, and its language so malleable that one could drive a convoy of supertankers through its ambiguities without touching anything firm.Investors see this instantly. For years, Canada has struggled to attract private capital not because our resources lack value, but because our regulatory and political systems generate uncertainty at every step. When the federal government releases agreements that read more like political placeholders than actual plans, that uncertainty only deepens..Consultation — Necessary, but Now WeaponizedThe Constitution requires that indigenous groups be meaningfully consulted on major projects. Canadians support that principle. But the operative word — “meaningful” — has increasingly been defined not by Parliament but by the courts, whose interpretations grow broader with each passing year.What was intended to ensure respect and dialogue has, in practice, become a tool for indefinite delay. Judicial rulings now routinely shape or halt national projects, while elected governments step back and wait for legal processes to unfold. Decision-making that once belonged to Parliament has shifted to courtrooms and regulatory boards.The result is a country where no one can say clearly who decides which projects advance, or on what timeline. That is no way to run a modern economy..CARPAY: Amend Regulated Professions Neutrality Act to protect free speech and professionalism better.A Country That Builds Paperwork, Not ProjectsCanadians once built railways, ports, pipelines, and electrical grids with purpose. Today, governments build layers of process: ESG requirements, DEI protocols, climate reviews, new regulatory hurdles, and never-ending consultations. Any project that survives that gauntlet must then endure further litigation, shifting political priorities, and a culture, it appears, increasingly suspicious of development itself.It is little wonder that capital investment has dropped sharply, productivity has stagnated, and Canada now ranks near the bottom of the OECD in business investment per worker. Investors are not avoiding Canada because they oppose our resources — they are avoiding us because we cannot get out of our own way..Carve-Outs Are Not New — They Are How Canada WorksSome critics argue that Alberta’s temporary relief from federal Clean Electricity Regulations sets a dangerous precedent. The opposite is true. Carve-outs and asymmetrical arrangements are a longstanding feature of Canadian federalism.Consider the Atlantic Accords, Quebec’s unique immigration agreement, territorial financing models, selective carbon-tax exemptions, provincial-specific health deals, and decades of targeted support for the auto sector. Canada has always operated with region-specific arrangements, often for legitimate economic or historical reasons.Alberta’s carve-out is hardly revolutionary. It is simply the latest example of a federation that has tried, whether successfully or not, to balance national and regional interests through negotiation rather than uniformity..OLDCORN: Accountability, not politics — $34 million ‘questionable’ spending at Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations.BC and First Nations Now Hold the LeverageGiven how much political capital Alberta and the federal government have invested in this MOU, British Columbia and the Coastal First Nations are now in a position of enormous leverage. They can — and almost certainly will — use that leverage to secure financial, environmental, and jurisdictional concessions.This is not a critique of BC or indigenous negotiators; it is a straightforward acknowledgment of political reality. When one side needs an agreement more than another, the more reluctant parties are able to extract what they want. The cost of doing so will fall, as it always does, largely on Canadian taxpayers..Canada at a CrossroadsThis MOU is not occurring in a vacuum. It arrives at a time when Canada’s economic foundations are eroding. Productivity is falling, foreign investment is fleeing, real incomes are stagnating, and our competitiveness metrics are slipping year after year.At the same time, public institutions — political, legal, and bureaucratic — are increasingly shaped by ideological currents rather than practical considerations. Canadians feel this drift intuitively: projects don’t get built, decisions take years, and accountability is nowhere to be found..MACLEOD: A Seat at the table — rise of the independence movement within the UCP.A country cannot diversify trade, expand exports, or strengthen its economic resilience if it fails to build the infrastructure required to reach global markets. And yet, for more than a decade, Canada has failed to do precisely that.A Call for Direction, Not DocumentsCanada does not need more MOUs. It needs clarity. It needs leadership. And it needs a federal government willing to do the hard work of restoring predictability to our regulatory systems and purpose to our national agenda..This involves reasserting Parliament’s authority over major national projects, streamlining regulatory and judicial pathways to serve the public interest rather than ideological agendas, rebuilding economic competitiveness with policies that encourage investment and reward productivity, and establishing clear, reliable processes for indigenous consultation that respect rights without enabling endless delay.Until these changes occur, we will continue to issue airy, optimistic agreements that crumble under real pressure.Canadians deserve better than policy theatre. They deserve a country capable of building again..ZEKVELD: Alberta must limit online gambling advertising .The MOU between Ottawa and Alberta may be well-intentioned, but unless Canada reforms the institutions and processes that consistently block progress, it will become yet another example of our national inability to turn possibilities into results.The question now is not whether BC or First Nations will use the leverage this agreement gives them — they will. The question is whether Canada will recognize this moment for what it is: a sign that the country must rediscover ambition, rebuild competence, and reclaim the capacity to say yes — with conditions, with care, but firmly and finally — when the national interest demands it.Terry Burton is a retired veteran of Alberta’s oil and heavy construction industry, and a former member of the Alberta Apprenticeship Board.
