The political dance between British Columbia and Alberta over pipelines has entered a new movement, with B.C. Premier David Eby pouring cold water on Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s ambitious proposal to resurrect the Northern Gateway pipeline project.
“I appreciate Premier Smith’s enthusiasm,” Eby told reporters in Victoria yesterday, his measured tone barely concealing the provincial divide. “But reviving Northern Gateway would require addressing the same significant Indigenous rights and environmental concerns that led to its rejection in the first place.”
The $7.9-billion Enbridge project, cancelled by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2016, remains a lightning rod in the ongoing tension between energy development and climate commitments. Smith recently floated the idea of bringing Northern Gateway back from the dead during her keynote address at the Alberta Energy Summit, suggesting it could be “reimagined with First Nations as equity partners.”
For those who’ve watched this file over the years, Smith’s proposal represents more than infrastructure planning—it’s the latest chapter in a provincial relationship defined by resource politics. The 1,177-kilometre pipeline would have transported diluted bitumen from Alberta’s oilsands to a marine terminal in Kitimat, B.C., creating an export route to Asian markets.
“Premier Smith seems to be overlooking the Supreme Court ruling that quashed the original approval,” said Dr. Kathryn Harrison, political science professor at UBC who specializes in environmental policy. “The court found consultation with First Nations was inadequate, and those issues haven’t magically disappeared.”
Indeed, while Smith has emphasized potential economic benefits, many coastal First Nations remain firmly opposed. The Gitga’at First Nation, whose territory includes parts of the proposed tanker route, expressed immediate concern about Smith’s revival talk.
“We defeated this proposal once through the courts, and our position hasn’t changed,” said Arnold Clifton, Chief Councillor of the Gitga’at. “Our waters, our livelihoods, and our cultural practices remain at risk from potential oil spills.”
The political calculus differs dramatically across provincial boundaries. For Smith, facing economic pressures and an increasingly restless energy sector, Northern Gateway represents a potential win with her conservative base. Recent polling from Angus Reid shows 68% of Albertans support expanded pipeline capacity, compared to just 43% of British Columbians.
Eby, meanwhile, must balance multiple competing interests. His government depends on support from urban voters in Metro Vancouver, where environmental concerns often trump resource development. Yet he’s also mindful of northern communities that might welcome the jobs and investment.
“What we’re seeing is the fundamental tension in Canadian federalism playing out,” said Jared Wesley, political scientist at the University of Alberta. “These premiers are responding to different constituencies with different priorities.”
The timing of Smith’s proposal isn’t coincidental. With federal Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre leading in national polls and promising to revive cancelled resource projects if elected, Smith appears to be positioning Alberta to take advantage of a potential change in government in Ottawa.
Trudeau’s government has shown no appetite for revisiting Northern Gateway, with Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault reiterating yesterday that the government “stands by its decision to reject the project on environmental grounds.”
For folks in pipeline communities like Kitimat, the political back-and-forth feels far removed from local realities. The town has experienced both boom and bust with various industrial proposals over the years.
“People here just want to know what’s actually going to happen,” said Phil Germuth, Mayor of Kitimat. “Every announcement creates uncertainty – will there be jobs? Environmental risks? We need clarity, not political posturing.”
Energy experts note that even if political hurdles could be overcome, the economic landscape has shifted dramatically since Northern Gateway was first proposed. LNG Canada’s massive facility under construction in Kitimat has altered local labour markets, while global energy transitions raise questions about long-term demand for bitumen exports.
“The business case would need complete reassessment,” said Trevor Tombe, economist at the University of Calgary. “Construction costs have increased substantially, and investor appetite for multi-decade fossil fuel infrastructure has changed.”
For everyday Canadians watching from afar, the revival proposal might seem like déjà vu – another round in the seemingly endless pipeline battles that have defined Canadian politics for over a decade. Yet the debate touches fundamental questions about how we balance resource development, Indigenous rights, and climate commitments.
As Eby and Smith prepare for the Western Premiers’ Conference next month in Whistler, the Northern Gateway discussion will likely continue behind closed doors. Whether this interprovincial tension escalates into something more serious remains to be seen.
What’s certain is that for both premiers, the political stakes extend beyond pipelines to their very vision of their provinces’ futures – and neither appears ready to concede ground easily.
