Carney’s Energy Vision: Growth and Green Go Hand in Hand
Questions about climate and the economy are often framed as zero-sum: should we develop our energy resources to drive growth or take climate action and protect the environment? Mark Carney pitched a both-and – not either-or – approach during the recent federal election. In the Canada Strong platform document, the Liberal party argued:
It’s time to build Canada into an energy superpower that combines our conventional energy resources with our unlimited potential when it comes to clean, affordable energy. It is what will power the economy of the future — it will be the backbone of the economy we build together.
The Liberal plan called for investments to bring emissions down, drive new economic growth across Canada, and open new export markets with like-minded countries.
Public Sentiment: Clean and Conventional Can Coexist
Is the public on board? To a great extent, yes. Canadians are largely in the “let’s do both” camp.
The federal government has announced plans to develop major energy projects that it considers in the national interest. These projects are intended to protect Canada’s energy security, diversify our trade, and enhance our long-term competitiveness. When asked what types of projects this program should prioritize to achieve its goals, one in six Canadians favours conventional energy projects and one in four clean energy projects. About half want to see both kinds of projects advance.
Forced to select just one mode of energy development, the public would likely favour clean projects. But for now, Canadians prefer not to choose. Mr. Carney is proposing that Canada exploit its current economic engine – oil and gas, and particularly the oil sands – while simultaneously laying foundations to become an energy superpower in a future dominated by clean tech and renewables. A lot of Canadians appear ready to follow the Prime Minister’s lead.
When told the federal government is planning changes whereby the approval timelines for major development projects in the national interest would be reduced from 5-10 years down to two years, the public is more likely to say these changes will streamline a lengthy and costly process (65%) than to say they’ll reduce our ability to protect the environment (35%).
A Shift in Priorities: Faster Timelines, Less Pushback
This opinion landscape is a major reversal from when the Harper government reduced the scope of the then-Canadian Environmental Assessment Act in 2012. At that time, only four in ten said the changes would streamline the process. Canadians’ more favourable attitudes on this issue today (and reduced expressions of environmental concern) may have less to do with the specific policy changes proposed than with a belief that, facing new economic pressures, the country needs to do things differently – and move with greater urgency.
Also in the series: Do Canadians support the oil sands and new export pipelines? With the economy top of mind, Canadians are backing oil sands and pipelines—hoping for growth without sacrificing climate progress.
