Can Ottawa Match Vision With Action? A Conversation With The Honourable Gordon Campbell
The past week saw a surge in energy-related political developments in Canada. Prime Minister Carney issued a unified Mandate Letter to his cabinet on May 21, 2025, emphasizing that Canada “must build an enormous amount of new infrastructure at speeds not seen in generations. This includes the infrastructure to diversify our trading relationships; to become an energy superpower in both clean and conventional energies.”
The newly appointed Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, Tim Hodgson, delivered a constructive message during his visit to Calgary, highlighting the importance of building energy infrastructure, including oil and gas. Meanwhile, the Premiers from Western Canada convened a meeting in Yellowknife. They released a joint statement agreeing to plan and develop an economic corridor for “transporting oil and gas, liquefied natural gas, uranium, electricity, and hydroelectricity to Canadian and world markets.”
To discuss these developments, we are joined by our guest, The Honourable Gordon Campbell, President of Hawksmuir International Partners Limited. He is the former Premier of British Columbia (2001–2011), Canadian High Commissioner to the UK and Northern Ireland (2011–2016), and Mayor of Vancouver (1986–1993).
Here are some of the questions Jackie and Peter posed to The Honourable Gordon Campbell: Based on the Carney government’s constructive comments on energy infrastructure and attracting private investment, including the Energy and Natural Resources Minister’s trip to Calgary last week, would you anticipate a new approach from the Liberals compared to the previous decade? The Western Premiers issued a joint statement to develop economic corridors, including those for transporting electricity, natural gas, and oil. What types of projects do you expect David Eby’s NDP government to support in British Columbia? Would you expect the Federal government to revise or repeal energy policies, particularly those that might deter capital investment, such as the industrial carbon pricing policy set to increase to $170 per tonne by 2030 or the oil and gas emissions cap?
Please review our disclaimer at: https://www.arcenergyinstitute.com/disclaimer/
Check us out on social media:
X (Twitter): @arcenergyinst
LinkedIn: @ARC Energy Research Institute
Subscribe to ARC Energy Ideas Podcast
Apple Podcasts
Amazon Music
Spotify
Episode 286 transcript
Disclosure:
The information and opinions presented in this ARC Energy Ideas podcast are provided for informational purposes only and are subject to the disclaimer link in the show notes.
Announcer:
This is the ARC Energy Ideas podcast, with Peter Tertzakian and Jackie Forrest, exploring trends that influence the energy business.
Jackie Forrest:
Welcome to the Arc Energy Ideas podcast. I’m Jackie Forrest.
Peter Tertzakian:
And I’m Peter Tertzakian. Welcome back. And as is recent custom, we have to timestamp our podcast recordings. So the King of England and the Queen of England have just stepped off the plane onto the tarmac, so that gives you a sense of where we’re at. We will anxiously await the throne speech. I guess that’s tomorrow, isn’t it?
Jackie Forrest:
Tomorrow, yeah.
Peter Tertzakian:
Yeah, that’s tomorrow?
Jackie Forrest:
So we’re recording May 26th, but we will air this podcast the same day of the throne speech.
Peter Tertzakian:
The same day as the throne speech, the king’s speech. Wow.
Jackie Forrest:
So decide which one you want to listen to.
Peter Tertzakian:
Decide which one you want to listen to. Okay.
Well, so Jackie, we’ve got a bunch of things to talk about because it’s been a busy week last week. Last week we had the mandate letter, letter in singular handed down by the Prime Minister to the various ministers to give them their marching orders in terms of what this country needs to do. And then following that, we had the new Minister of Energy and Natural Resources visit Western Canada, culminating in a breakfast on Friday last. How did that go?
Jackie Forrest:
Yeah, well, and I will just say Mark Carney’s letter had those constructive words about the energy sector, very consistent, like wanting to become an energy superpower in both clean and conventional. But we did have this visit from now it’s called the Energy and Natural Resources Minister, that’s a new thing, adding energy to the title, Tim Hodgson. And he spoke at this event and he signaled a new potential era, I think, for Canadian energy. I mean words are going to have to be backed up by action, but the words he said were very constructive and I think well-received.
And I’ll just give you just a smattering of some of the quotes, and there was quite a bit of writing about this on the weekend, but, “Canada will no longer be defined by delay. It will be defined by delivery. We will be a stable provider of oil and gas and the government must work fast to open new export markets. And we are better at forestry, mining, oil and gas than others and we should be proud of it. Canada is the best in the world.” Other kind of comments made where he thinks we need to get the Pathways project done, that’s that oil sands carbon capture project.
Peter Tertzakian:
Carbon capture.
Jackie Forrest:
It’s about 20 million tons that would be-
Peter Tertzakian:
Abated.
Jackie Forrest:
… abated by it. And it’s about a $17 billion project. So he did have a caveat that the province has to help out, and that, “Energy is power and energy is our superpower.” So I think the feeling of… I spent some time after, and I’ve even talked to some people here on Monday morning, he will be judged by actions, but this is the most constructive kind of statements we’ve had from someone in this position in a decade or longer.
Peter Tertzakian:
Well, the physicist in me wants to make a minor correction to the statement, power is energy over time. And so that’s one of the things we’re looking for is how fast things can get done. And it can become an energy superpower if the power can be delivered over the course of a very short period of time, which is something that I think much of the audience was looking for.
Jackie Forrest:
Yeah, for sure. I mean, definitely rapid, people want to see things happen quickly. I think there’s a belief too that we need some policy change to attract capital. He did talk about the fact projects will be built by the private sector and the government is a catalyst and enabler. And for that to happen, I think some policy change will have to come too. And he didn’t mention that in his speech.
Peter Tertzakian:
Yeah, and I think that that’s sort of up in the air in terms of how policy and regulatory change are going to happen at the federal level. And we shouldn’t be naive to think that it’s not only at the federal level, there has to be changes at the provincial levels too to harmonize. We’ve talked a lot about that on our podcasts.
Well, as you said, words have to be followed up by action. Let’s talk about the intent though. Let’s talk about those words. We are really honored to have the Honourable Gordon Campbell, former Premier of British Columbia between 2001 and 2011, former High Commissioner to the UK and Northern Ireland from 2011 to 2016, and I didn’t know this, former Mayor of Vancouver from 1986 to 1993. So I want to welcome the Honourable Gordon Campbell, whom, if he doesn’t mind, I’m just going to refer to as Gordon, who’s also president of Hawksmuir International Partners Limited. Welcome, Gordon.
Gordon Campbell:
Hi, Peter. Good to be with you. I’m glad you’re calling me Gordon. People were never quite sure what my label was supposed to be, all those public jobs, so I’m glad you’re calling me Gordon or Gord or whatever.
Peter Tertzakian:
Okay.
Jackie Forrest:
All right. Well Gordon, we have lots of questions for you, but before we get into that, maybe you can tell us about Hawksmuir International Partners and what you’ve been up to most recently.
Gordon Campbell:
Sure. It is just a small company. I provide advice to people, frankly mostly in the UK about what’s going on in Canada and occasionally in Canada about what’s taking place. I’m working on a few projects, a few mining projects, etc in Canada. I sit on boards of directors and a number of companies internationally. So it keeps me busy. But I had a rule when I left public life that I wanted to be involved in the things I wanted to be involved in. So that’s what I’m doing now with Hawksmuir.
Peter Tertzakian:
Yeah, great. So what I didn’t mention in my intro is that you were premier of British Columbia as a BC Liberal. So before we get into the political discourse here, maybe give us a sense of how you define BC Liberal versus a federal Liberal.
Gordon Campbell:
Well, first of all, when I was the leader of the BC Liberals, it was very clear we were distinct from the federal Liberal Party. My caucus and I and our party were not involved in federal politics at all. In fact, they had to keep away from it. And the reason for that is I think when you’re the premier for province, your job is to speak for the province. Your job is to tell the federal jurisdiction what it is that your province would like to do, offer solutions. And they can be held to account for federal issues and we’ll be held to account for provincial issues.
So I wanted us to be independent. We were. I must admit, the label often confuses people, but it’s one of the really interesting things about our public life today is too often we let labels get in the way of substance. And I think it’s really important as we move forward to put the labels aside and say, “Okay, what are we saying we’re doing? What are we trying to accomplish? And what are the results?” So I think we’ve completely put accountability aside in public life and I think that’s a huge mistake because when you don’t hold politicians to account for what they say by what they do, you get disappointed on a regular basis.
Jackie Forrest:
I want to talk a little bit about your views on the change in governments. In the Vancouver Sun in April 16th, this is before the election, you argued that, “Canada cannot afford another term of Liberal government no matter who the leader is. And when we keep our minerals and energy locked away, we lock away our future and our opportunity for generations of Canadians.”
Now, we talked about some of the early signs coming from the Mark Carney government, including the Minister Hodgson’s constructive trip to Calgary last week. Could you conclude that maybe this new Liberals has a new approach and we’re not going to lock away our resources?
Gordon Campbell:
I’m going to tell you I don’t think they are the new Liberals. I think that the old Liberals. Look at the cabinet, look at what they’re doing. There’s a government that was there for 10 years, they’re the same government, effectively with one change, which is Mr. Carney. And as much as he would like us to think he’s like Mr. Trump as he sits there and pretends to sign legislation which has no relevance whatsoever in Canada and our form of government, he’s not. He’s got a party. If you look at the leadership group that he’s put together in the cabinet, there’s very few changes, although I’ll give him this, Tim Hodgson was a change, obviously it was a brand new MP, so that was a change. But until we see real action, I think what we’ve got is a consummate political play, which is at work right now.
Honestly, I think energy is one of the cores of Canada’s economic future. Frankly, I think we’ve never quite understood this in Canada, it is the cornerstone of everybody’s quality of life everywhere in the world. And so we may wish that energy would do one thing, but the fact of the matter is there is only one environment. And to be candid, if Canada had made our natural gas available to the countries that have asked for it, Greece and Germany and, frankly, China and Korea and India, we would’ve had more positive impact on the environment by putting our LNG into that energy mix than keeping it in the ground.
But honestly, it’s what Mr. Carney, if you read his book, Value(s), he’s very much for keeping things in the ground. We have the change in words and I see the change in words. But here’s one of the things that we were told, “We are going to act so quickly, we’re going to act faster than we’ve ever imagined.” So you can say whatever you want. When we have a country where the federal government is recognized for changing the rules as they go along, when we have Bill 69 sitting there, no one’s investing in energy projects in Canada because they don’t trust the government to allow them to deliver on that billions of dollars of investment they’ve got. When we’ve got Bill C-48 stopping our energy from crossing the Pacific, that’s not going to encourage any investment.
Repealing an act can be done very quickly, and if we’re going to act as fast as we can imagine, they’re going back to parliament tomorrow, that would be great. Bring on a list of some of the acts that you’re going to repeal that will free up the energy industry, that will free up the private sector to move ahead and create the kind of economy that we should. And that economy should be based on our mineral resources and our energy resources. They’re what really set Canada apart as well as the people that we have that are living here.
Peter Tertzakian:
So we’re talking about action, and I think we’re all healthily skeptical about whether the actual action will follow. And we’ve talked about words and action. But before words, there are beliefs, beliefs of the leader, the leadership, and so I haven’t read the book cover to cover. I know Jackie, you have, but I’ve certainly seen summaries and got the general gist of Mr. Carney’s book from, I don’t know how long ago it was-
Jackie Forrest:
It was ’21 that he wrote it.
Peter Tertzakian:
In 2021. Okay, so I mean the question is given the circumstances since 2021, which would include the war in Ukraine, which would include the Trump administration and the trade wars and the 51st state narrative and all that kind of stuff, is whether or not beliefs can change as a consequence of a changing world?
Gordon Campbell:
Well, I think clearly they can, but the first thing I’d like to hear from any of the federal Liberals is frankly an apology for 10 years of constantly missing the mark. They seriously missed the mark in terms of the environment, which is what they were striving to do. They seriously missed it. It wasn’t sort of just about a miss, it was actually just billions and billions of dollars and we made no progress. That’s not me saying this, that’s their own government saying that. The minister came and he said to you that, “We’re no longer going to be a government of delay. We’re going to be a government of delivery.” Well, people forget this. When the Liberals were elected in 2015, ’16, they actually hired a consultant in that they called the Consultant on Deliverology. And I go back to the words thing. So yes, you can change, but I’d like someone to say, “Yeah, we were wrong.”
Peter Tertzakian:
But Mr. Carney says he’s not Mr. Trudeau.
Gordon Campbell:
Yeah, he isn’t Mr. Trudeau. He’s not at all. He’s much smarter, from my perspective. It’s not that I don’t like Mark, it’s the policies though are still there. You can’t say, “Oh, I’m changing the world. It’s going to be great. I’m really concerned about change. This is important. This is an emergency.” Let me just give you this quick example. When I was in school, we used to have fire drills, they were an emergency, and when the bell moved, you weren’t supposed to sit in your desk as long as you felt like it, you were supposed to stand up and march out to make sure you were safe.
We’re not supposed to have our parliamentarians sitting at their desks and cheering. We’re supposed to have them actually acting, doing stuff. So can you change? Yes you can. Do you make mistakes? Sure you can make mistakes. But admit you’ve made the mistake and say, “This is what we’re going to do that’s different. That’s significantly different.” And that’s not to say we’re going to go from delay to delivery. That’s exactly the message we got in 2015, ’16 from the federal Liberals at that time. That’s not a change for me. So if there’s a change for them, tell me how it’s a change. Tell me how it’s going to work for the private sector to invest billions of dollars in an oil pipeline that gets to the Pacific Ocean because maybe we’ll let you go get to tidewater there. Maybe we’ll allow you to go through billions of dollars of investment and we won’t change our minds, but the record is that’s what they do.
I’ll tell you, when I was in London, just to give you this quick example, Canada was known as a country that got to yes. By the time I left in 2016, there were real questions about whether we could get major projects through in Canada. And instead of investing in Canada, people were looking elsewhere. And that’s what’s happened in spades over the last number of years.
Jackie Forrest:
All right, so July 1, apparently they’re going to have all these inter-provincial trade barriers knocked down. We’ll find out for Canada Day. They’re talking about a nation building project list, helping Canada become the fastest growing GDP in the G7. So I look at that and think, “Where in this country can we get more private capital than the oil and gas sector?” If I think about the LNG projects that could be moved forward under this government that are uncertain right now, plus things like the Pathways, we’re talking like $50 billion of potential investment. I don’t know anywhere else in this country where we could get that. So I agree with what you’re saying, Gordon. There’s certainly some skepticism, but if we can see action on those two fronts, they will have proven that they can do action.
Peter Tertzakian:
I’m going to come back to this action because… I don’t know why I’m playing the foil here, because I guess that’s just my natural tendency for the sake that, okay, the Prime Minister’s mandate letter is only a week old, and so we’ve talked about words and action. So what is an appropriate amount of time that needs to go by which we can judge whether or not action is happening?
Gordon Campbell:
Well, I think it’s different time for different kinds of actions. Like I say, if you’re going to repeal a bill, you can repeal it very quickly. You bring it into the house and you say it’s repealed. You know what? He would have almost unanimous support if he brought that in, that repeal of Bill C-69 into the House, almost unanimous support if he brought the repeal of Bill C-48 into the house. I don’t know why he doesn’t. There’s obviously work to do on some of the other bills with regard to public safety and those things. For example, for housing, they’ve got to get a better understanding of what’s involved in what they call housing affordability. That’s why I go back to the words, Peter. It’s all very well for all the politicians to stand up and say they’re concerned about housing affordability. But I can tell you right now, when politician tells you they’re concerned about affordability, just about inevitably they’re adding costs to housing.
So we know what goes into the cost for housing, how do we reduce them? I can’t speak for Alberta or other provinces, but in British Columbia, I think in Toronto this is true, about 30% of the cost of all new housing is imposed by government, 30%. So in a $1 million home, that’s $300,000. So that’s one thing. How do we reduce costs? The government have complete control over a lot of those cost reductions. They can do it. I liked the fact, you’ll be glad to hear this, I like the fact that Mr. Carney said he was going to take GST off of residential building products. That’s good. That’s a step. That’s a reduction in cost. There’s another part, and that’s how do people have enough money to pay more? And that means you’ve got to reduce their income tax and you’ve got to be bold. A 1% reduction in income tax is symbolic, it’s not bold. I mean, frankly, the federal government right now was talking more about increasing debt substantially more than they’re talking about reducing your taxes.
Jackie Forrest:
There was a Western premiers meeting last week in Yellowknife. So much going on, that was another thing. And there was a joint statement that was saying that there was a goal to create a energy corridor for transporting oil and gas, liquefied natural gas, uranium electricity and hydroelectricity, and separately kind of British Columbia agreed to create an interconnect for electricity. Now all western corridors to Tidewater go through BC, and you don’t even sound like a BC politician to me right now, Gordon, but they have been a barrier here in terms of moving oil and gas and natural gas through BC. And so what do you think that the BC government led by David Eby would support? Because we did get some signs last week in the media reports that he was pretty cool to Smith’s idea of a gateway or a Prince Rupert oil pipeline. Maybe natural gas is more something that BC would support.
Gordon Campbell:
Well, I’m sorry I don’t sound like a BC. politician. I guess that’s because I’m not one anymore. But I can tell you this, if I had been the Premier in 2012 when Stephen Harper said, “We’re going to stop focusing on going south into the United States, we’re going to start going across,” I would’ve said, “Great, let’s go and let’s get this pipeline built.” David Eby is not going to say that. We have to bring the pressure on him to say it. It’s kind of, if you want, the theme of today’s show, David Eby’s idea of economic development or of dealing with the trade war is to say, “I’m not going to buy liquor from red states.” My idea of dealing with the trade war is to make Canada economically independent, to create new opportunities to the west and to the east, to combine all those joint resources of Canada and deal with the world on the world market like we would with the hockey team.
When we went to the Olympics, we don’t say to our best players, “You’re going to be benched for a while. We hope that’s okay.” We want McDavid on the ice with Mitch Marner, with Nate McKinnon. We want them to be there so we can score the last goal. This is a big, huge international competition and people only care about Canada if they have to care about Canada. We have to be there. I don’t know what Mr. Eby will do, but I think Mr. Eby says one thing at one time and another thing another. In fact, we had reports that he said one thing at the press conference with the premiers and another thing outside the press conference with the premiers.
I can tell you this, a nationally acceptable, important and critical project is the Northern Gateway Pipeline, which the federal government stopped, that it should be put through. There should be a commitment to do it. British Columbians, whether Mr. Eby will like it or not, will support that for sure. There’s no question about it. Look at that entire region and look at the politics of that, it all was really driven by the… They all voted Conservative. They want this to happen. They don’t want it held back. And I think that we in British Columbia have to make a fuss about the fact that we want to be part of that energy corridor. We want to be part of that energy industry.
When I was elected, one of the first things I said to the energy industry is, “How do we revitalize our energy industry in the northeast part of the province?” They gave me a whole list of things. I said, “Well, I’ll do five at once.” We did the first five, and within a month we had the largest single gas lease in the history of the province. Industry will work with government when government sets goals and objectives. And I think our goal and objective should be to get that pipeline through to Prince Rupert and out across the Pacific to the countries that need it.
Peter Tertzakian:
You talked about gateway and oil, and I think we can agree oil is far more contentious than natural gas and LNG. Can you talk about LNG?
Gordon Campbell:
Yeah, I think LNG is a huge opportunity for Canada. I’m glad that we’ve got it started, but the myth that we’ve got, we have tons of capacity is not correct. There’s an awful lot of demand. Remember Canada, the former Liberal government in Canada said to people, “Oh no, we don’t have really any business case here.” Well, Canada’s the only country in the world that didn’t see a business case to deliver our energy, our LNG to the international marketplace. There was Greece, there was Germany, there was Japan. They came, they were told, “No, there’s no business case really.” Well, there is a business case. It’s not just a business case, it’s an environmental case. There’s huge opportunities that are created by that. I take my hat off to the premier, I think subsequent premier to me, Christy Clark who pushed really hard to get LNG moving through the province and out into the international marketplace. I think we should keep doing that.
Jackie Forrest:
Hey, I’m a believer in LNG as well, but the EB government hasn’t always been. They had a requirement of net zero LNG by 2030, which is basically impossible. That’s basically saying we don’t want an industry. Now, they have relaxed that recently and they’re now going to allow facilities to be net zero when the electricity is available. Do you think there’s a softening towards the support for LNG with the current BC NDP government?
Gordon Campbell:
I hope there is. But I have the same skepticism with this as I do federally. I just wish that we would recognize that a strong economy is what gives us the opportunities to invest in healthcare, to invest in education. There’s so much that we have to change and do better at. I really think it’s important.
Jackie Forrest:
We’re coming to the end or near the end, and I wanted to talk a bit about policy. I think one of the barriers to investing both in clean energy and oil and gas is the carbon price situation. So it increases right now the industrial carbon tax to $170 a ton by 2030. And many industry executives say that that’s a barrier to investing, especially versus the United States, which has no carbon cost. Now we have Daniel Smith that said Alberta is freezing the carbon price at $95 a ton and no longer following that federal route.
We have the CEOs, there’s something like almost 40 CEOs have said, “You should just scrap the policy altogether if you want to see investment in this country.” And we’ve got some real problems with our existing carbon markets. Right now, Alberta’s price should be $95 for offsets, but it’s $30 because we’re oversupplied. We have all these little markets in the country and we don’t have a big enough pool of buyers and sellers to create price stability. It just isn’t working. What do you think should be done on the carbon markets, recognizing that they do fall into that area of inter-provincial challenges where the provinces want to control their markets?
Gordon Campbell:
I think we’re better off when we let the provinces control their markets. I think that, frankly, you probably know this, but I was a premier who brought in what we called a revenue neutral carbon tax. So for every dollar that you took in for a carbon tax, you had a reduction in personal or business income tax. That was the idea behind it. And I can remember having an argument with Brad Wall over whether that would work or not, and Brad said to me, “You know Gordon, it’s nice that you’re there and that you’re doing that, but as soon as you get a new government, they’re going to get rid of the revenue neutrality.” And it wasn’t quite that fast, but when our government was changed to the BC NDP who voted against the revenue neutral carbon tax, they just decided what they didn’t like was a revenue neutrality. So they kept the carbon tax and they got rid of the neutrality.
Let me just go back to the beginning. What do the investors tell you they need to invest? We’re not going to beat the investors. They don’t need to bring their money here. They don’t need to invest in Canada, in Canada’s energy resources, in our mineral resources. They don’t need Canada. We may want them to, but they don’t need us. So we better start paying attention to what they say. I think Premier Smith was absolutely correct in what she did saying she was going to basically leave it at 95. But when you’ve got 40 CEOs are saying, “This isn’t going to work, guys,” when you’ve got the international community saying, “This is unfair for Canadian industry. What happened to be in the best industry in the G7?” You can’t turn your back on the people that are going to do the work that you’re expecting them to do.
So I really think we should start listening to people. They care about Canada. They care about what they’re doing. They care about their communities they’re doing it in. They care about the environment. They all want to have a good strong environment. I’ll tell you what gives us the tools to have the environment the way we’d like it, a strong economy. A strong economy needs private sector investment. It doesn’t need more public debt. It needs more private sector investment.
Jackie Forrest:
And one thing we’ll be watching for is some changes in these policies because we have to attract the capital. We don’t need to go into it. But another obvious one is this oil and gas cap. If we do have these nation building projects, and I do hope this is the case that they support LNG exports, well, how can you have a, we’ll call it a green light policy, I’ll use Peter’s terminology on the exports, so you’re trying to get more exports out, but then you have a red light policy on the upstream saying, “We’re constraining the supply side with the oil and gas emissions cap.” So we have to kind of look holistically and see some major changes. Because for anyone coming along investing in LNG terminal, they’re going to be like, “That’s a bit of a problem. How do I know the gas will be there if we’ve got this other constraining policy on the other end?”
Gordon Campbell:
Best we can say today is we’ve got an amber light. We don’t have a green light. We look more like we have a red light. So if people want to give the government the benefit of the doubt, it could be amber. Right now, I’m still thinking as red.
Peter Tertzakian:
Well, I think that’s part of the debate that we talked about today. We started out talking about whether or not words can transpire into action, sort of conjectured also that before the words, there’s beliefs and whether or not the beliefs have changed as a consequence of the world order changing and the economic circumstances, the political and geopolitical circumstances, we’re all on the same team in Canada. I certainly believe that. But I also get the sense that we don’t all agree on the rules yet. The only thing we agree on is that the rules have to change, given the changes in the world order and the world circumstances.
So I think that it’s going to be very interesting. It’s been a very tumultuous last few months, both south of the border and on this side of the border all the way starting from the resignation of Prime Minister Trudeau, the election, and now where we are today. So I guess how the rules get resolved are going to dictate, we fully agree with that, are going to dictate what gets built, because Jackie and I have talked extensively on this podcast that investors need clarity, investors need a simplicity before they will come and invest. And definitely we need more private sector investment, whatever the projects are deemed to get built. So there’s no question the rules need to get resolved, and once they get resolved and clarified, and hopefully they won’t be too complex, it will also dictate what will get done and by when.
We’ve been talking with the Honourable Gordon Campbell, former Premier of British Columbia, former High Commissioner to the UK and, as I said, I didn’t know it, former Mayor of Vancouver. Gordon, it’s been a pleasure to talk to you and get your perspectives.
Gordon Campbell:
Thank you very much, Peter. Good to talk with you and Jackie too.
Jackie Forrest:
Thank you. And thanks to our listeners. If you enjoyed this podcast, please rate us on the app that you listened to and tell someone else about us.
Announcer:
For more ideas and insights, visit arcenergyinstitute.com.
