Taxpayers could be on hook for West Coast pipeline, but it's a 'good investment': Energy minister

Energy Minister Tim Hodgson says a second pipeline to the West Coast will be money well-spent for the federal government but can't say how much Ottawa would be on the hook for.

"I am quite comfortable that this is a good investment for Canadian taxpayers," Hodgson said in an interview with CBC's Power and Politics.

According to a submission from the Alberta government, the proposed 1,200-kilometre pipeline is supposed to largely mirror the path of the existing Trans Mountain pipeline.

Instead of terminating in Burnaby, B.C., it would deviate and continue to the Robert Banks Terminal in Delta, B.C.

It's also expected to cost more than the $34-billion Trans Mountain expansion, which was massively over-budget and delayed. The province estimates it could between $35.2 billion and $43.7 billion and be completed between 2032 and 2034.

The pipeline would be built in partnership with the federal government through the government-owned Trans Mountain Corporation and the province through the Alberta Petroleum Marketing Commission.

WATCH | Hodgson calls West Coast pipeline the 'way to move forward':

The details of Alberta's pitch for a new federally funded pipeline have been revealed, and Canada's minister of energy and natural resources says it's the 'way to move forward' after news that the U.S. will not renew CUSMA. Tim Hodgson stops by Power & Politics to discuss why he believes this project is 'a good investment for Canadian taxpayers.'

A private sector proponent owns a minority stake. Pembina Pipeline will hold a 10 per cent economic interest in the project once construction begins.

During his Power and Politics interview, guest host Catherine Cullen pushed the federal energy minister on how much federal money will be invested in the new pipeline.

"I don't have the numbers in front of me right now, Catherine, so I don't want to make numbers up. But the previous pipeline cost in the $30-billion-to-$40-billion range. That's a reasonable thing to look at," Hodgson said.

The minister suggested the federal government could absorb some of the cost.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith also told Power and Politics that over the next year all of the partners in the project will work out who pays what and how much they borrow.

"We'll have to see what the final outcome looks like, what ownership stake is taken by each of the partners, how much is going to be debt financed and paid off over time, how much is going to be equity," Smith said.

WATCH | 'Increasingly likely' new oil pipeline happens, says Danielle Smith:

The details of Alberta’s pitch for a new oil pipeline to the West Coast are now public, revealing a price tag of $35 billion. Power & Politics sits down with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith to discuss why her government is prepared to use public money to foot part of that bill.

The Trudeau government purchased Trans Mountain from Kinder Morgan for $4.5 billion in 2018. Under the Trans Mountain federal crown corporation, construction on the expansion began in earnest in 2019 but was plagued by delays, regulatory hurdles and soaring construction costs.

During his interview, the energy minister said any public dollars would generate a substantial return, citing the revenues generated by Trans Mountain.

"The Trans Mountain pipeline is a money maker. It's one of the best assets that this the country has," Hodgson said. "It is generating oodles of cash."

Although the pipeline is generating revenue, when stacked against its legacy of debt it's operating at a loss, according to Thomas Gunton, a professor at Simon Fraser University who studies climate and environmental policy.

In his recent analysis, Gunton called Trans Mountain's financial reporting "misleading," registering only $12 billion in debt in 2025. The corporation, however, is masking another $23 billion in loans that it now calls equity, which Gunton and others have disputed.

"In my mind those are all public dollars going to a massively profitable industry," said Eugene Kung, a staff lawyer with West Coast Environmental Law.

"These companies are recording record profits, and yet expecting Canadians to pay for the infrastructure that only they will use. I think for Canadians struggling with the cost of living, it's a slap in the face."

WATCH | West Coast pipeline will 'fuel more climate change,' says Guilbeault:

Alberta has formally submitted a proposal to Ottawa's major projects office for an oil pipeline that will travel through southern British Columbia. Power & Politics hears from Quebec Liberal MP Steven Guilbeault, the country's former environment minister, about his concerns over the toll this new pipeline could take on both the planet and the Canadian people.

During a separate interview with CBC’s Power and Politics, former Trudeau-era environment minister Stephen Guilbeault was critical of the planned pipeline, saying it means tackling climate change is “no longer a priority” for the federal government.

Guilbeault resigned from Prime Minister Mark Carney’s federal cabinet last year, after the government signed the initial memorandum of understanding with Alberta.

The outgoing MP was especially critical of the role taxpayers will have to play in funding the project — potentially 90 per cent of the project's estimated $35.2-billion-to-$43.7-billion cost.

WATCH | Southern pipeline route unveiled:

Prime Minister Mark Carney, alongside Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, unveiled the details of a proposed oil pipeline to the West Coast. Trans Mountain Corp. will plan and construct a new pipeline out of Alberta, working closely with the Pembina Pipeline Corp., according to Carney.

Guilbeault also said he’s having a “very difficult time reconciling” the plan with what Carney has said in the past. He specifically referenced Carney’s book Values, in which the prime minister described climate change as an existential threat.

"What I told people is that they could vote for us, even people who don't usually vote for us … saying, 'He's going to continue the fight against climate change,'" Guilbeault said.

"Clearly climate change is no longer a priority for this government.”