B.C. Premier David Eby – who has vehemently opposed Alberta’s pursuit for a new bitumen pipeline to the West Coast – says he is open to a pipeline project in his province if the tanker ban remains in place.

“No, I think we can have those conversations,” Eby said in an interview with CTV Question Period airing Sunday, when asked by host Vassy Kapelos whether he is against additional export capacity that does not impact the federal tanker ban.

“My anxiety is about this oil tanker ban, which is the foundational social license piece for tens of billions of dollars of investment in B.C.”

“If we can agree that the oil tanker ban is going to stay in place, then let’s have those conversations,” Eby later added.

“I think that would make life a lot better and easier in British Columbia in terms of our relationship with coastal First Nations. (It) would definitely take down the temperature and maybe enable some creative solutions.”

Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith signed a historic energy co-operation agreement on Thursday, outlining the conditions that need to be met for a new oil pipeline to the Pacific to proceed.

In the memorandum of understanding (MOU), Alberta has agreed to negotiate an industrial carbon pricing agreement by April 2026 that would implement an industrial carbon price with a floor of $130 per tonne.

In return, the federal Liberals have agreed to suspend the clean electricity regulations in the province, not implement the oil and gas emissions cap, and if required, make an exemption to the federal tanker ban.

Carney also made it clear on Thursday that a new pipeline will only happen if a private sector proponent comes forward.

Eby: ‘Grave mistake’ to lift tanker ban

Leading up to the MOU announcement, Eby called it “unacceptable” that his province had been excluded from those discussions and warned that a tanker ban exemption would threaten projects already in development in the B.C. north coast region and consensus among coastal First Nations.

The tanker ban was enacted in 2019 and prohibits oil tankers carrying over 12,500 metric tons of crude or persistent oil from docking, loading or unloading at ports on the B.C. north coast.

According to the MOU, there is a commitment to construct “one or more private sector constructed and financed pipelines, with Indigenous Peoples co-ownership and economic benefits” with a “route that increases export access to Asian markets.” But there is no explicit obligation for a pipeline that would route through the B.C. north coast.

Asked by Kapelos if his opposition is contingent on where the potential pipeline goes, Eby reiterated that the tanker ban should remain.

“I think it’s a grave mistake to get rid of the oil tanker ban off the north coast of British Columbia,” he said. “I think that the risk of an oil spill is really significant in terms of the economic harm.”

Eby also pointed to the B.C. government’s recent support to move more Alberta crude oil to the West Coast by increasing capacity to the Trans Mountain pipeline by 40 per cent, with results as early as 2026.

“We’ve offered that up to Alberta to say we’re happy to work with you on this. And I say happy, but it’s gritted teeth,” Eby said.

“We fought that pipeline pretty hard for similar concerns, but it’s built now. It’s publicly owned. It is a moment for Canada. We’re willing to sit at the table and work out those details and get it done,” he added.

When asked by Kapelos about his change in tone compared to weeks past, Eby acknowledged the federal government’s jurisdiction over projects that cross provincial borders.

“If the federal government is going to impose this on British Columbia, they’re going to impose it on British Columbia. We’ve been down that road. I don’t think it’s beneficial to be fighting,” Eby said.

In a separate interview with CTV Question Period, former Kinder Morgan Canada president Ian Anderson said the market will dictate the path of a new pipeline.

“The market should decide where that pipeline ends up. Is it Kitimat? Is it Prince Rupert? Is it Vancouver?,” Anderson said.

“Do we go back to Vancouver and build another pipe, along the existing Trans Mountain Group, which is always an alternative. I think that the market has got to now respond.”

Eby, federal energy minister have ‘frank’ conversation

The MOU, meanwhile, states that Canada and Alberta have agreed to “engage” with British Columbia “to further the economic interests of B.C. related to their own projects of interest.”

Eby met with Energy and Natural Resources Minister Tim Hodgson in B.C. about the energy deal on Friday and described the conversation as “frank.”

“It was a challenging, but frank exchange between us,” Eby told Kapelos. “I had to outline again, for the minister, why it is that British Columbia is concerned about what happened in Alberta in terms of this agreement about the pipeline proposal that Premier Smith is advancing.”

Eby also said while it’s “important” for Carney to “de-escalate tensions with Alberta,” he reiterated the importance for B.C. to be “at the table too.”

Meanwhile, in an interview with CTV Power Play on Thursday, when asked why B.C. was not more involved in the MOU talks, Hodgson did not answer directly but said “we need to work together with British Columbia.”

“It’s part of the agreement. It calls for a trilateral table to advance things, and it is very clear that to do some of the things Alberta wants to do, it needs to work with British Columbia,” Hodgson said.