Canada's natural resources minister isn't offering any guarantees to Alberta's premier that construction on the Trans Mountain pipeline will have resumed by the time that province's election rolls around.

The Federal Court of Appeal ruled last week that consultations done with Indigenous peoples before the $7.4 billion project was approved were insufficient, sending both the provincial and federal governments into a tailspin.

Finance Minister Bill Morneau immediately defended the Liberals' decision to nationalize the pipeline and said the government would be studying the court's ruling to find a timely way to get shovels back in the ground.

But Alberta Premier Rachel Notley wasn't satisfied with that message. Notley had been one of the federal government's few allies on its climate plan, which includes a carbon tax. She pulled her support from that program in retaliation over the Trudeau government's handling of the court decision.

Natural Resources Minister Amarjeet Sohi told The House his government is working on a "responsible" timeline to fulfil the court's requirements — but struggled to answer when pressed about the impact this would have on Notley's chances of re-election.

Notley is lagging in the polls behind United Conservative Party Leader Jason Kenney. Bringing home this pipeline project could salvage her shot at winning a second term in the spring.

She has asked Ottawa to introduce legislation to push the pipeline through the red tape, but all Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would confirm is that he's looking at "various options."

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau renew their determination to get the Trans Mountain pipeline built in their first face to face meeting since the Federal Court of Appeal decision halting construction. 3:04

The premier wasn't reassured.

"We, and the industry, are trapped on a regulatory merry-go-round, and only the federal government has the tools and the authority to bring it to a permanent stop," Notley said Thursday.

The federal government doesn't seem to share Notley's sense of urgency.

Sohi acknowledged mistakes were made by the federal government when it came to Trans Mountain, but repeatedly shifted the blame to a Harper-era National Energy Board review process. He said his priority is ensuring there are no more court challenges in the future — or, if there are, that the government will be prepared to defend the pipeline.

Natural Resources Minister Amarjeet Sohi explains how the government is working on a "responsible" timeline to fulfil the court's requirements for the Trans Mountain pipeline- but struggled to answer when pressed about the impact this would have on Notley's chances of re-election. 11:12

"Where we fell short was the implementation of the framework instead of engaging in a two-way, meaningful dialogue," he said.

"We need to do more and we will do more."

He wouldn't offer a precise timeline. But that timeline — and a clear path forward — are exactly what the two opposition parties want to see.

"They need to answer exactly what the concrete next steps are immediately," Shannon Stubbs, the Conservative natural resources critic, told The House.





Opposition MPs forced an emergency meeting of the natural resources committee this week, with the goal of calling on cabinet ministers to testify — but Liberal members who hold the majority on the committee voted down the motion.



"Here's where British Columbians and Albertans are united," NDP MP Nathan Cullen told host Chris Hall.

"We were both promised something from this prime minister. He told Albertans, 'I'm going to get your product to market.' He told British Columbians, 'I'm going to put it under a proper review.' He has done neither."



Though the NDP and the Conservatives stand on opposite ends of this issue, both are pressing for answers from the governing party.

The NDP's Nathan Cullen and Conservative natural resources critic Shannon Stubbs weigh in on the Trudeau government's response to the court's ruling on Trans Mountain. 9:12

Anonymous Trump editorial highlights the need to check facts, expert says

President Donald Trump has threatened to leave Canada out of a deal with Mexico and the U.S. (Evan Vucci/Associated Press)

The uproar created by an opinion piece written by a Trump administration official signals a critical juncture for both journalism and democracy, according to a media ethics expert.

"I'm calling this Op-Ed Gate," Michele Weldon, a professor emerita at Northwestern University in Chicago, told The House.

"This is a chaotic time."

The article, published by the New York Times, outlines what the unnamed author claims is the work of administration officials to save the U.S. from its president.

But the anonymity of the piece is a red flag to Weldon.

"It really is troubling on many different levels that this doesn't have a byline," she said.

The article has Trump fuming, while senior officials in his administration scramble to deny they wrote it. 5:30

The NYT's decision to publish the article means, said Weldon, that people are getting pushed to desperation by the actions of Donald Trump. It's a situation she suggests calls for more careful fact-checking, both by journalists and by citizens who consume their work.

"You can't fact-check erratic behaviour," she said, adding journalists now have a duty to corroborate as much of their information as possible.

For example, the anonymous author's claim that insiders were trying to have Trump declared unfit for office could be confirmed by other senior officials.

While an international guessing game continues over the identity of the official, Weldon said it's important to address the harm that will arise out of the Times' decision to publish the "shocking and outrageous statements."

The information may be pertinent to the public, but Weldon said it's important to balance that with the responsibility to avoid causing hysteria.

Media ethics expert Michele Weldon talks about the rationale behind the New York Times' decision to publish an editorial from a Trump White House insider and the effect that has on democracy. 7:41

Should Scheer make peace with Bernier?

Conservative Party of Canada leader Andrew Scheer was criticized by former MP Maxime Bernier, who called him too weak to lead the party. (Andrew Vaughan/Canadian Press)

Maxime Bernier's fiery departure from the Conservative party drew the ire of its leaders, though they seemed reluctant to mention him by name at the party's recent convention. In an effort to minimize the fallout, party officials seem to be resisting tackling the issue head-on.

However, Bernier maintains strong support in factions of the party — demonstrated by his second-place finish in the leadership race last May — and his split could draw enough votes away to thwart party leader Andrew Scheer's shot at government.

It's a danger that Bob Plamondon, a consultant and author who has written about the party, believes Scheer still has time to address.

"He has to bring the family back together," he told The House.

Plamondon said he thinks there's still time to reattach Bernier to the Conservative party and reach out to the people who follow him.

He added Scheer might not have a choice if he wants to win in 2019.

"When the family is split, the Conservatives have never had any hope of winning, and that's been true over the history of Canada."

One key issue in the feud between Scheer and Bernier is the dairy sector and Canada's supply management system.

A large chunk of farmers supported Scheer's leadership campaign, but Plamondon said it might be time to consider breaking off that commitment.

"Good politicians know when and how to break bad campaign promises," he said.