Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tried to do the impossible this week. He tried to break the media complex that ties economic might, energy industries and regional identity together in a tightly bound Gordian knot by launching a listening tour in Alberta — where the global drop in the price of oil has slashed corporate budgets and swelled the number of jobless Canadians.

He heard from corporate executives about layoffs. He promised Premier Rachel Notley to fast-track $750 million in already-announced infrastructure money and he confirmed Ottawa was moving quickly on another $250 million in emergency support. But he didn’t budge on suggestions he reconsider making a climate change analysis a prerequisite for federal pipeline and LNG terminal approvals.

His choice to go to the centre of the storm is commendable. Still, many pundits in Alberta accused Trudeau of delivering nothing substantial — claiming he steered clear of any promises to make Employment Insurance more flexible.

But no concession would have been enough to stem the immediate bleeding. In Canada, the association between economic heft and provincial pride runs deep, and long-standing beliefs about negligence and marginalization by Ottawa or any other centres of power are difficult to overcome. The prime minister — a Liberal leader whose last name happens to be Trudeau — hopefully inched the country away from that attitude a little this week.

Receiving help from the federal government should be something every Canadian sees as a right — not the result of some obscure argument about whether one part of the country is ‘better’ than another. Ottawa should be there to make sure Canadians help each other in reaching a similar level of economic opportunity and quality of life.

In large part, that job gets done. But recent months have put a strain on our ability to come together behind a shared economic vision. The federal government’s regulation of the energy sector, beginning with the Harper government’s reforms to the National Energy Board’s mandate and continuing with Trudeau’s own vague changes two weeks ago, is in deep disarray on this front.

No one knows yet how to align the stars on an amicable energy transition away from fossil fuels. Or at least the plan isn’t obvious yet.

At the very least, this haphazard path to a low-carbon economy — the kind of approach pushed by Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre and others — should stop. Better to be in the room together, instead of yelling at each other from separate podiums.

Given how difficult this challenge will be, the federal government should make the debate about offering equal opportunities and access to services across the country.

Take employment insurance (EI). The conversation has revolved around making benefits more generous and easier to access. But that’s only the edge of reform.

In 2011, Ontario’s Mowat Centre recommended a change to the way local unemployment rates determine whether a person is eligible for benefits, the size of the benefits and the period of time the benefits are available. Proposed changes to EI in 2012 by the then-Conservative government proved so contentious in Atlantic Canada, where seasonal industries are the backbone of the economy, that only minor tweaks to the system were enacted.

But the problem that the think-tank identified still exists. Canada’s EI system helps workers at different levels, depending on where they live, discouraging them from going where the jobs are. Better labour mobility would put all Canadians in the same boat, and the Liberals should try to pursue that when they do get around to changing EI.

Their efforts shouldn’t stop there. The government’s role in propping up industries — manufacturing, the oilsands, LNG in British Columbia — is another critical tool for leveling-out economic opportunities. Many forget it was the interest and support of a federal Liberal government that helped turn advances in oilsands technology into an economic behemoth. When Ottawa gets around to promising substantive stimulus to certain industries — especially in clean technology — it should strive to allot the spending in a way that benefits the regions of the country equally.

The pipeline quagmire, and the awful situation in the oil sector generally, are touching a national nerve — ginning up the argument about who’s paying their fair share for our collective future. Hopefully, Trudeau’s talk of seeing the challenges through a lens of shared responsibility will continue far beyond a final decision on helping Alberta.