The only thing that took the Liberals from third-party status to majority government was Justin Trudeau.

The only thing that will ever take the federal NDP from third-party status to something better is Jagmeet Singh.

That’s the theory, at least.

But Singh’s bid to become the real progressive on the block faces a lot of problems. First, there is Trudeau’s enduring personal popularity — not to be underestimated. Nor is it likely the NDP leader will have much appeal for the Kool-Aid drinkers who support the Conservatives and Parson Scheer. But Singh’s biggest problem is not his political opponents. It’s the NDP itself.

Provincial NDP governments are a potential bear-trap for the new federal leader. Nowhere is that clearer than in Alberta. NDP Premier Rachel Notley has done a better job of promoting new pipelines than any Conservative premier before her.

In fact, it is hard to see how a Premier Jason Kenney could out-perform Notley at cheerleading for fossil fuels and the tar sands — or at completely obfuscating the mortal threat of climate change.

Singh, on the other hand, is selling a different bar of soap, and so is the national party; that’s their story, at any rate. Although he stops short of opposing fossil fuel projects on principle, Singh’s three criteria for such projects effectively do just that.

The new NDP leader says any such projects must respect the principles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, meet climate change goals and create local opportunities. Implied by that notion of ‘local opportunities’ is the idea that energy projects should offer the jobs of the future, not those of the past.

Singh clearly is trying to take advantage of the Trudeau government’s unprincipled backtracking on the environment. And good for him. Although Trudeau and Environment Minister Catherine McKenna continue to say all the right things on the environment, their rhetoric is emptier than a limp balloon. The PM’s support for projects like Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, and his failure to re-do the Harper era’s industry-friendly environmental assessment process, have tarnished his armour.

So it appears there is a political opening here for Singh the environmentalist — a chance to assure the nation’s young people that he, unlike Trudeau, really means what he says about protecting the planet. But with Notley delivering her nearsighted message on pipelines — a shrill injunction to Ottawa and provincial governments to support them as some kind of national mission — the opportunity for Singh to score political points is now more apparent than real.

For all his hoopla about being the real progressive, Singh didn’t look much like an environmentalist on his recent trip to Alberta. More like Rachel Notley’s lapdog. Although he did not meet the premier personally, the new federal leader had nothing to say about her tar sands policy. In fact, he praised Notley for keeping her word from the campaign trail about fighting for Alberta’s oil and gas economy.

Jagmeet Singh can kiss goodbye any chance of shaming the Trudeau government over its enabling of Site C if his own political bedfellows do the same thing. Jagmeet Singh can kiss goodbye any chance of shaming the Trudeau government over its enabling of Site C if his own political bedfellows do the same thing.

Where was his stated opposition to Kinder Morgan? He kept quiet on the topic while he was in Wild Rose country. It was also absent when he told Global News that, in effect, Notley was a champion of the environment. So when he later tried to shift the burden of his environmental righteousness onto Justin Trudeau, it was more than unconvincing. It was hypocritical. The new leader suddenly looked quite old.

And when he crossed the border into B.C. on his national getting-to-know-Jagmeet tour, he got even older. Once in B.C., Singh trumpeted his support for the new NDP government and its opposition to Kinder Morgan.

It was the old political stunt of tailoring the message to the audience. If you’re against Kinder Morgan in British Columbia you probably should be against it in Alberta too — unless, that is, political advantage is higher on your priority list than principle.

Early in the game, Singh failed a fundamental test of leadership by telling people what they want to hear, instead of what he really believes.

That said, British Columbia represents another danger to Singh which is not his fault but might end up as his problem — the Site C dam dilemma.

This obvious boondoggle from the Christy Clark era was given approval and permits by the Trudeau Liberals. Opponents of the $9 billion dam have been fighting a pitched battle to stop the project, which is already over-budget, behind schedule and, in the opinion of many experts, completely unnecessary.

During the election, NDP Leader John Horgan promised to return this rogue project to the British Columbia Utilities Commission for an assessment of its desirability and viability.

That’s where the matter should have been decided in the first place, but under Premier Clark, the provincial government was a one-woman show. The BCUC has handed in its report to premier Horgan. Now the government has to decide whether to fish or cut bait on the Peace River.

On the merits, the Site C decision should be a no-brainer. Even a former president of B.C. Hydro, Marc Eliesen, thinks the true cost of the project will be 30 per cent higher than the utility’s $9 billion estimate. A similar cost overrun in Newfoundland’s Muskrat Falls hydro dam could end up costing Newfoundland ratepayers a staggering $1,800 more per year on their hydro bills.

Construction on Site C is behind schedule and will only fall further behind now that two “cracks” have appeared in the banks of the Peace River. These “geotechnical problems,” as B.C. Hydro’s president Chris O’Reilly called them, will delay work for another year.

With other energy alternatives available (geothermal, wind and solar) and no immediate customer or provincial need for Site C’s power, one would think that pulling the plug $2 billion into a nightmare in the making would not be a hard call to make.

Ah, but politics … Staunch NDP supporters in the labour movement are lobbying hard for Premier Horgan to greenlight Site C. Despite the voodoo economics and the prospect of ruining of a great river, the Allied Hydro Council of British Columbia wants the jobs. Acknowledging all the warts of Site C, the group’s president, Chris Feller, wants the new NDP government “to make the best” of a bad situation and press on.

And there is another source of pressure on Horgan. What will business leaders conclude about the investment climate in British Columbia if the new government cancels an unfinished megaproject? And if that happens, how will B.C. ratepayers feel about an extra 10 per cent on their hydro bills to pay for nothing? Build or don’t build: either way, the question must be answered by December 31.

Should the Horgan government allow Site C to proceed, the NDP can kiss goodbye a sizeable portion of those voters who supported them because they believed Horgan would stop the dam. And Jagmeet Singh can kiss goodbye any chance of shaming the Trudeau government over its enabling of Site C if his own political bedfellows do the same thing.

Singh’s efforts to define what his NDP stands for is off to a very shaky start. If this continues, the only authentic progressive left standing to challenge Justin Trudeau might end up being Elizabeth May.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.