Responding to a media question about Iran restricting the movement of oil though the Strait of Hormuz, Prime Minister Mark Carney on June 16th stated that “we have to take our lessons from this, and one of the big lessons here is ‘don’t be held hostage to one chokepoint’ in the global economy, whether that’s for oil, for gas…”, etc.
That statement was not only timely; it was a clear articulation of a principle that is not only a reflection of responsible leadership as it applies in a global context. It is a principle that must be applied at home — in Canada — and nowhere more urgently than in Newfoundland and Labrador.
For more than fifty years, our province has endured the consequences of being held hostage to a single chokepoint in its own energy economy: Quebec’s control over the transmission of Churchill Falls power.
Since 1969, Newfoundland and Labrador has been constrained — economically, structurally, and strategically — by a transmission arrangement that no modern confederation should accept. Quebec’s refusal to permit fair, market‑based access to transmission corridors has created precisely the situation that the Prime Minister warned the world about: a jurisdiction forced into dependence on a single gatekeeper.
This is not merely a historical grievance. It is an ongoing structural imbalance that continues to shape our province’s economic prospects and bargaining position.
Both Prime Minster Carney and Premier Wakeham are now in a position to ensure that Newfoundland and Labrador does not enter the next half‑century with the same vulnerability that defined the last.
As Canada transitions toward a net‑zero economy, the need for Atlantic Canada and east‑west electricity cooperation has never been greater. The federal government cannot allow the next generation of Atlantic energy development — whether Gull Island, wind‑to‑hydrogen, or expanded hydro capacity — to be constrained by the same chokepoint that in the past has defined the Churchill Falls era. The Prime Minister’s own words make the case: no region should be held hostage to a single route, a single gatekeeper, a chokepoint, or a single point of failure.
Prime Minister Carney and Premier Wakeham now have an opportunity — and I would argue an obligation — to ensure that any future agreements, whether with Quebec, other provinces or U.S. exports, reflect the best interests of Newfoundland and Labrador, not just the interests of the party controlling a chokepoint. This includes insisting on equitable transmission access, ensuring that negotiations are grounded in the Churchill River’s true valuation and fairness, and making clear that our province will not accept arrangements that perpetuate structural dependence.
At the same time, if the principle articulated by the Prime Minister is to mean anything, then the federal government must work to develop transmission routes that do not create a single chokepoint. Whether that means strengthening the Atlantic Loop, expanding subsea transmission capacity, or supporting new interprovincial corridors, the goal must be the same: ensuring that no province can unilaterally restrict Newfoundland and Labrador’s ability to participate fully in the national energy economy.
This is not about revisiting old disputes. It is about applying a clear, fundamental principle — articulated by the Prime Minister himself — to ensure that Newfoundland and Labrador’s future is not constrained by the structural vulnerabilities of its past. It is about ensuring that one of the most energy‑rich jurisdictions in the country is not forced into the same chokepoint dynamic the Prime Minister cautioned the world against.
The Prime Minister’s comments are correct. Chokepoints distort markets, undermine security, and weaken the resilience of the systems that depend on them. Newfoundland and Labrador has lived that reality for 55 years. The question now is whether government will ensure that NL will not continue to bear the consequences of a chokepoint that should never have been allowed to define our economic future.
The time has come for Newfoundland and Labrador to insist — firmly and publicly — that no government should be held hostage to a single chokepoint, whether in the Strait of Hormuz or on the transmission lines between Labrador and Quebec.
NL must take a strong, principled position consistent with this national lesson: support equitable access, support structural alternatives, and support a future in which Newfoundland and Labrador’s energy resources can finally move freely within the country they help power.