It is not very often that a rookie backbencher MP has the potential to shake up Parliament Hill. But Linda McQuaig will be a safe bet to do just that should she manage to get elected as the New Democratic Party candidate in Toronto Centre.

Within the first week of the federal election campaign, the longtime journalist managed to upstage her party leader and actually inject a real issue into an election campaign that so far has been a phony war of platitudes, pandering promises, vapid insults and the prime minister continually reannouncing action against terrorists. Not many candidates can do what McQuaig has done.

“A lot of the oilsands oil may have to stay in the ground,” declared McQuaig during a TV panel, to the considerable horror of the Alberta oilpatch.

McQuaig might be right, but not because of any hidden NDP agenda. Simple economics will decide how much of the 1.8 trillion barrels of oil held in Canada’s oilsands will be actually extracted from the ground.

About 10% of all that oil is considered recoverable with today’s technology. Depressed oil prices and an uncertain future for fossil fuels won’t provide much economic incentive to develop technology. It may be a long time before we see oil at US$100 a barrel again.

At the end of June, the G7 leaders committed to ending all production and use of carbon-based energy by the end of this century, with lowered production targets in 2030 and 2050. As Prime Minister Harper noted: “The kind of targets we are talking about will require a transformation in our energy sector.”

OK, the G7 leaders probably won’t make their targets. But the clock is ticking slowly on carbon-based energy just the same. Which is why Saudi Arabia has developed a sudden interest in solar energy.

The prognosis for the oilsands may be better than that for the coal industry. But the negative effects of an NDP agenda on the oil industry is likely to be the last thing to worry about for the 25,000 people who work on the oilsands and the governments that depend on the royalties.

Generally, mentioning an awkward truth during an election campaign is a stupid idea, even if you are in the Opposition. But McQuaig may have done us all a service if the oilsands become an election issue because of what she said.

As a nation, we need to start thinking hard about what kind of economic strategy we require to prevent us from regressing to being hewers of wood and drawers of water (although water could very well be our leading export soon). What is our transition plan after the inevitable end of supply management in the oil and gas industry?

Elections are not the best time for intelligent discussion of important issues. But in this election, the prime minister seems loath to discuss the economy in detail beyond the usual mantras about being among the best economic managers in the G7.

Instead, a bit of discussion about diversifying and growing our economy would be good right now. McQuaig’s comments also might jar Conservatives into thinking about what they have done wrong with the oilsands.

The Harper government’s nine years of hostility toward the environmental movement and lack of enthusiasm for climate change legislation together provide a good case study of what not to do in issues management.

Those years of single-minded opposition to environmental regulation have resulted in a reverse-branding process.

As a result, the oilsands have become a bigger monster to environmentalists around the world than deserved.

They have acquired such a stigma internationally that approving the Keystone pipeline became politically impossible for the Obama administration.

Relations between Ottawa and Washington now may be worse than they were during the Diefenbaker years. This is why the U.S. shafted Canada at the Trans-Pacific Partnership talks in Hawaii in late July, with a surprise side deal with Japan on auto trade.

Win or lose, we probably haven’t heard the last from McQuaig during this election campaign. She may become the Tories’ worst nightmare.

© 2015 Investment Executive. All rights reserved.