losing what? Please step-in for the lack of kimmy linked substantiation... while you're doing that, don't hesitate to challenge anything I've stated in regards to the historical references and causal ties I state here - or here... waiting, waiting, waiting.....
I had sought to contrast an actual industry-building program-- the NOP-- with the destructive idiocy of the NEP. I had been of the belief that the oil pipeline had been build as a result of the NOP, but it had been built earlier, by private industry. I gave the NOP more credit than it deserved. Mea culpa.
That said, the NOP was an actual industry-building program that served Canada well. Creating a "captive market" for Alberta oil during the years when it wasn't cost-competitive with imported oil was a major boost for the industry.
For 12 years-- 1961 to 1973-- Quebec refineries and industries and consumers had a competitive advantage over their Ontario counterparts, because Ontario was on the wrong side of the "Borden Line". And then everything changed. If you google for "Borden Line", you'll discover it became a major point of anger in Quebec sovereigntist thought. Sovereigntist revisionism has the Borden Line as being a plot by Les Anglos to advantage Ontario's petrochemical industry at the expense of Quebec's, howling mad about the closure of Montreal refineries and the loss of jobs. Ultimately it turns out that Ontario was on the right side of the Borden Line, not the wrong side.
And, while Ontario consumers may feel they were hard done by for having to pay ~$4/barrel for Alberta oil at a time when import oil could be purchase for ~$3 during those 12 years, I think it's reasonable to point out that the rest of Canada had been likewise been a "captive market" for Central Canada-manufactured products for a very long time, as tariffs and taxes and import duties made sure Central-Canadian producers weren't undercut by foreign competitors.
As for the other point-- whether the Borden Line was a result of Quebec opposition or a federal decision, yes, it appears to be the case that the decision was made at the federal level-- but I'm sure that the owners of Quebec refineries weren't unhappy about getting to continue to buy cheap import oil while their Ontario competitors were forced to buy more expensive Canadian oil. How much say industry players had in shaping that decision is a matter of speculation.
So in summary, I acknowledge the mistake of attributing the oil pipeline to the NOP. The main point-- the example of the NOP as a policy that benefited both the industry and the country-- remains.
-k