Are you saying that overall the governments of Canada put out more than they get back in O&G? I think even if it were a break even proposition the ability to be energy self sufficient has significant value.
Here's a biased bunny hugger site that is surely overstating the subsidies;
https://environmentaldefence.ca/report/the-elephant-in-the-room-canadas-fossil-fuel-subsidies/
Here's the Gov. data on what they take in;
https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy-and-economy/20062
Some quotes from the link above provided by your Liberal friends in Ottawa;
--An important share of government revenues is collected from the oil and gas industry, which averaged $14.8 billion over the last five years, including $11.8 billion from upstream oil and gas extraction and its support activities.
Between 2013 and 2017, the energy sector’s share of total taxes paid by all industries was 7.7% and brought in nearly 11% of all operating revenues earned by governments in Canada.
Unrelated to subsidies but an indication of how much more money comes back into the economy in return for the investment (subsidies) in just one example.
-- Capital expenditures in Canada’s energy sector total $75 billion in 2018, 36% lower from a peak in 2014.
Investment has been stable over the last three years, with oil and gas extraction being the largest contributor at $36.7 billion in 2018, followed by electric power generation and transmission at $24.3 billion.
Canada has to stay competitive the other G7 members have given over $100 billion per year to oil, gas and coal companies at home and abroad since they signed the 2015 Paris Agreement. Even with subsidies the country is revenue positive. But I digress getting back to the original point of this thread, how would ending subsidies help at the pumps?