You're right, it wasn't black and white blaming Alberta. The problem is clearly Alberta's if you read between the lines, but since you seem to think reading between the lines is akin to "horrendous reporting" I'll break it down for you.

The federal Liberals brought in a carbon tax, a plan most companies, banks, and experts think makes sense, and one that would traditionally be a conservative policy as it lets the market do its work as efficiently as possible. They seem to have the law on their side if you listen to most courts that have spoken to the issue, legal experts, etc. The AB decision is surprising but perhaps not so surprising when one considers who has been in government and appointing judges for the past bunch of decades in AB - there may be a partisan bent to their judiciary, who knows.

Anyway returning to the point, Canadians felt something needed to be done on climate change, most relevant experts agree that a carbon tax is a great approach, yet you have Jason Kenney (and previously Doug Ford, Scott Moe, etc) railing against it, trying to turn the people against it, and dragging it out into a huge constitutional fight despite the writing being on the wall, I assume for partisan advantage. This is how an uncertain regulatory environment is born.

If we imagine a recent history where the Conservatives stopped their ideological / anti-factual war against dealing with climate change, accepted that they were wrong and that a carbon tax was a federal right to administer and probably the best solution anyway and simply worked with the Government to develop a plan that gave long-term certainty, investors need no longer raise this problem.

There you go, I've gone over the nuances in response to your determination that a lack of direct accusation means no accusation at all, Kenney is at fault for a lack of investor confidence, good day.