HARDING: If Alberta leaves, British Columbia is next, not Saskatchewan

Support for Western independence is strongest in Alberta, but Saskatchewan isn’t far behind. Its people share the same grievances that Albertans have with Ottawa and the way Canadian federalism currently operates. However, if Alberta did leave Canada, that province’s eastern neighbour would not be the first to join. Its western neighbour, British Columbia, would join first, then take the West with it.A recent study published by the Library of Parliament suggested that British Columbia and Alberta were the only net contributors to Canada in the entire country. With revenues, expenditures, and transfers taken into account, all other provinces are net takers. Ottawa took a net of roughly $4,000 per Albertan and $1,000 per British Columbian. When taxation revenues and federal transfers were considered, Saskatchewan and Manitoba received more per capita through Canadian federalism than Ontario or Quebec did, but less than any Atlantic province did.Some Saskatchewan residents wonder how this could be, given that Saskatchewan, British Columbia, and Alberta are the only three provinces that do not receive equalization payments. The answer is that Saskatchewan still receives other transfers. As in Manitoba, a comparatively large percentage of Saskatchewan’s residents are Status Indians, with perks that largely fall under federal jurisdiction. Relative to non-status people, they have lower employment levels and higher healthcare costs, partly due to supplemental care paid for by the federal government that other Canadians do not enjoy. And, thanks to a court decision, there are tax exemptions for items sold on reserve and money earned on reserve. In such circumstances, expenditures go their way, but tax revenue doesn’t come back..If Alberta leaves, would BC want to stay to prop up the rest of Canada, connected to it only through the territories? Likely not. Some kind of new national union with Alberta would not drain BC’s resources through equalization or other transfers. In fact, BC might be more willing than ever to have Alberta join before the United States snatches it up and everything gets shipped out of Washington state instead. For its part, Alberta would be keen to maintain access to the BC coast to export its resources..BC also has governmental reasons to leave Canada. It would no longer care about the fact that Quebec has three of the nine seats on the Supreme Court, while the entire West has one. Nor would BC care that it has only one senator for every 951,000 citizens, while PEI has one for every 45,000.Incidentally, Saskatchewan has one senator for every 213,000 residents — a better ratio than in any other non-Atlantic province. Even so, Saskatchewan would likely join the new nation next. Saskatchewan’s resource-based economy can’t afford to lose the ability to ship potash and agricultural exports to Asian markets. Saskatchewan and Alberta became provinces in the same year, 1905, and have similar political sentiments. That makes it likely that Alberta would accept it, along with BC, into the new country.Besides, Saskatchewan should be tethered to the winners instead of the losers to the east. Atlantic Canada is an economic laggard, Quebec is a francophone socialist outlier only half-heartedly part of Canada anyway, and Ontario has the largest public debt of any subnational government in the world.From there, the new nation would want to renew access to European markets across the Atlantic via Hudson Bay and the Arctic Ocean. The acceptance of Manitoba would make sense for both sides. Again, it’s better for Manitoba to be joined with Western winners than Eastern losers. And a rail link straight west to the Pacific Ocean would still be handy to maintain..With Manitoba on board, and perhaps even without it, the territories would join as well. Sir Frederick Haultain’s dream of the province of Buffalo, one that spanned the Canadian West, would finally manifest in a way he did not envision: as its own country.What would be the capital of this new political entity? Kelowna? Calgary? Saskatoon? It matters little. Any choice would still be closer than Ottawa, which is yet another reason for the West to form its own country.To repeat, none of these dominoes are likely to fall because the first one, Alberta independence, is also unlikely. However, these very conceivable consequences should make Laurentian Canadians think twice about how they value the West. The time for disrespecting pipelines or dismissing Western values and grievances must end. So must BC’s and Alberta’s poor representation in the Senate, Quebec’s dominance of the Supreme Court, and an over-greedy, distorted equalization system.The West is Canada, not some colony to be dominated by the regions to the east. A renewed Canada would regard the interests of the West as just as vital to the national interest as those of Ontario, Quebec, or Atlantic Canada. That is a more likely and more desirable result than Alberta independence itself.

HARDING: If Alberta leaves, British Columbia is next, not Saskatchewan

Related Stories

KAPLAN: Albertans could send $900 billion more to Ottawa than receive back over the next 25 years

MACLEOD: Carney’s ‘nation-building’ illusion — Canadian LNG, Canadian workers, but Chinese steel

HANNAFORD: Two Carneys, one question

HANNAFORD: Eby's $10 daycare — likely the most expensive he'll ever pay for