One of the pleasures of writing columns for the Western Standard is receiving feedback. A recent email from a former law school roommate posed some interesting and relevant questions that, while unable to answer, this column can perhaps provide some perspective and context.
One addressed geography — would independence be just Alberta or also include Saskatchewan and Manitoba? To that, I would include parts of British Columbia.
The current formal process seeking support for a referendum is in Alberta only; there has been little similar activity elsewhere. The impending referendum puts Premier Danielle Smith in a difficult position, which she has handled wisely, framing it quite accurately as honouring the right of Albertans to voice their opinions.
By contrast, the lack of any meaningful voice in Ottawa, even respecting policies directly impacting Alberta, is one of the primary reasons for the frustration and disaffection with the established power structure in Canada.
Little action notwithstanding, Saskatchewan polling shows very similar values and resentment — hardly a surprise given the similar history and culture of both provinces. Early action to join Alberta would be likely.
The Premier of British Columbia, struggling to maintain power at the mercy of a few eco-centric MLAs, has called the initiative, including visits by some proponents to US politicians, “treason.”
Over time, it would not be a surprise for northeastern British Columbia, a significant and growing contributor to oil and natural gas production, to also embrace the opportunity of joining the new entity. This might also eventually extend west to Kitimat, a historical aluminum producer, and the site of the LNG Canada project, the largest in the history of the country.
With a sincere energy agenda (versus the MOU plagued by conditions), the future of Kitimat would be mouth-watering. One suspects that much of BC outside the Lower Mainland has the same disdain for the progressive elitists that hold power and favour big government and high taxes versus the freedom and prosperity of an entrepreneurial culture.
A further opinion, Manitoba is a Midwestern province like the State of Minnesota in the US, with a different history and blessed with significant hydroelectric power. Its politics, like Saskatchewan until the last few decades, exhibit socialist tendencies and comfort with the NDP, both provincially and federally. Not a good fit.
One of the shortcomings of this drive for self-determination is the myriad of groups that emerged during the Trudeau “lost decade.” Lacking cohesion and strategic leadership, one can only hope for the adage that leaders emerge when most needed.
An interesting irony — the depth of resentment that led to spontaneous reactions and the creation of many distinct initiatives also adds complexity to a coordinated and clear presentation of the very strong case. Expect the inevitable response of the federal government to be highly strategic, coordinated, and targeted.
Another revealing irony — when Quebec twice pursued independence, there was a generous and sincere response across the country, and action to satisfy Quebec issues continues; for Alberta and the West generally, the response varies from treason to dismissal, and an obvious tone of condescension.
A second question concerns the relationship with the United States (US), and in particular, future global trade issues, and especially CUSMA, now in “the hands of Trump.” This is an easier question.
The single most important export to the US is the more than 4 million daily barrels (BPD) of oil shipped mostly to the refining complex in the Midwest. Only 100,000-200,000 BPD reach the Gulf Coast.
Contrary to early comments by Trump that “we don't need Canadian oil,” the dramatic oil growth story in the US is approaching its inevitable peak, followed by declining production. Currently, the US imports more than 6 million BPD, and Canada’s share, exceeding 4 million with plans to grow, is as irreplaceable as it is necessary.
This is the result of the longstanding continental energy market and the 80 pipelines that move oil and gas across the border. All of this was damaged (along with trust) by Presidents Obama and Biden, who persisted in denying the Keystone XL Pipeline, notwithstanding regulatory approval, market demand, and the above.
So, one can understand why Trump did not levy tariffs on its most important import from Canada. An independent country would be free to negotiate trade rules that reflect geography, history, and economic common sense, with the US and other countries. And we could avoid the damage of the United Nations (the “climate crisis” and aboriginal land issues, for example) and the damaging dairy cartel. Both the UN and the dairy trade barriers are laced with Carney fingerprints.
Saskatchewan and Alberta would no longer be subject to retaliatory federal tariffs on the important canola industry, to cite a current example. Our interests will drive trade policy.
Potash is shipped by rail to an American port, maybe also be a model for oil and gas pipelines to avoid the unreliable and costly Port of Vancouver. Also, the conditions of the nonsensical MOU would delay and likely deny the important need for future oil export access. The long-demonstrated values of the Prime Minister, his pals at the United Nations and the World Economic Forum, and other perpetrators of the “climate crisis” suggest the pipeline is mere political expediency.
Carney has a deep involvement and supports the Trudeau/Butts determination to continue the self-declared posturing of Canada as a global climate leader, as if our emissions have any global impact.
Most in Alberta and Saskatchewan have much more trust in our leaders than the antagonistic ideologues in Central Canada who control the flow of power, impose their values, and deny the colonies any say whatsoever.
The opportunity to leave behind the growing mess that is Canada and make our own decisions based on our interests outweighs any uncertainty. This is a great opportunity for freedom, self-determination, dignity, and prosperity.
Reader views regarding the above intelligent questions, and others, are most welcome. We have an imminent and very important choice, and a duty to be as informed as possible.
