As anticipated, a myriad of Albertans and others have emerged advocating against the province exploring independence because “we are winning.” This column challenges the wisdom and likelihood of success of that next step.
One of the most recent to rely on the winning narrative is former prime minister Stephen Harper. We know him as a successful PM who, despite his presence, the power of the PMO, and considerable effort, couldn't reform the Senate or evolve Canada into a functioning federal state.
Another is former premier Jason Kenney, who, after being relentlessly pushed, finally held an equalization referendum. With a 62% affirmation, he never found time to discuss an amended formula with the feds — maybe the reason he was deposed as premier?
Now we have Premier Danielle Smith, who looks at recent positive polls to also claim, like those above, “we are winning.” They all ignore the reality that we have no say in Parliament in our pretend democratic federal state. The overriding reality is that we are all supplicants.
Sure — out of the goodness of their hearts, the Laurentian elites (LE) will create a real Senate representing the regions of provinces, with power that would forever limit the LE’s domination of the Quebec/Liberal Party and others composing this self-serving informal coalition?
Really?
Have we already forgotten the most recent example of how power flows in Canada? After Trump was elected for the second time, there was almost unanimity, even among the federal Liberal cabinet hostile to fossil fuels, that a pipeline to the Pacific is a priority and that the elimination of trade barriers between and among provinces is critical.
But then new Prime Minister Mark Carney rushed, at Quebec’s behest, to enshrine the protected dairy cartel, even with the knowledge that Trump is still upset it was not resolved in the original CUSMA in 2018. This successful tactic to retain power, by gaining Quebec support for the federal Liberal Party, is more important than the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and reduced interprovincial trade barriers.
Power presides over the interests of the country — this from our political leaders.
All this was reinforced as more than half of the Conservative caucus also voted to grant Quebec this special treatment, contrary to the articulated, agreed, and important objectives of the country.
Our memory bank also forgets the National Energy Program that caused economic and human chaos and pain for almost a decade. And how can we ignore the recent Lost Decade attacking and demeaning the energy sector and, by extension, thousands of investors, service providers, risk-taking producers, and the regional economic well-being of lower-stature Canadians by denying us any meaningful voice in our country?
This happens because they can, absent the ‘checks and balances’ of successful federal states. As the manipulation of the dairy cartel blatantly demonstrates, we in the West have NO SAY.
Another reason is support from the central Canadian voters who don’t always like uppity, successful, and entrepreneurial Albertans. How else does one understand that oil produced in the West, responsible for only 10% of carbon emissions along the emission chain, is demonized and penalized while oil consumed in the heartland, responsible for 80%, remains exempt?
The naïve belief that our premier will charm vested interests into sharing power is as illogical as banning tankers off the West Coast but welcoming tankers that ship oil up the St. Lawrence River.
This is not about emotions or fairness — it is only about raw power. Why would they voluntarily cede their political power of 120 years, especially to us lesser people who only benefit from a geologic accident?
Relying on short-term political winds is not strategic or successful (I hope this is wrong). But it perpetuates our vulnerability to the next economic attack. Have any of the “winners” considered the inevitable future increases in net equalization given the coincident growth of Alberta’s revenues and ever-growing national debt?
Those with power will tax those with money, to the joy of many central Canadians envious of our good fortune.
Premier Smith is committed, energetic, personable, likeable, and more as Alberta's leader. However, without power, she remains just a supplicant.
For me, and hopefully many others, the important takeaway of the Manning Canada West Assembly is the importance of voting yes on the question posed in a future independence referendum.
The single best way to avoid an independence referendum, and indeed independence itself, is to negotiate with the feds — but only once they understand the potential ramifications for them and the steadfast determination of the supplicants to become fully fledged citizens.
Providing Premier Smith with a strong message might rattle the cage. Her choice, and that of too many others, not to present strength is an unfortunate lack of strategic thinking. It provides the inaccurate impression of broad satisfaction with the status quo.
This is not a pathway to “winning.”
It requires strength and real consequences to wrest entrenched power from those who believe in their superiority.
It was Saint Bernard, the twelfth-century abbot of Clairvaux, who first said, “the road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Smith’s pilgrimage to Ottawa as a supplicant will be sobering for all those who believe “we are winning,” but lack an alternative pathway.
By voting for a future referendum, we might prove the “we are winning” crowd right — wouldn’t that be a delightful coincidence!
