 |
| Good Morning, Alberta |
What
about Alberta?
“The
election has already been decided before the Alberta votes are even counted.”
I’ve heard this complaint any number of times. Every vote
counted in Central Canada was cast by an individual in a secret booth, just
like every vote cast in Alberta, B.C., Nova Scotia and P.E.I. But it’s sometimes reported
as if it were a conspiracy to exclude the West whenever the results are unfavourable. In
logic, this is a non-sequitur, an argument irrelevant to the case.
The
trucker’s protest and the government’s response prove that the “government
doesn’t uphold the right to lawful protest.”
The protest developed into an occupation as the COVID
epidemic continued to be a distinct general threat. The national understanding
was that Ottawa as the federal government needed to enforce (if necessary)
strategies for public safety. The vaccine requirement for people who entered
from another country or who worked in close contact with the public forced many
who saw this as a freedom issue to make a choice, which often meant losing
their jobs.
Another interpretation was that those who either were
vaccinated or had not had the opportunity to be, would be endangered by contact
with anti-vax persons. The relative importance of “you have no right to make me
get the jab,” or “the spirit of accepting some sacrifice for the sake of my
community” made for pretty severe divisions in our towns, families and, indeed,
our Canada. The degree to which individuals held their cooperative view, or
their personal freedom inclination, nearly gave the appearance of religions or
cults.
It would be a mistake, I think, to assume that the fervour
behind the two stands is unconnected to the current separatist sentiment in
Alberta.
Equalization has meant that Alberta pays into the fund, and Quebec gets it handed to them.
There is no Equalization Fund, and Alberta doesn’t pay into it. Equalization
may be the wrong word. The basic assumption is that every Canadian should have
access to similar services: healthcare, education, etc. But some provinces
aren’t as endowed with natural resources as their counterparts, so by a
formula, the Government of Canada funds those to bring them closer to the
average. Money flowing to the Federal Treasury from provinces go by the same rules in all the provinces through uniform taxation and grant legislation; Alberta pays more because they have
more resources, wealthier taxpayers.
In thousands of dollars, here are the per capita GDPs of the
provinces: Alberta, 97; Saskatchewan, 91; B.C., 74; NFLD & Lab, 72;
Ontario, 72; Quebec, 65; Manitoba, 63; PEI, 57; New Brunswick, 57; Nova Scotia,
56. (Per
capita GDP in Canadian provinces. - Search (The territories outrank all the provinces in per capita GDP, a result of their sparse populations.)
Alberta is sovereign over its own affairs.
The “sovereign” word has been
front and centre in the UCP government’s push toward greater independence. Sovereignty
means, “where the buck stops,” it’s the final say on a particular entity.
Canada has a division of powers outlined in the British North America Act of
1867; the feds are sovereign over borders and defense, while the provinces are
sovereign over healthcare and education.
Sounds simple, but it can be muddy. The Federal Government
has sovereignty over international relations, and if it deems climate change to
be worthy of best efforts in its mitigation for the sake of the welfare of
Canadians, does it have sovereignty over pollution drifting out of Alberta,
across Saskatchewan and onward? Of course it does. Similarly, the Saskatchewan
River flowing through BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba could never fall
under the sovereignty of any of them.
Danielle Smith’s government proposed an act which would give
the sovereign right to the province to veto any federal act deemed to be against
Alberta’s interests. That judgment would be left to an Alberta government
committee, of course.
Because the arbitrary decision by Alberta to override
federal jurisdictions is constitutionally not possible, and because the
province contains large areas of indigenous “nations” with particular
sovereignty over land and its use, Alberta appears to be using the Sovereignty
Act to pressure Canada into negotiating a special relationship, perhaps
something like Quebec’s “Sovereignty-association” relationship.
Is
Alberta the Texas of Canada?
Labeling a people or place with pejoratives is always a
temptation when conflicts develop. Classifying people who favour politics with
a liberal, socially conscious bent as woke, and calling people who prefer
right-of-centre political arrangements rednecks may feel good, like
landing the final punch in a playground fight.
But both labels are fake. Labeling is a tool of propaganda,
a ploy to elevate a position by denigrating its opposite. The sad thing about
it is that it works. Albertans’ attitudes toward non-Albertans and
non-Albertans’ attitudes toward Albertans isn’t helped by negative characterizations
spread publicly.
I’ve lived and worked in Alberta for ten years and found
them to be woke on some issues and redneckish on others, just
like people in my town in Saskatchewan, and in Thompson, Manitoba when I lived
and worked there for fifteen years, and in Europe where I was an MCC
administrator for three years. The division and antagonism that we find is not
our natural state as a community; the myths are seeded and nurtured for a
purpose by those who finding themselves in a position of influence, fall for
the temptation of using it to gain ever-increasing wealth, power and/or
notoriety.
Like Canada’s need to find a way to retain the peace and
harmony of our relationship with Americans, Alberta must be judicious in preserving
good relations with their fellow citizens in the community that is Canada. It
may be that Carney’s appeasement of Donald Trump will prove to have been
judicious, and signs that he will relax regulations on fossil fuel expansion to
appease the Albertans’ given their threat to separate, might work out Jim-dandy.
Then again, think Germany, Chamberlain and appeasement, and
the prospects of a good end dim.
A Final
Thought
Alberta as a sovereign country, landlocked among Saskatchewan,
British Columbia, Northwest Territories and Montana would be faced with massive
economic, social and political adjustments, not the least of which would be the
first nations place in a sovereign Alberta. And their dream of pipelines carrying
their oil--a gentleman conjectured to me yesterday--would necessitate an
agreement with—or annexation by—the USA. And those are just for starters.
More importantly, Alberta and its people and its incredible
vistas are loved by their brother and sister Canadians, who have long accepted
that the colourful, rugged, can do spirit that characterizes Southern Alberta,
at least, is a unique and valued part of us as a nation.
In short, we want you to stay.
