The Dominion of (West) Canada?

Barry Cooper
December 2, 2018
Blocking pipelines to “phase out” energy production from Alberta’s oilsands has nothing to do with saving the planet. It’s about Eastern Canada screwing the West to take the Rest. Always has been, always will be, unless...

The Dominion of (West) Canada?

Barry Cooper
December 2, 2018
Blocking pipelines to “phase out” energy production from Alberta’s oilsands has nothing to do with saving the planet. It’s about Eastern Canada screwing the West to take the Rest. Always has been, always will be, unless...
Share on facebook
Share on Facebook
Share on twitter
Share on Twitter

In the past couple of weeks, a retired senior oil executive, Gwyn Morgan, a former premier of Saskatchewan, Brad Wall, and a veteran journalist, Don Braid, all commented publicly on the current position of Alberta in Canada. They agreed on the nature of the problem, but stopped short of suggesting the obvious response. It’s not that difficult.

Wall and Morgan emphasized the parallel between the current Trudeau government’s assault on Alberta with the earlier attack initiated by his father, the National Energy Program. In place of a single plan to confiscate Western wealth, however, we find a series of incremental policies designed to ensure that, as Trudeau’s principal secretary Gerald Butts once put it, there would be no Canadian hydrocarbon industry within a generation. This is a much more radical policy than the NEP because it‘s informed by the ideological fashion of anti-carbon environmentalism. Certainly Butts and Trudeau’s environment minister, Catherine McKenna, are fully credentialed climate-change alarmists. And the prime minister himself has mused about shutting down the oil sands, allowing only that “we need to phase them out. We need to manage the transition off of our dependence on fossil fuels.” Note the emphasis: they have to manage the transition, not Albertans who actually own the resource.

In reality, however, the current mix of policies is not about the environment, climate change, or even oil. It’s about re-asserting the rule of Laurentian Canada – that’s the Canada of the St. Lawrence Valley, i.e., the urbanized portions of Ontario and Quebec – over the West. This objective has been a structural constant of Canadian politics since before Confederation. The difference today is that we can do something about it. Let’s connect the dots.

We begin with our version of what pre-Revolution American colonists called a “long train of abuses and usurpations.” Just looking at the current Liberal initiatives, the first insult was Bill C-48. It is often called a tanker ban on the northern B.C. coast. But it is not a ban on tankers transiting the Inside Passage; it’s a ban on the export of primary and refined hydrocarbons from Alberta that necessarily would use tankers to do so. Then came the completely bogus notion of a Great Bear Rain Forest, through which pipelines never shall pass. Thus was Enbridge’s Northern Gateway extinguished. Back then many Albertans were still naïve enough to think that the Trudeau Laurentians were actually concerned with the environment; accordingly, protestations were muted.

Then came the post-regulatory hearings to kill TransCanada Corporation’s Energy East pipeline by introducing the novel notion of “upstream emissions.” This time we noticed that the objections all came from Laurentian Canada and that nothing was said or done about the hundreds of tankers filled with Saudi crude that annually ply the St. Lawrence. Nor was anything said or done about the “upstream emissions” of foreign oil.

There remained the project to twin Kinder Morgan’s Trans-Mountain pipeline. But after some deft moves, often portrayed as mismanagement, Trans-Mountain expansion is dead. Worse, the Government of (Laurentian) Canada now owns the pipe and can interrupt at will our last link to global markets. To add further insults, the federal carbon tax and Bill C-69, which imposes a huge new regulatory burden, all but ensure there will be no capital investment in energy in Alberta or Saskatchewan.

Wall and Morgan say they are “hopeful” because they retain the commonsensical assumption that, in the teeth of all evidence, the Laurentians actually support a strong domestic energy industry. Braid was more realistic when he noted that “for many of Trudeau’s MPs and ministers,” that is, for Trudeau’s Laurentians, “the crisis looks like a kind of victory. The plan for Alberta is working. Just a little early, that’s all.” From the start, the Laurentians have wanted to shut down the oil industry because it provides us with a measure of autonomy. So far they are succeeding.

There was a demonstration by concerned energy industry supporters in Calgary when Trudeau was in town last week. There was a meeting between him and energy leaders where he learned again what he already knew: the condition of the Alberta economy was parlous indeed. He gave evasive responses to pointed and direct questions. Premier Notley wanted Ottawa to join the province and purchase more locomotives and tank cars. Radio silence from the Laurentians.

Calgarians protest PM Trudeau's national energy policy. (Image: Gavin Young / Postmedia)

Even apolitical oil patch engineers and social democrats ought to be able to notice a pattern here. So the interesting question now is: what is to be done?

Consider the following facts. The current equalization system, which transfers money from so-called “have” provinces to “have-not” provinces, directly costs around $20 billion a year. The policy is enshrined in section 32(6) of the Constitution Act (1982). Quebec receives over 60 percent of the total transferred money. Even Ontario receives some because the peculiarities of the allocation formula have deemed it to be a have-not province as well.

Albertans pay directly through their federal taxes about 20 percent of the cost of equalization, around $4 billion. But that is the tip of the iceberg. In 2017, the Library of Parliament published a study showing that in 2014 Albertans contributed about $26 billion through federal health and social transfers, infrastructure grants, and so on. Employment insurance through payroll taxes is another way to extract money from Albertans, as is the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) – because historically Alberta has had a younger workforce with a higher rate of employment and, in turn, EI and CPP contributions. In 2016 and 2018 Ottawa re-jigged employment insurance to make it easier to claim, so that today Albertans contribute even more to the welfare of Quebec and Atlantic Canada than before. Because Ottawa also expanded the CPP, our contributions to old age security also grew.

Moreover, because Albertans make more money on average than other Canadians, the normal operation of the tax system is yet another way to transfer wealth. In 2016, income taxes for individuals making $200,000 or more increased. Jack Mintz, Canada’s premier tax expert, calculated that this change added $200 per Albertan in transfers to non-Albertans, a cool $800 million a year. Mintz drew the obvious conclusion: “federal policies are killing the golden goose” as well as promoting “regional conflict.” He called upon Ottawa to “wake up,” which implied that these policies were inadvertent. They are not.

From what has been said about Laurentian energy policy, one must be naïve beyond measure to think that Alberta is not being deliberately pillaged. We have seen this movie before. I explained the motivations of Laurentian Canada a few years ago in a book, It’s the Regime, Stupid! Here I will conclude by indicating the vulnerabilities of Laurentian Canada and what the Government of Alberta can do to push back.

Ironically, the 1998 Secession Reference, which addressed the non-existent threat of Quebec separatism, provides a way out. The Supreme Court’s famous requirement of a “clear answer to a clear question” would compel the Government of Canada to enter negotiations with Alberta and/or Saskatchewan to amend the constitution, were either province to call a referendum on a constitutional question. In this case, it would entail repealing the constitutionality of transfer payments.

Following a lengthy publicity campaign on the costs of transfer payments to Albertans and Saskatchewanians, the question would be simple: are you in favour of repealing s. 36 (2)? Does anyone seriously doubt that an overwhelming majority of those asked would support such a proposal? Jason Kenny has made no secret of the fact that he is seriously considering such a referendum, if he becomes premier of Alberta.

Should the Laurentians obfuscate and delay and refuse to negotiate in good faith, it doesn’t take much imagination to foresee a follow-on referendum asking if we want to exit Trudeau’s absurd “post-national” country. And this would be good-bye, not au revoir. The Dominion of West Canada has become a real possibility thanks to the abuses and injustices imposed by the Laurentians.

Barry Cooper is a professor of political science at the University of Calgary. His latest book is Consciousness and Politics (2018).

Love C2C Journal? Here's how you can help us grow.

More for you

The Private Sector Must Get a Larger Role in Canadian Health Care

Canada has so far ducked the extreme growth in the Covid-19 hospitalization and mortality rates afflicting some other countries. The worst is certainly still to come, however – and when it does, the shortfall in Canada’s health care capacity will be laid bare. The vulnerability was largely avoidable, points out Gwyn Morgan, if Canada like nearly all other countries had only allowed private health care delivery alongside its public system. When the nation comes out the other side of the pandemic, Morgan writes, a health care policy reckoning will be long overdue.

Future of Conservatism Series, Part V: Could Canada Handle a Trumpian Populist?

Democratic politics must continue even in times of war. Despite suspension of the federal Conservative leadership race amidst the coronavirus, members and supporters still need to think about how to shape their party and pick the right leader to best meet the many challenges of our era. C2C Journal has looked at revived Red Toryism, at uncompromisingly principled conservatism and at the decidedly compromised but successful Harper way. We have sought insight from abroad. And now we turn to populism. Barry Cooper applies his usual fearless thinking and cheerful bluntness to evaluate whether the Canadian political landscape has become hospitable terrain to a Canadian Trump.

Want More Affordable Housing in Canada? Build More Houses

Solving Canada’s housing crisis shouldn’t require more than a single lesson in economics. When prices are high, a free market always responds and supplies more. Yet amidst Canada’s severe problems of housing affordability, this foolproof mechanism is continually frustrated by governments that are either ignorant of how markets work, fixated on preserving the status quo or display naked contempt for the profit motive. Peter Shawn Taylor looks at the scorn heaped on land developers, landlords and the rest of the housing supply industry and wonders how they became the villains of this story.

Thinking Clearly in a Time of Panic

How should the conservative mind respond to the coronavirus pandemic? Panic and despair are in ample supply, and the urge to succumb appears widespread. Others have steered, via deliberate ignorance, to fatalism, though the walls are closing in on such rebels. Both extremes are beneath thoughtful conservatives. C2C Editor-in-Chief George Koch counsels that however dark today might appear, the eternal search for objective truth – the foundation for all conservative thought – is the first necessary step along the path to seeing humankind through to brighter days.

Future of Conservatism Series Part IV: Rallying the World’s Centre-Right Parties

As Canada’s Conservatives evaluate leadership hopefuls and ponder what their party is about and which path might lead to electoral victory, it’s easy to ignore international politics. They should take a look, for the world holds dozens of established centre-right democratic parties, and many are tackling challenges of relevance and adaptation at least as steep as those burdening Canada’s Conservatives. John Weissenberger travelled to Washington, D.C. for the annual conference of the International Democrat Union (IDU) and provides his assessment in this essay. Later this year, once international travel is restored, Weissenberger heads to Vienna to deepen his understanding at the IDU’s 2020 Forum.

Averting “Climate Poverty” for Canada’s Middle Class

Pursuing grandiose visions tends to cloud judgment, and when the vision is saving our very planet from an apprehended climate crisis, it’s little surprise that numbers are fudged, logic is twisted, the hardest-hit are ignored and entire social classes are cast into the trash. Matthew Lau, however, refuses to be dazzled by dreams. In this article, Lau remains rooted in reality and fixed on crunching the numbers to come up with some arresting conclusions about the huge costs of government climate policies to working people here and now, set against marginal if not ephemeral benefits to come over the next 80 years.

Share This Story

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

Donate

Subscribe to the C2C Weekly
It's Free!

By clicking SUBSCRIBE, you agree to receive emails from C2C Journal. You can unsubscribe at any time.