Conrad Black: Alberta Independence Would Be the Death Knell for Canada

Commentary

All of Canada is waiting to see which of the Mark Carneys that we saw in the recent election campaign emerges as the new prime minister. The two choices are the long-standing climate-change advocate who was apparently the inspirer-in-chief of the Justin Trudeau government, and who persuaded that regime to bind itself with non-biodegradable hoops to the notion that climate was the greatest problem facing Canada. This, of course, is nonsense. Canada’s greatest problems are economic competitiveness and a declining comparative standard of living with steady net capital outflows, as well as the disintegration of the Confederation and the official self-degradation of the country.

The other Mark Carney is the candidate who abandoned the consumer carbon tax after more than a decade of support for it and pivoted to the approval of more pipelines and great Canada-unifying projects.

The Confederation is wearing thin in Alberta and Saskatchewan especially, as the oil-producing areas of the country are being steadily frustrated in their ability to export oil and other petroleum products, especially natural gas, to Eastern Canada and the world across all three oceans with Canadian shores.

The disintegration of Confederation is also advancing in Quebec, but more slowly and less dramatically, where the Trudeau government (in 180-degree contrast to the government of Pierre Trudeau), effectively acquiesced to Quebec’s official restrictions on the use of the English language. To the best of my observations, Mr. Carney has not commented on the subject or given any reason to believe that his government will alter the course of the preceding Trudeau government.

The degradation of the country consists of the acquiescence to the teaching of Canada’s history as essentially a tale of invasion, subjugation, exploitation, and racial mistreatment of the indigenous peoples to such an absurdly exaggerated extent that it caused Canada to be registered at the United Nations as a country confessing to attempts at genocide, placing us in the most abominated and ostracized category of human regimes. We have yet to hear the new prime minister’s comments on that subject as well.

The most immediate threat is undoubtedly the issues that will influence the federal government’s relationship with Alberta. The very able premier of that province, Danielle Smith, has made it clear that her preference is for the continued presence of Alberta in a reinforced Canadian Confederation. The majority of her party, however, while not directly approving the secession of Alberta from Canada, is open to the possibility unless what almost all Albertans regard as the province’s legitimate ambitions to enjoy the benefit of its natural resources are respected by Ottawa. The premier has clearly placed the decision of the future status of Alberta in the hands of the voters, if they meet the legislative requirements in elevating a petition to a referendum, which could happen in 2026. By then, it is presumed that the federal government’s policy choices relevant to such a vote will be known and capable of being evaluated by Albertans.

Some have suggested that this may be creating a set of circumstances similar to the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom in 2016, when the government of David Cameron had promised a referendum on whether to remain in an “ever closer” integrated Europe or not. Prior to the referendum, Cameron promised “full-on treaty change,” but all he produced was the right of the UK to vary social benefit on a category-by-category basis if approved by every other member of the European Union.

In Alberta, Smith is making clear her personal preference that Canada work well and continue intact, without committing herself inexorably. Meanwhile, it remains to be seen whether Carney still believes in piling up debt and radically increasing consumer costs, while conducting a war on the hydrocarbon industry and on the internal combustion engine in the interests of reducing Canada’s minuscule carbon footprint—which has almost no impact on the world—to help save the planet. Whatever else the Canadian electorate may have done on April 28, it did not vote for sharply increased taxing, spending, and shouldering of inflationary cost-of-living increases to reduce Canada’s carbon emissions.

Premier Smith has called on the prime minister to ensure easy access by extending new oil and gas pipelines to all three coasts, an increase in new financial transfers, and the abandonment of much of the Liberal Party’s climate program. This leaves her with plenty of room to negotiate and to place herself at the head of the emerging majority of Alberta opinion. The successful Liberal campaign to transfer the basis of voting in the election from a verdict on the Justin Trudeau government to a narrow approval of Mark Carney as the best-qualified person to deal with President Donald Trump and his effort to persuade Canada of the virtues of federal union with the United States, puts the onus more squarely than it would otherwise be upon Mr. Carney to make secession an unattractive alternative for Alberta.

If Alberta did secede from Canada, no one should be in any doubt that it would be the death knell of this country. Alberta would not necessarily be seeking independence, and would be highly amenable to a proposal to adhere to the United States as its 51st state. There is little doubt that the U.S. government would offer parity in currency to Albertans for their Canadian dollars and reasonable concessions of control of residential immigration and laws concerning firearms. Alberta would not wish a vast influx of America’s most destitute welfare cases into its social safety net, and like the rest of Canada, it is not a society with a revolutionary history going back to the founding of the country by those exercising the right to bear arms against authority perceived to be despotic.

Federal union with the United States could be made tempting for Albertans, but if it occurred it would be fatal for Canada. Mark Carney should know that he is playing with fire, not only if he focuses on climate change but also if he continues with his approach as the defender of Canada from its neighbour. His promise to eliminate internal trading borders is an excellent sign, and we can only hope that it is the beginning of an intelligent and constructive national program—an updated version of the trade, industrial, and railway policies with which John A. Macdonald built the foundation of this country.