Excellent article. The one major accomplishment of the separation discussion has been to highlight some of the problems that have been ignored for decades. That being said, regulatory reform and a pipeline to the west coast would be bandaids. Canada needs constitutional reform and lacks the leadership and institutional maturity to do so. I suspect it won't happen until Alberta's size because too big to ignore. It is on track to be the second largest economy and third largest population.
One of the frustrating aspects of Alberta separatism is the way it sucks the oxygen from efforts to address structural and policy problems that not only impact Alberta, but the rest of Canada as well. For example, the regulatory sclerosis for approval of major projects has been frustrating many provinces: BC natural gas projects, Newfoundland hydro development, Ontario mining projects. Instead of talking about those things, instead the focus is on rebutting fantastical claims by separatists about the outcome of their project. Further, for separatists to succeed, they've been actively working to deny that any reform or progress can be made on their purported grievances short of actual separation. It reminds me of the old left wing radicals engaged in campaigns of disruption and provocation to "heighten the contradictions" and build support for a revolution.
Well said Jen!! Lets hope in the coming months the arguments and benefits of staying within beautiful Canada become more clear than the thinner arguments for separatism.
Spot on, Jen Gerson. I applaud your passion and the clarity with which you have made the case against the separatists.
I’m also glad that you called out those who claim to be federalists but are too blinded by their partisan rage to be more wholehearted in their support for Canada. I refer, for example, to those who berate “stupid voters” elsewhere in Canada who keep voting for the candidates who run for other political parties.
On the list of Alberta grievances that you cited, I agree that equalization and “ragging the puck” on the approval of resource projects are definitely legitimate concerns.
I also believe, however, that Alberta conservatives’ willingness to engage in “beggar thy neighbour” tax policy is a big issue, especially for the neighbouring provinces of Saskatchewan and British Columbia.
Why?
Because millions of shopping trips annually are made in Alberta centres like Grande Prairie and (the western half of) Lloydminster by residents of those provinces. That this damages local economies in the hinterlands of both goes without saying.
And to those in Alberta who say that Saskatchewan and BC could simply choose to stop collecting PST, I would say “how on Earth would they pay for basic infrastructure and services”?
Ironically, this “PST phobia” has ensured that Alberta’s resources have not been used to redirect funds to new industries, because successive provincial governments have used royalties to fund government budgets.
It is terrible public policy and should be junked in the context of talks to rebalance the Equalization formula.
Address the alienation issues with some tangible concrete actions and a lot of the separatist movements grievances go away. BTW it’s not just an Alberta issue. It’s a Western Canada issue.
More precisely, tangible concrete actions would address the grievances that motivate a lot of "soft separatists" who might vote as a protest vote against Ottawa. My take on the hardline separatists is that they're not open to persuasion: they're emotionally committed to their cause.
I think your advice is well offered. I , as a former Montrealer, was part of the people who flocked to Montreal in the final days of the Quebec Referendum debate. The intent of those of us who went was to show Quebeckers they were wanted and loved. In the post mortem of the vote it turned out that we, well meaning as we were, almost lost the no vote. Quebeckers experienced our intervention as English Canada trying to tell them what to do. Referendums are tricky and the world is even more polarized now so non-Albertans need to be very careful.
“For more than a decade, this country has turned pipeline construction and oil development into the front of a pointless and self-destructive war of virtue against the country’s best economic interests.”
The problem from my point of view, Jen, is that we have tried it your way, and your way doesn’t work.
I live in London, Ontario, as I have since 1968.
I have had a front row seat to the diminishment, decline, and decay of our Country.
If you truly believe that investment in an Alberta free of the Supreme Court of Canada, of the Parliament of Canada, of the thirty-seven layers of regulatory inertia designed to impair the innovation, opportunity, and human flourishing of a splendid people, and of the far-left activist class, you are, respectfully, demonstrably wrong.
I truly hope Alberta remains in Confederation, but, with each day that passes, I understand better why She may leave.
It's a battle of two fantasies/dreams: the fantasy of Ottawa listening to Alberta, and the dream of Alberta determining its own future - not without costs, but at least with hope.
Can federalists offer realistic hope of improvement within Confederation?
I don't think Jen is disputing anything your saying. I think the real issue is, while we understand there are plenty of grievances, separating from Canada is only going to make everything worse and harder for Alberta and Albertans.
I don't support Alberta separatism and don't think it's a real threat, but I also can see that those who do support it aren't making a purely rational calculation based on relative economic outcomes, and they know this. They are willing to trade safety and short-term prosperity for the freedom to do things their own way. This thinking has some appeal.
I would like to see the Line paying some attention to the Alberta Tory Party. We need a clearly federalist alternative that isn’t the NDP.
Excellent article. The one major accomplishment of the separation discussion has been to highlight some of the problems that have been ignored for decades. That being said, regulatory reform and a pipeline to the west coast would be bandaids. Canada needs constitutional reform and lacks the leadership and institutional maturity to do so. I suspect it won't happen until Alberta's size because too big to ignore. It is on track to be the second largest economy and third largest population.
One of the frustrating aspects of Alberta separatism is the way it sucks the oxygen from efforts to address structural and policy problems that not only impact Alberta, but the rest of Canada as well. For example, the regulatory sclerosis for approval of major projects has been frustrating many provinces: BC natural gas projects, Newfoundland hydro development, Ontario mining projects. Instead of talking about those things, instead the focus is on rebutting fantastical claims by separatists about the outcome of their project. Further, for separatists to succeed, they've been actively working to deny that any reform or progress can be made on their purported grievances short of actual separation. It reminds me of the old left wing radicals engaged in campaigns of disruption and provocation to "heighten the contradictions" and build support for a revolution.
Excellent column, and one that finally got me to cough up for an annual subscription, so well done you. :-)
Well said Jen!! Lets hope in the coming months the arguments and benefits of staying within beautiful Canada become more clear than the thinner arguments for separatism.
Spot on, Jen Gerson. I applaud your passion and the clarity with which you have made the case against the separatists.
I’m also glad that you called out those who claim to be federalists but are too blinded by their partisan rage to be more wholehearted in their support for Canada. I refer, for example, to those who berate “stupid voters” elsewhere in Canada who keep voting for the candidates who run for other political parties.
On the list of Alberta grievances that you cited, I agree that equalization and “ragging the puck” on the approval of resource projects are definitely legitimate concerns.
I also believe, however, that Alberta conservatives’ willingness to engage in “beggar thy neighbour” tax policy is a big issue, especially for the neighbouring provinces of Saskatchewan and British Columbia.
Why?
Because millions of shopping trips annually are made in Alberta centres like Grande Prairie and (the western half of) Lloydminster by residents of those provinces. That this damages local economies in the hinterlands of both goes without saying.
And to those in Alberta who say that Saskatchewan and BC could simply choose to stop collecting PST, I would say “how on Earth would they pay for basic infrastructure and services”?
Ironically, this “PST phobia” has ensured that Alberta’s resources have not been used to redirect funds to new industries, because successive provincial governments have used royalties to fund government budgets.
It is terrible public policy and should be junked in the context of talks to rebalance the Equalization formula.
Address the alienation issues with some tangible concrete actions and a lot of the separatist movements grievances go away. BTW it’s not just an Alberta issue. It’s a Western Canada issue.
More precisely, tangible concrete actions would address the grievances that motivate a lot of "soft separatists" who might vote as a protest vote against Ottawa. My take on the hardline separatists is that they're not open to persuasion: they're emotionally committed to their cause.
Same comment as before.
Those who would push separation are at this point unreachable whiners and should be treated as such.
Worrying about how you speak to a toddler having a tantrum is I guess useful in a theoretical sense but it's probably a waste of time in the main.
Nice article you are so well positioned to make these arguements
I think your advice is well offered. I , as a former Montrealer, was part of the people who flocked to Montreal in the final days of the Quebec Referendum debate. The intent of those of us who went was to show Quebeckers they were wanted and loved. In the post mortem of the vote it turned out that we, well meaning as we were, almost lost the no vote. Quebeckers experienced our intervention as English Canada trying to tell them what to do. Referendums are tricky and the world is even more polarized now so non-Albertans need to be very careful.
Thanks Jen, and yes Avi Lewis needs to either think more, shut the fuck up, or both. Talk about an elitist!
“For more than a decade, this country has turned pipeline construction and oil development into the front of a pointless and self-destructive war of virtue against the country’s best economic interests.”
The problem from my point of view, Jen, is that we have tried it your way, and your way doesn’t work.
I live in London, Ontario, as I have since 1968.
I have had a front row seat to the diminishment, decline, and decay of our Country.
If you truly believe that investment in an Alberta free of the Supreme Court of Canada, of the Parliament of Canada, of the thirty-seven layers of regulatory inertia designed to impair the innovation, opportunity, and human flourishing of a splendid people, and of the far-left activist class, you are, respectfully, demonstrably wrong.
I truly hope Alberta remains in Confederation, but, with each day that passes, I understand better why She may leave.
It's a battle of two fantasies/dreams: the fantasy of Ottawa listening to Alberta, and the dream of Alberta determining its own future - not without costs, but at least with hope.
Can federalists offer realistic hope of improvement within Confederation?
They seem to feel they don't have to.
I think that's the way they need to fight the campaign. Because they just can't offer credible hope.
This is what I’m looking for as well..
I don't think Jen is disputing anything your saying. I think the real issue is, while we understand there are plenty of grievances, separating from Canada is only going to make everything worse and harder for Alberta and Albertans.
That's just a nicer way of saying Albertans should just pay up and shut up.
Good point. What if you're wrong? (JG convinced me of the need for contrarian points of view in the last podcast.)
I was reading a National Review article outlining the logistical and operational nightmare that is the California vote-counting system.
“A failed state as a result of learned helplessness.”
Reminds me of another place in which I am familiar.
Can you guess the operationally failed state of which I speak?
That is a reasonable position to hold, with the exception of the evidence to the contrary.
Please consider opinions more informed and more eloquent than mine.
For example, I recommend the views of Keith Wilson and Dr. Matthew Rowley.
I don't support Alberta separatism and don't think it's a real threat, but I also can see that those who do support it aren't making a purely rational calculation based on relative economic outcomes, and they know this. They are willing to trade safety and short-term prosperity for the freedom to do things their own way. This thinking has some appeal.
It is, ironically, a very Canadian way to approach the problem of Western discontent and alienation.