The Sovereignty Act: Lougheed and Klein successfully dealt with Ottawa without resorting to extreme measures, so why does Smith?
The Sovereignty Act: Lougheed and Klein successfully dealt with Ottawa without resorting to extreme measures, so why does Smith?
Alberta fighting with Ottawa is as Albertan as an oil derrick, but if changes to laws are needed it should be done where Albertans can see it - not behind closed doors.
I’m Dave Cournoyer and this is the Daveberta Substack
Perhaps appropriately for the topic of today’s column, I’m in Ottawa right now. I’ve taken a few days to think about the new Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act and am happy to be able to share some thoughts about it below.
Thank you to everyone who has subscribed to the Daveberta Substack. If you like what you read here, please feel free to share it with a friend and share your feedback in the comment section below.
TL;DR
If you don’t have time to read today’s column right away, here are some of my main points:
Peter Lougheed and Ralph Klein famously stood up for Alberta’s interests without the powers Premier Danielle Smith is asking for in the Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act.
The Sovereignty Act would allow cabinet ministers to change laws behind closed doors without legislative oversight.
The provincial government fighting with Ottawa is as Albertan as an oil derrick, but if changes to laws are needed it should be done where Albertans can see it - not behind closed doors.
Smith is trying to trick NDP leader Rachel Notley into being seen as supporting Ottawa over Alberta.
It’s not even totally clear why Smith’s Sovereignty Act is needed.
Today’s column
The Sovereignty Act: Lougheed and Klein successfully dealt with Ottawa without resorting to extreme measures, so why does Smith?
Benjamin Franklin is crediting as saying that “in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” I’d like to amend that slightly to say “in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes, and Alberta government fighting with Ottawa.”
It has been 101 years since the United Farmers of Alberta swept the Liberal Party out of power in 1921, and every government in this province since has made a point of exerting provincial autonomy, whether it be through pure partisanship or actual government policy.
Premiers Herbert Greenfield and John Brownlee successfully advocated for the transfer of natural resource rights to the provinces. William Aberhart beat his chest over banking reform. Ernest Manning was a strident opponent of public medicare. Don Getty championed the Triple-E Senate. But the two premiers most widely recognized for standing up for Alberta’s interests on the national stage are Peter Lougheed and Ralph Klein.
They had very different styles. Lougheed was a nation-builder and Klein was a scrapper.
Lougheed was a key player in the Constitutional debates, successfully convinced Ottawa and the Ontario government to make early investments in the tar sands in the 1970s, and famously stood up to Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau during the Energy Wars of the early 1980s.
Klein was no slouch either. His fights with Ottawa against same-sex marriage and the Kyoto Accord will probably be looked at less kindly in the history books, but he is remembered fondly by many Albertans and venerated by many partisan conservatives.
Both Lougheed and Klein used straight-talking, problem-solving and savvy-communications to stand up for what they believed to be Alberta’s best interests. But neither of these two titans of Alberta politics needed the powers Premier Danielle Smith is asking for in the Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act.
The comically named ASWAUCA, formerly just known as the Alberta Sovereignty Act, is different from what was championed by Rob Anderson’s Free Alberta Strategy and embraced by Smith’s leadership campaign.
Instead of just allowing the Alberta government to ignore federal laws and court decisions, as was promised by Smith’s campaign during the United Conservative Party leadership race, this Sovereignty Act goes further. It gives cabinet ministers sweeping powers to change laws without a public debate or vote in the Legislature in response to real or perceived “harmful” threats posed by the federal government in Ottawa.
For many years we’ve seen a trend toward burying parts of laws in regulations, which are designed to be written and amended by cabinet mostly for the purposes of flexibility, but this is much more. This Act would allow cabinet ministers to change laws behind closed doors without any legislative oversight.
It’s a blank cheque.
I make a real effort not to get caught up in the sometimes hair-on-fire reaction on social media, but Smith’s Sovereignty Act is very troubling.
Smith’s office argues that this authority would only be granted to cabinet after a free vote by MLAs.
It’s equally troubling that the Premier expects MLAs to make themselves even less relevant in the legislative process by giving cabinet a free hand to change laws without oversight. The bill does more to increase the sovereignty of the cabinet from the Legislature than it does Alberta from Ottawa.
The Legislative Assembly of Alberta is the focal point of the democratic process in Alberta. It is responsible for debating issues, passing laws and ensuring accountability, all of which directly impact Albertans. Those are the words actually written on the Legislative Assembly of Alberta website.
If MLAs believe actions taken by Ottawa are a threat that requires changes to laws in Alberta, then those MLAs should hold an emergency debate about it on the floor of the Legislative Assembly and change those laws in public.
The Calgary Chamber of Commerce is worried about the Act, and so are the Alberta Federation of Labour and the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.
The Line’s Jen Gerson argues that the Sovereignty Act is political theatre. It’s an awkwardly set trap laid by Smith to force NDP leader Rachel Notley into a position where she is seen as supporting Ottawa over Alberta. Recent posts on Smith’s Twitter account would support this argument.
But relying on stunt legislation for the purpose of pre-election posturing and picking fights with Ottawa, which this looks like, is ultimately unproductive and serves Albertans poorly.
The provincial government fighting with Ottawa is as Albertan as an oil derrick, but if changes to laws are needed it should be done where Albertans can see it - not behind closed doors.
Ultimately, it’s not even totally clear why Smith’s Sovereignty Act is needed.
Peter Lougheed and Ralph Klein successfully dealt with Ottawa without resorting to extreme measures, so why does Danielle Smith?
What are others saying about the Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act?
David Climenhaga: Alberta’s ‘blatantly unconstitutional ‘Sovereignty Act’ would let ministers rule by decree
Lisa Young: Excuse me while I light my hair on fire
Evan Scrimshaw: Smith's Sovereignty Act An Authoritarian Attack
David Moscrop: The New Sovereign of Alberta
Jason Markusoff: Danielle Smith and the War Against Ottawa Measures Act
Colby Cosh: Danielle Smith's unnecessary political power grab
Gary Mason: Albertans are being played for fools – by their own government
Don Martin: Danielle Smith's antics suggest she could soon claim the title of Alberta's briefest premier
Apart from Lougheed or Klein I think there was another premier that was able to successfully deal with Ottawa and even get a pipeline built?
Dave, I saw the headline and I absolutely couldn't stop myself: I had to answer your question even before I read the piece. Oh, rest assured that I will read it and, perhaps, just perhaps comment again, but first to your question.
You ask why Smith could not operate like Lougheed or Klein and it is a reasonable question, just as the answer is entirely reasonable. The answer is her interlocutor, one J. Trudeau.
Like his father, Junior has disdain for Alberta; Hell, he has disdain for anyone or anywhere outside of Quebec and (perhaps) Ontario. Like his father, Junior wants to appropriate to the federal fisque Alberta's oil wealth. Like his father, Junior is terrifically arrogant. So far, pretty much the same, no?
The difference this time is Junior has become an acolyte of the Church of Green and that means that he doesn't simply want to tax us to death and line the federal fisque but, more importantly, he wants to cancel the resource industry and any other industry that uses fossil fuels. Oh, and, of course, as one of the high priests of the Church of Green he doesn't need to worry about his fossil footprint, sending untold gazillions of tonnes into the air to go to Scotland (last year), Egypt (this year) for a conference that could have been held by Zoom. 300 Canadian delegates - really! But then, what is sauce for the gander is most definitely not sauce for the goose.
Lougheed and Klein had to fight on a federal - provincial basis but with Junior, he has chosen to fight on the basis of laying total waste to Alberta.
You might, yourself, be an adherent to the Church of Green and, if so, I do not mean to offend you or your fellow adherents. The problem here is that Junior is not willing to deal openly and honestly. He certainly isn't an honest fellow: you can look at his record for dissembling in ever so many situations and circumstances; I could list ever so many examples but you either know of them and agree with me or you give him a pass.
So, that is why the change in approach.
Now, on to reading further than the headline. As always, thank you for the effort that you put in to this publication.