A look at the growing discord in Western Canada

Opinion

Our national unifying election is generating national unity discord. Not in Quebec but in Western Canada.

At a time of intense patriotism in the face of U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs and annexationist screeds against Canada, some Alberta politicians and interests are threatening separation if the election doesn’t go their way. A vote for Mark Carney’s Liberals and against Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives would be “a vote for Western secession – a vote for the breakup of Canada as we know it.”

So wrote former Reform Party leader Preston Manning in the Globe and Mail this week. “The West Wants In” guy has now become ‘The West Wants Out” guy. Rejecting democracy itself because of “easily frightened voters,” Manning ironically called for “a democratic forum to first consider alternative courses of action” on “ways and means to peacefully secede.”

Doubtless, Manning aspires to head up another Alberta Fair Deal panel like he did before. Unfortunately, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith gave him just that opening when she said she would convene a post-election “what’s next” panel for Albertans to advise on topics for a possible referendum. Secession was not ruled out as one of those topics.

All this separation angst will be jarring for Canadians. Especially as a sea of Canadian flags surround leaders on the campaign trail. What should not be jarring is the sentiment behind this. Never absent in the Prairies, that sentiment has been building over the past 10 years due to feelings of government overreach on policy and a desire for political autonomy in response.

Take these two views. Federal policy on energy and climate change has penalized the exploitation of natural resources in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Public health measures during the pandemic penalized people for simply trying to live their lives. Both views are seen as examples of government overreach.

An overreaching central government always fosters provincial government pushback in the form of demands for political and policy autonomy. From Alberta’s Sovereignty Act to Saskatchewan withholding carbon tax remits to Ottawa, premiers in those two provinces have emerged as vocal advocates of provincial political autonomy.

Unsurprisingly, then, the most lukewarm premiers on a Team Canada response to Trump have also been Smith and Moe. Smith refused to endorse the joint statement against Trump’s tariffs by the prime minister and premiers when Justin Trudeau was still prime minister in January. She has visibly and controversially “gone it alone” in her own lobbying path in the United States.

On the policy front, the Alberta energy industry inserted itself into the election, writing a public letter demanding federal leaders endorse five measures to “help strengthen Canada’s economic sovereignty.” These include streamlined regulation of projects, six-month deadlines for project approvals, an end to both the emissions cap and the industrial carbon price, and the provision of Indigenous loan guarantees. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre promptly agreed to all five. Liberal Leader Mark Carney promised to address only the first two in some fashion with a “one project, one review” policy. He has said he would retain industrial carbon pricing and maintain some form of cap on carbon emissions from the energy sector.

Accelerating energy infrastructure must be one way Canada responds to the new Trump economic order. Poilievre and Carney agree on this. This would relieve some of the policy pressure contributing to Western Canadian anger and frustration with their federal government. But it won’t alleviate the core dissension.

A recent Leger poll asked this question: “If the Liberal Party wins the next Canadian federal election, how would you vote in a provincial referendum to separate from Canada and join the United States?” Most Canadians – 83 per cent – said they would remain in Canada, only 11 per cent said they would join the U.S. But more than one-quarter of Conservative voters opted for joining the U.S. This makes them the largest portion of what we might call “soft Canadians” now.

Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter

Paul Samyn | Editor's Note

Wednesdays

A weekly dispatch from the head of the Free Press newsroom.

Sign up for Paul Samyn | Editor's Note

Sign Up

I agree to the Terms and Conditions, Cookie and Privacy Policies, and CASL agreement.

Alberta and Saskatchewan are “ground zero” for the Conservative political movement.

A movement for some form of “sovereignty association” within Canada, or even joining Trump’s America as the 51st state, is not imminent or popular. But Manning and Smith, for different reasons, seek advantage from the current storm of events.

Manning seeks to become relevant to events in his province, and Smith seeks to become resilient from events in her party. Having levered former premier Jason Kenney out of office by channeling populist anger in her party against his government’s COVID response, Smith wants to avoid the same fate.

Manning’s Order of Canada citation states he has “tirelessly championed the cause of democratic and political reform.” Yet, the most undemocratic thing is to threaten your own country’s existence if democracy doesn’t give you the result you want. We should be disdainful of this attitude. But we should not be disdainful of the need for whatever federal government emerges after the election to act quickly in the spirit of regional reconciliation and national unity.

David McLaughlin is a former clerk of the executive council and cabinet secretary in the Manitoba government.