Is the Canada option still viable for Alberta?

Canada faces a national unity crisis as Alberta battles economic sabotage from Ottawa

Interview requests

Could country-wide, east-west pipelines be the thread that holds Canada together?

In 1871, Prime Minister John A. Macdonald enticed British Columbia into joining Confederation with the promise of a national railway stretching from coast to coast. His “national dream” gave B.C. a compelling reason to join the young country. Without that promise, would B.C. have become part of Canada, or might it have remained independent as a British colony? At the time, it had more in common with the U.S. states of Oregon and Washington, a region sometimes referred to as Cascadia.

The strategy worked, and B.C. joined Confederation.

Alberta came aboard in 1905 and has since become the economic engine through which the federal government largely supports “have-not” provinces such as Quebec. Equalization payments, derived primarily from Alberta’s oil sands, flow toward La Belle Province, which nonetheless holds these resources in low esteem.

Tensions have escalated steadily in Alberta over the past decade as the federal Liberals clamped down on natural resource development through restrictive legislation and regulations. Albertans vividly remember Pierre Trudeau’s controversial National Energy Program, amplifying Premier Danielle Smith’s criticisms of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and current Prime Minister Mark Carney.

Smith rightly dismissed Carney’s suggestion that Alberta’s energy exports could be leveraged in the ongoing tariff dispute with the United States. Carney has confirmed plans to proceed with the Liberal government’s ambitious emission-reduction targets for the oil patch. The independent parliamentary budget officer estimates that implementing these targets would reduce Canada’s GDP by 0.39 per cent and eliminate approximately 54,400 jobs by 2032, mostly in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

Following her meeting with Carney on March 20, Smith was unequivocal:

“At his request, I met with Prime Minister Mark Carney today. We had a very frank discussion in which I made it clear Albertans will no longer tolerate the way we’ve been treated by the federal Liberals over the past 10 years. I provided a specific list of demands the next prime minister, regardless of who that is, must address within the first six months of their term to avoid an unprecedented national unity crisis.

“I also made it clear that Alberta, as owner of the resource, will not accept an export tax or restrictions on Alberta’s oil and gas to the U.S., and that our province is no longer agreeable to subsidizing other large provinces who are fully capable of funding themselves.”

Now that Alberta is in the midst of one of the most pivotal elections in Canadian history, she added, it is crucial for Albertans to actively engage and support parties and candidates committed to protecting the province from federal overreach and ongoing economic attacks from Ottawa.

Smith told the Calgary Herald: “I think there is a real danger the new prime minister is worse than the old prime minister.”

That’s an alarming prospect for the resource sector, and government revenues would certainly suffer if that proves true.

The Conservatives are growing uneasy as their substantial polling lead has evaporated. Some political observers attribute this shift to a favourable media reception of Carney, comparable to the initial enthusiasm of U.S. media for Vice-President Kamala Harris. Whether such popularity is genuine or fleeting remains to be seen. The ballot boxes will provide the definitive answer.

What remains clear is that Alberta has reached a critical juncture. Smith’s deliberate use of the phrase “unprecedented national unity crisis” is no accident.

Consider Alberta’s perspective. With their major industry repeatedly under attack by Ottawa, efforts to expand into European and Asian markets frequently stalled by red tape, and significant tax revenue flowing to Quebec—a province opposed to the Energy East pipeline—it’s natural that Albertans might consider alternatives.

Namely, closer ties with the United States.

Could Albertans easily decline an attractive economic offer from the U.S., potentially featuring parity with the U.S. dollar, unrestricted resource development, genuine respect, and an end to equalization payments? Prominent Canadian thinker Jordan Peterson has often posed these provocative questions.

Given persistent hostility from Ottawa and the potential for a welcoming partnership with the U.S., Alberta faces a fundamental question: Why remain part of Canada? Smith herself has faced harsh criticism from other provinces merely for defending Alberta’s interests.

Imagine Canada without Alberta. The country’s new landscape would feature a substantial gap in its heartland, effectively cutting off British Columbia from the rest of Canada.

Impossible? Perhaps not. Smith’s careful, measured words suggest otherwise.

Ottawa urgently needs to provide Alberta with compelling reasons—and genuine respect—to remain in Confederation. Pipelines could indeed become a new “national dream” for Alberta, echoing the railway that once bound the country together.

Mark MacDonald writes for the Business Examiner News Group in British Columbia.