Smith leads the way as the right challenges democratic norms in the post-COVID political wasteland

OTTAWA—COVID, social media, and imported extremist populism have created a post-truth political environment with the potential to reduce traditional public affairs to chaos and undermine Canada’s basic federal-provincial power-sharing arrangements. Integrity, factual argumentation, restraint, and consistency of policy—all fundamental elements of debate in a functioning democracy—have lost a lot of their relevance in this political no man’s land. And this seems to be expanding relentlessly as we head into the final stages of the first quarter of the century. As an example, take a look at the position of key members of Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s cabinet on the provincial “sovereignty” legislation she introduced last week. A few months ago, during the United Conservative Party’s leadership race, the proposed act to allow the provincial government to ignore federal legislation considered harmful to Alberta was widely condemned by Smith’s rivals. Brian Jean said the proposed act was a “constitutional fairy tale,” adding that “no Alberta law can stop the federal government from controlling federal jurisdiction.” “We have a moral imperative to tell the truth about the potential of this very destructive piece of legislation,” Rajan Sawhney said. “It’ll create constitutional and economic crisis that’ll hurt Alberta.” “The Sovereignty Act is not only economically naïve, it is politically dangerous,” said Travis Toews. Now in the Smith cabinet, all three have changed their tune and are fine with the act. Although having no mandate from the people of Alberta, Smith is going ahead with the legislation in an open challenge to federal jurisdiction and constitutional law. While it may appeal to the UCP base, Smith’s declaration of war on the federal government set off alarms among those like the Calgary Chamber of Commerce accustomed to the rational and predictable application of the rule of law as a basis for business and investment. Leaving aside the fact the act was so badly written that the government had to immediately agree to rewrite the part giving Smith dictatorial powers, her legislation is about what you would get if the people who organized the trucker convoy last winter had somehow ended up in control of a province. At its core, it shares the motivating conviction of the Republican right in the United States, which is that conservatives are under no obligation to live with democratically determined outcomes they don’t agree with. That is the essence of the Republican attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election and the current move by GOP lawmakers in many U.S. states to put partisan legislators in a position to sideline local officials in order to reverse future election results. Smith is saying the province of Alberta does not have to comply with laws passed by the democratically chosen Members of Parliament if the Alberta legislature considers the laws unconstitutional or harmful to the province. In other words, the ramifications of national elections will be considered invalid in Alberta if Smith’s caucus doesn’t like them. This takes place against a backdrop of anger and grievance aimed at the Trudeau government that is largely based on myth. Contrary to the misinformation pedalled by the likes of Smith, the shortage of oil-pipeline capacity in Canada resulted from the ill-conceived nature of the Northern Gateway pipeline, changing market conditions, Quebec opposition to an eastward-bound pipeline, and U.S. rejection of Keystone—not the Liberals in Ottawa. In fact, the Trudeau government is committed to $21-billion in support for the TMX expansion to triple oil export capacity from Alberta—something Smith somehow seems to have missed. To be considered also are the many billions of dollars the federal government is allocating to the oil and gas sector to support the transition away from fossil fuels—something that the industry accepts as a reality even if Smith’s base wants to pretend climate change is a hoax. With both business and labour calling for extensive additional federal funding to enable this huge transition away from carbon, the last thing Albertans need is a constitutional showdown with Ottawa. Needless to say, this sort of thing is worrisome in a federation held together as loosely as Canada’s. Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe has his own independence strategy underway, including plans to block the RCMP from enforcing proposed federal firearms legislation. And Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Quebec’s François Legault have used constitutional shortcuts to flout guarantees on individual rights without paying any political price. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is of course on board with the right-wing campaign to depict the federal government as overly powerful and tear down traditional governing norms. As Brian Mulroney once said, it’s a hard country to govern. And as far as Alberta is concerned, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government is taking a wait-and-see attitude. Ultimately, it will be up to the voters—in Alberta and elsewhere—to reaffirm faith in the co-operative federalist model that has served Canada well. Les Whittington is a regular columnist for The Hill Times. The Hill Times