Alberta Premier Danielle Smith at the offices of Bennett Jones LLP in Calgary on Oct. 3, 2022.Gavin John/The Globe and Mail
Danielle Smith has long promised to be the most combative of Premiers. She has lived up to those words, perhaps especially so in legislation introduced this month, the Provincial Priorities Act (Bill 18), which would allow her government to say a pre-emptive yea or nay to every funding deal Ottawa makes in Alberta.
There is a long list of downsides for the academics and cities caught in the crossfire. But given the angry national mood – including frustration with the federal Liberal government’s reach into realms that are mostly provincial, such as housing, electricity, dentistry or school lunch programs, for all the good and the bad – the bill could be a win for Ms. Smith and her unabashed main cause: autonomy from Ottawa.
Her high-profile Sovereignty Act hasn’t proven its effectiveness yet, and might not hold a candle to the disruptive potential of this bill. If passed, it would require entities in the province – including public agencies, postsecondary institutions, school boards, health authorities, housing management bodies and municipalities – to obtain prior approval from Alberta’s government before signing agreements with Ottawa. Quebec has had similar legislation on the books for decades.
The Premier said that the legislation is needed to ensure a break from Liberal ideology, to monitor whether the province is getting a fair share of per capita funding, and because Ottawa is treading too much on provincial turf. She added that an initial review has flagged about 800 agreements, of a total of 14,000, as “problematic” – warranting a closer look.
The earliest it could come into effect is 2025, following consultations. But the red tape it would add could be onerous. And the stated aim of the bill – to ensure federal funding is aligned with provincial priorities, rather than with priorities contrary to Alberta’s interests – would only highlight the divisions within the province. It would be an extension of a protracted fight between the United Conservative Party government and the progressive mayors of the big cities, Jyoti Gondek in Calgary and Amarjeet Sohi in Edmonton, who are ideologically closer to the federal Liberals than Alberta’s governing party. (Mr. Sohi himself used to be a Liberal cabinet minister.)
It has long been the contention of those mayors that the province is underfunding or stalling on cash, and that Ottawa is a desperately needed ally for getting infrastructure projects under way. Echoing the language often employed by the province on Ottawa, Mr. Sohi posted on X that his city deserves the same treatment as Calgary from the province – “a fair deal,” as he wrote – when it comes to paying for freeways.
But constitutionally, provinces are responsible for local government, and any relationship between municipalities and Ottawa is only informal.
The province will point to the federal government pushing Edmonton toward the purchase of electric buses; many have since broken down and proven to have a deeply disappointing range in Alberta’s harsh winters. Ms. Smith says she’s worried British Columbia’s proposed ban on natural-gas hookups in homes will be forced on Albertans too, through a national net-zero housing strategy. And she believes that recent Ottawa-to-city deals on housing circumvent provincial authority and undermine the province’s role in distributing the cash to fast-growing municipalities.
But Ms. Smith doesn’t have a lot of firm data in hand – mostly anecdotes and concerns. And if Bill 18 passes, her province could miss out on winning federal ideas. She could also some day have a problem with federal intrusion from ally Pierre Poilievre, as the Conservative Leader has long promised to take on any municipal “gatekeeper” holding up new housing.
Still, she is forcing the important question of which level of government should make the call when there’s disagreement. That aligns with the broad suspicion that the recent federal budget was more of a desperate campaign document than an actual plan on issues such as climate or housing. The provinces and territories are fairly united in asking Ottawa to stop overreaching with what has become a stream of centrally decided programs in areas where the provinces should be taking the lead.
The Council of the Federation last week released a reaction to the federal budget that included what could be referred to as a Quebec (and now Alberta) ask: “Every government should have the right to receive ongoing financial compensation representing their fair share. This includes provinces and territories that reserve the right to require unconditional federal funding.”
In the end, Bill 18 – a political manoeuvre around jurisdiction and ideology – fits in with that sentiment, and with Ms. Smith’s stated raison d’être as politician. For all its potential consequences, it’s a promise kept.