Alberta Premier Danielle Smith speaks at a press conference after the Speech from the Throne in Edmonton, on Nov. 29.JASON FRANSON/The Canadian Press
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s long-awaited sovereignty act hasn’t been softened. There’s no pivot. If anything, it’s bigger than advertised, taking an unexpectedly undemocratic approach to its goal of bolstering the province’s defences against federal intrusion.
Days before winning the United Conservative Party leadership race in October, Ms. Smith pledged to double-down on her controversial promises, including her Alberta First agenda. The Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act, introduced as the legislature reconvened on Tuesday, is a fulfillment of that push. The new, longer name of the bill is part of her argument that the legislation has never been about separation, as many critics charged, but about a new, respectful relationship after Alberta’s long mistreatment by an out-of-control Ottawa.
Bill 1, according to the UCP government, is designed to protect Albertans from federal legislation or policies that are unconstitutional or harmful to the province. It will give authority to cabinet, when authorized by a legislature resolution, to direct provincial entities to not enforce specific Ottawa laws or policies.
Albertans certainly don’t like every federal policy, especially when it comes to energy matters and industry-specific emission caps. But those alarmed about Ms. Smith’s leadership have reason to be on higher alert now.
For a bill that’s purportedly about protecting Albertans, there’s a strange twist: If passed, it will give cabinet new, unilateral power to alter laws. Once the assembly passes a motion under this act, cabinet can change bills by order-in-council, without going through the normal legislative process. It will be speedier and easier than the democratic procedure of making provincial laws. But why is this necessary or desirable?
“We need the power to re-set the relationship with Ottawa,” said Ms. Smith in a news conference late Tuesday. “We’ve tried different things in the past and it hasn’t worked. So we’ve got to try something new.”
But that’s not everyone’s take. Eric Adams, a professor at the University of Alberta specializing in constitutional law, said “the extraordinary power envisioned in the cabinet as a result of one of these triggering motions” would enable the cabinet to bypass the legislature entirely. He said it’s “extraordinary in its breadth, puzzling in its necessity and curious as to the strategy of including it in this legislation.”
While cabinet has the power to unilaterally change laws, without the question going back to the legislature, this power is time-limited. Action must be taken by cabinet within two years of a particular motion being passed. And the longest the cabinet order amending the law can last is four years.
Then there’s the issue of the Premier’s definition of what the legislature might reject from Ottawa, which was originally focused on limiting federal overreach and stopping laws or policies that violate the jurisdictional rights of Alberta. In a backgrounder released in September, she said “several federal laws and policies, though harmful to Alberta, are not necessarily in areas of policy over which our province has constitutional sovereignty.”
But now, the bill will also include action MLAs deem harmful to the province, even if it’s clearly within federal jurisdiction: “As a topical example, improper or abusive use of the federal Emergencies Act against the rights of Albertans could be dealt with by way of resolution under the act if needed,” the government said.
The supporters of the act argue this bill will shift the legal burden to Ottawa. The federal government will have to legally challenge Alberta’s refusal to enforce laws or policies, instead of Alberta having to initiate and waiting years for a decision. Ms. Smith acknowledged ultimately that questions of jurisdiction will be settled in the courts.
One pressing matter is what UCP MLAs do next. Travis Toews, a leadership rival to Ms. Smith, said months ago that the idea of the act isn’t acceptable to the vast majority of Albertans and could make the UCP “unelectable” when the province heads to the polls in May.
After Ms. Smith’s win, Mr. Toews was re-appointed Finance Minister, and told Edmonton Journal columnist David Staples that “our concerns have been heard and I’m hopeful they can be adequately addressed.”
You have to wonder how Mr. Toews, and other members of the UCP who thought the sovereignty act was deeply flawed, will vote now. This includes most of the other leadership contenders. Former premier Jason Kenney, who had promised to vote against the bill – calling it a “cockamamie idea that was first floated by a far-right special interest group” – resigned his Calgary-Lougheed seat late Tuesday.
The UCP are in a fight-to-the-finish election battle with Rachel Notley’s NDP, which is adamantly opposed to the sovereignty act. And although Ms. Smith said she hopes she never has to use this legislation, she’s is now telling her cabinet ministers to prepare special resolutions under the act for the spring legislative session.
Albertans will wake up on Wednesday trying to understand what Ms. Smith means to do with the act, and which members of the governing party – if any – will vote against it.
With a report from Alanna Smith.