This article makes the case for why Alberta independence is essential for the flourishing of our province. To read an opposing viewpoint, click here: Why Alberta Should Stay in Canada

In any large country with diverse regions like Canada, it will be very hard for the national government to satisfy everyone all the time. Policies that help one region may hurt another, and there are never enough resources to meet the needs of all regions at once. Conflict between people of the various regions is, therefore, inevitable and to be expected.

Nevertheless, if a government sincerely desires to do its best for the whole country, the regions that benefit most from its policies will shift over time, so that each region will get its fair share at one time or another. Arguably, this is how Canada operated for its first hundred years.

Of course, since the prairie provinces were created, they have had grievances with federal policies. As a result, a number of political movements arose during the twentieth century to address those concerns. A good example is the Progressive Party of Canada, which dominated the prairies in the early 1920s.

Until the late 1960s, none of those movements advocated for regional or provincial independence. That changed when Pierre Trudeau became prime minister in 1968. He pushed an agenda that deliberately deepened regional conflicts and changed the nature of Canada.

Pierre Trudeau

In order to placate Quebec, one of Trudeau’s signature policies was the Official Languages Act of 1969, which (among other things) made French much more prominent among the English-speaking majority on the prairies. Many people resented this form of cultural intrusion. 

Much more importantly, however, was Trudeau’s response to the energy crisis of the 1970s. In October 1973, a war in the Middle East resulted in a huge increase in oil prices. Until then, oil had been a beneficial resource, but prices were normally low, at around three dollars per barrel. Within a matter of months, it had jumped to over eleven dollars a barrel. 

In Canada, provinces own their natural resources, but Trudeau took two significant steps to reduce Alberta’s ability to benefit from the surging price of oil. He capped the price on Canadian-produced oil sold within Canada much lower than the world price, and he placed an export tax on oil so that the federal government would garner windfall profits from the export of Alberta’s oil to the United States. Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed called the export tax “the most discriminatory action ever taken by a federal government against a particular province in the entire history of confederation.”¹ He was right.

As a result of the oil export tax, Trudeau’s government raked in huge amounts of money that should have gone to Alberta. Trudeau used that money to subsidize oil imports to eastern Canada.

Then things got even worse. After a brief Progressive Conservative minority government, Pierre Trudeau was reelected as prime minister in February 1980 with an agenda to even more harshly deal with Alberta. As University of Regina sociologist John Conway wrote, that “election, and its aftermath, sparked the most serious confrontation between the West and Ottawa in the twentieth century.”²

National Energy Program

Shortly thereafter, Trudeau introduced the infamous National Energy Program (NEP). The purpose of the NEP was to put an end to the growing economic and political clout of the West, especially Alberta. According to Conway, “This program unilaterally imposed federal authority over energy resources and established new price and revenue sharing regimes in the absence of consent from the West.”³

As Dr. Tammy Nemeth wrote, “The NEP was a turning point for Alberta. Never before had a federal government attempted such a comprehensive restructuring of the federal-provincial balance of power and of an industry predominantly located in one province.”⁴

Prominent Alberta economists concluded that the NEP pushed Alberta into an economic recession. Thousands of people lost their jobs and their livelihoods. Many Albertans suffered hardships.

Ted Byfield of Alberta Report magazine explained the implications clearly: “More and more it began to look as though Canada was a mere con game, being played out by Ontario and Quebec at the expense of the West. And the numbers proved it. Between 1969 and 1984, Alberta transferred more than $95 billion to the rest of Canada, most of it to Quebec, which gained $80 billion out of tax transfers and energy benefits during the same period. This money, had it remained in Alberta, would have financed industrial diversification in the bust that followed. But by then the money was gone.”⁵

The Reform Party of Canada

After Trudeau resigned, there was a federal election in 1984 that was won by the Progressive Conservatives under Brian Mulroney. Albertans and other Westerners were relieved and expected to be treated much better.

However, even under Mulroney, the interests of Central Canada took center stage. In 1986, his government awarded a lucrative maintenance contract for Canada’s new CF-18 fighter jets to a Montreal firm, despite a Winnipeg firm winning the contract according to the government’s own criteria. This was done to boost support for the government in Quebec but it created outrage in the West, not least in Alberta.

That outrage led to the creation of the Reform Party of Canada under Preston Manning. The Reform Party’s motto was “the West wants in,” referring to the desire of Westerners for meaningful representation within federal institutions. Despite winning large numbers of seats from the West in the 1993 and 1997 federal elections, Central Canada did not want the West to be “in” and the reforms desired by many Westerners were ignored.

One key reform advocated by Westerners – especially Albertans – was the Triple-E Senate. That is, an Elected Senate, with Equal representation from each province and possessing Effective powers. Reformed along these lines, the Senate would give the Western provinces a voice within the federal government. However, this proposal was not taken seriously by Central Canada.

When one of the original Reform Party MPs – Stephen Harper – was elected Conservative prime minister in 2006, he proceeded to work towards a reformed Senate. However, even as prime minister, his efforts were thwarted every step of the way. The Supreme Court of Canada put an end to his attempts at Senate reform in 2014.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper – a man who was committed to constitutional reform to benefit the West – could not prevail in the face of intense opposition from Central Canada.

If Stephen Harper couldn’t do it then it can’t be done. Albertans will not be able to achieve any constitutional reforms that will benefit their province.

The second NEP

Liberal leader Justin Trudeau beat Stephen Harper in the 2015 federal election and was soon implementing policies to address climate change. Many of these policies were very harmful to Alberta’s economy. 

University of Calgary political scientist Tom Flanagan refers to Justin Trudeau’s climate change policies as a second NEP: “This second National Energy Program is different from the first; it seeks not to transfer Alberta’s wealth to other governments but to reduce Alberta’s use of its hydrocarbon resources to generate wealth, even if it also reduces incomes and wealth in other provinces. But it is similar in that it was calculated to appeal to voters in Ontario and Quebec for whom climate change was a priority issue. And it worked. It’s not a coincidence that in 2015 Justin Trudeau was the first Liberal leader to win a majority of seats from Quebec since his father did in 1980.”⁶

Once again, a Liberal prime minister was attacking Alberta as a way of generating support in Central Canada.

Meanwhile, Alberta continues to have its wealth transferred to other parts of Canada. University of Calgary economist Robert Mansell has calculated that between 1965 and 2018, Alberta made a net contribution of $630 billion to Canada. That amount is even higher now.

As the late columnist Rex Murphy wrote in 2021, “And out in Alberta, it is becoming more and more difficult, perhaps even impossible, to answer the basic question: If you allow the savaging of our economy, if you ignore what we in Alberta have contributed to you during the good times, if you side with rabid environmentalism, pour on carbon taxes and fuel emission standards, if you bar every effort to build even one...pipeline: Why are we in this thing? That’s the question. And you know what ‘this thing’ refers to.”⁷

Conclusion

In Canada, the federal government prioritizes the interests and desires of Central Canada over Alberta and the West. This political reality is not going to change, and it is the bedrock of the case for independence. 

Thankfully, as a result of the Secession Reference case at the Supreme Court of Canada in 1998, Canadian constitutional law allows a province to secede from Canada if it holds a referendum on independence with a clear question, and a clear majority of people vote in favour. 

Because seceding from the country is legal and constitutional, Alberta Christians can support this option with enthusiasm and a clear conscience.

We need an independence referendum.

1 - Peter Foster, The Blue-Eyed Sheiks: The Canadian Oil Establishment (Collins Publishers, 1979), 42.

2 - John F. Conway, The Rise of the New West: The History of a Region in Confederation. Fourth edition. (James Lorimer & Company, 2014), 173.

3 - Conway, The Rise of the New West, 177.

4 - Tammy Nemeth, “1980: Duel of the Decade,” in Alberta Formed Alberta Transformed, Volume 2, ed. Michael Payne, Donald Wetherell, and Catherine Cavanaugh (University of Alberta Press, and University of Calgary Press, 2006), 696.

5 - Ted Byfield, “The Reform party: The timing was right,” in Act of Faith: The Illustrated Chronicle of the Fastest-growing Political Movement in Canadian History: The Reform Party of Canada, ed. Terry O’Neill (British Columbia Report Books, 1991), 3.

6 - Tom Flanagan, “Alberta and the myth of Sisyphus,” in Moment of Truth: How to Think About Alberta's Future, ed. Jack M. Mintz, Tom Flanagan, and Ted Morton (Sutherland House, 2020), 50.

7 - Rex Murphy, “Were I an Albertan, I’d be asking: What’s the point?” National Post. January 23, 2021, A14.

The future of Alberta is a weighty matter, and the question of independence is prompting strong opinions across the province. While some see it as a serious and urgent matter, others haven't given it a second thought.

This is not a time for Christians to remain on the sidelines. We must engage with this issue thoughtfully and biblically, considering how our faith informs our understanding of citizenship, justice, and the common good.

Alberta Reformer is committed to facilitating that engagement. While we do not take an official position on independence, we believe it's vital to create space for robust discussion and debate, rooted in our desire to see God's word shape every aspect of life in our province.

This article makes the case for why Alberta independence is essential for the flourishing of our province. To read an opposing viewpoint, click here: Why Alberta Should Stay in Canada

We encourage you to prayerfully consider these perspectives, weigh them against Scripture, and actively participate in seeking God's will for Alberta. As we seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, may we also strive for the welfare of our fellow Albertans.

We plan to engage in the conversation on an ongoing basis, and we invite you to join us in this endeavour.

– The Alberta Reformer Team

Photo Credit: Graphic from the cover of Dr. Michael Wagner's book No Other Option, designed by Jeff Rout