Danielle Smith wants all the power

In its perpetual sea of political blue, Alberta’s two biggest cities stand out as islands of progressive resistance. In the 2021 municipal elections, Calgary and Edmonton elected progressive councils, while in the 2023 provincial election, the NDP won every seat in Edmonton and a majority of those in Calgary. Now, it seems, Danielle Smith’s UCP government has decided to punish them for their disloyalty.

Bill 20, the “Municipal Affairs Statutes Amendment Act,” would give Smith’s cabinet the ability to fire mayors and councillors, overturn bylaws and even postpone elections if it sees fit. The only constraint on this power would be public outcry, and with a majority government that might have to wait years to be heard. For a government that complains endlessly about federal overreach, its new Bill 20 plumbs some impressive new depths of hypocrisy.

The proposed bill doesn’t technically run afoul of our Constitution. It dictates municipalities are entirely beholden to the provinces that created them, which means they have no real legal standing. “They absolutely can exercise this control over both those cities or any city if they wish,” University of Alberta law professor Eric Adams noted in an interview with Global. “The province could make Edmonton and Calgary disappear if they wanted to through legislation. But just because you have a power, of course, doesn’t mean that it should be exercised.” Even Tyler Gandam, the president of Alberta Municipalities and mayor of Wetaskiwin — hardly a bastion of progressive politics — described it as a “power grab.”

The bill’s first target could be the proposed amendment to the land use bylaw in Calgary that would see the city move forward with the so-called “blanket upzoning” recommended by its Housing and Affordability Task Force. Her stated opposition, not surprisingly, is informed by the federal government and its interest in “rewriting the zoning laws” in Calgary. Yes, bigfooting Calgary’s city council on this issue would pretty clearly put the province at odds with federal Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and his promise to eliminate housing “gatekeepers,” but that’s a fight for another day — and one neither is particularly anxious to initiate.

But Smith’s looming fight with Naheed Nenshi, who will almost certainly become the leader of the Alberta NDP in June, is a different matter entirely. Bill 20 is a gift for the probable future leader of the Opposition, who will get to brandish his credentials as a former mayor and remind Albertans about the importance of both strong municipal leadership and political independence. Indeed, with the Alberta NDP’s path to power running straight through cities like Calgary and Edmonton, as well as smaller urban centres like Lethbridge, Red Deer, and Medicine Hat, this UCP attack on cities seems particularly ill-advised.

It may even stir some resistance within the UCP’s ranks. Take Back Alberta, the group that now essentially controls the party’s executive and clearly influences many of its policy decisions, is led by someone who self-identifies as a “decentralist.” As David Parker told the National Post’s Donna Kennedy-Glans back in January, “I believe in localism. I believe we need to take power away from institutions.” Now, Parker and his fellow travellers will have to decide what they believe in more: their supposed principles or their proximity to power.

But Smith’s attack on the independence of Alberta’s municipalities will resonate far beyond its provincial borders. It is a reminder to other municipal leaders across the country — especially in provinces with their own conservative premiers — that their independence and autonomy are now clearly in jeopardy. It would not be at all surprising to see this legislation taken up in places like Saskatchewan or Ontario, where Doug Ford has already meddled in municipal political issues many times before.

It may even turn up the heat on the long-simmering conversation about the need to invest Canada’s cities with more constitutionally guaranteed authority than they were given back in 1867. In the 21st century, as the demand for commodities like oil and gas inevitably start to wane, Canada will need to develop new sources of economic strength and opportunity. Those will be found almost entirely in our cities, where the vast majority of people and our centres of knowledge and learning are located — and where they can be combined to develop, harness and commercialize knowledge and ideas.

We won’t be able to do that effectively if our major cities are mere vassals to their respective provincial governments. Yes, constitutional change is hard at the best of times, even during challenging moments when it is most necessary. But if the Trudeau government is looking for a way to advance its political argument against the provinces and their corrosive impact on Confederation, Smith’s new legislation offers a pretty tempting target.