Support strong Canadian climate journalism for 2025
Just a few thousand votes in a handful of suburban Calgary ridings decided the last Alberta election. With the Alberta NDP now led by former Calgary mayor Naheed Nenshi, you might think Premier Danielle Smith would be paying extremely close attention to the needs and interests of people living in those parts of the city. Instead, her UCP government just killed the LRT project that would have served them.
Believe it or not, there is a method to this political madness.
In its original formulation, the Green Line would have connected more than a dozen under-served communities in the southeast and the north to the city’s existing LRT network. After years of deliberate slow-walking by the UCP government and its local enablers — most of whom, it should be noted, are wealthy octogenarians who don’t actually use transit — and the pandemic’s impact on supply chains and costs, the city significantly scaled down the route. But the provincial money, at least, was there: in an interview with CBC Calgary on Aug. 1, Minister of Transportation and Economic Corridors Devin Dreeshen confirmed the province’s $1.53 billion contribution. “I've been working closely with the mayor and Calgary city councillors so that they know that the commitment from the province for the Green Line [is] in place and that they can bank on it."
Well, so much for that. In a letter this week, he pulled funding, saying the project was turning into a “boondoggle,” and tried to blame it on former Mayor Nenshi, now Smith’s rival, who hasn’t been in that office for almost three years. It’s hard to imagine many people in the communities affected by this decision buying that argument, and it’s one Nenshi himself has already addressed. But the UCP seems more interested in testing how many times they can poke voters in the eye than actually helping improve their lives.
Take their ongoing demolition of the province’s healthcare system, which includes breaking Alberta Health Services into four different organizations and handing over control of some hospitals to Catholic-run organizations. It seems designed to sow confusion and chaos, not to mention increased bureaucracy, duplication, and red tape that conservative governments claim to abhor. How that helps attract more doctors and nurses to this province is anyone’s guess, but it’s clearly not the UCP’s main concern.
The Smith government’s decision to move ahead with costly plans to create a provincial police force flies in the face of public opinion, which shows that more than 80 per cent of Albertans support retaining the RCMP. Her ongoing threat to pull out of the Canada Pension Plan — one she’s yet to actually withdraw — might be even more unpopular, and that’s after months of town halls, government-funded advertising campaigns and other taxpayer-funded attempts to persuade Albertans.
So why is a populist politician like Smith pursuing all of these unpopular policies and positions? Because she, better than anyone else in Alberta today, understands where the real threat lies for a conservative premier. As former conservative premiers like Ed Stelmach, Alison Redford, and Jason Kenney have learned the hard way, the call almost always comes from inside the house.
That’s particularly true in the post-pandemic version of the United Conservative Party, whose membership and internal leadership are dominated by far-right activists like Take Back Alberta who seem far more interested in re-litigating old battles and settling scores than actually governing in everyone’s best interests. With a vote on her leadership being held at the UCP’s annual general meeting in early November, Smith has been effectively campaigning for their support for months now. Even if Smith survives the vote, as seems likely, she’ll still have to prioritize their preferences over the best interests of the province as a whole. There’s always another leadership vote lurking in the middle distance, after all.
That’s why, unless and until Smith’s UCP is defeated at the polls, the needs of the few will always outweigh the needs of the many. The province will remain beholden to a small subset of mostly rural and deeply conservative UCP members, and its policy agenda will disproportionately reflect their hobbies and hatreds rather than the best interests of more than four million people. And if Danielle Smith has to break the healthcare system, kill necessary public transit projects and yank Alberta out of the Canada Pension Plan to keep her own party members at bay, well, then that’s exactly what she’s going to do.
Comments
And that’s exactly what will happen in B.C. if Rustad and his far right cronies win the looming provincial. Whatever flaws the NDP government has, they pale in comparison with the nastiness of the Cons.
Damn right. Honestly, if there's one thing that seriously pisses me off about modern Conservatives, it's their insistence on being so toxic that it's almost impossible to start building political forces better than the lesser evil, because the consequences of letting the lesser evil lose are so horrific.
And don't forget what the modern conservatives are? The rednecks, the radical religious right who scream freedom while reducing step by subtle step.and they are to destroy u ions and who are the largest unions? Teachers and nurses
As an Albertan who voted for Lougheed a long time ago it has been quite the show watching the conservative (small c) party in Alberta move from a "red tory" party (remember that?) to an American-style republican party over the last few decades by a series of forks. Alberta PC -> Alberta Reform -> Conservative Party of Alberta -> Wildrose Party -> United Conservative Party of Alberta. I hesitate to speculate on what the next step could be.
Sadly, it's not just the UCP. It's the conservative movement in Canada generally. Issue polling has shown that the CPC base is, like the UCP, divorced from reality. Not sure what can be done about it, but we're in for years of this nonsense federally and provincially.
Which wouldn't be such a pain if that resulted in them also staying divorced from government. But the mainstream media insist on sane-washing them, a process which seems to just get more blatant as they become more obviously insane.
Editing note (with tongue only partially in cheek)
In the second last paragraph you wrote "...than actually governing in everyone’s best interests" Shouldn't that read "... ANYONE'S best interests." (emphasis mine)? Given the infinitesimally small minority pulling her strings, you could probably get everyone who will benefit from her idiocy in a medium sized conference room.
Calling them "deeply conservative" is an insult to the concept of "conservative".
Jason Kenny called them "kooks".
Ehh, the concept of "conservative" is worthy of a few insults, so I don't mind.