(Edmonton) Alberta Premier Jason Kenney says his party was built on the solid foundation of a strong Alberta within Canadian Confederation and he has no intention of sitting still, the arms crossed, while one of the contenders for his succession puts forward a “risky, dangerous, lame plan for a banana republic” to obtain more autonomy.
Posted yesterday at 8:50 p.m.
Mr. Kenney was specifically targeting candidate Danielle Smith’s promise on Tuesday to table a bill on Alberta sovereignty as soon as she comes to power. She promises that her government could then completely ignore federal laws and federal court rulings deemed contrary to Alberta’s interests.
“This so-called sovereignty law would effectively lead us to separation from the Canadian federation, tear apart the rule of law and have devastating effects on jobs, the economy and the future of pipelines,” Kenney said. at a press conference in Calgary.
Jason Kenney said while sharing some Albertans’ frustrations with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s federal policies, he has “always been an unqualified Canadian patriot.”
“I’m not going to start displaying columnless patriotism or drop my defense of the rule of law just because someone without the leadership contest disagrees,” he continued.
This Alberta sovereignty act is the flagship promise of the platform of Danielle Smith, the former leader of the Wildrose Party.
Mme Smith unveiled his plan last June, finding himself in the headlines and drawing large crowds at his rallies. She has since been under attack from her six opponents in the race for the leadership of the United Conservative Party (PCU). This mobilization of attacks suggests that she could be in the lead as the vote scheduled for October 6 approaches.
Ballots began to be mailed to members last week.
According to Mme Smith, this legislation is necessary to undermine an “anarchic” federal government that is adopting policies it sees as deeply harmful to Alberta’s energy development.
Last week, Alberta announced that it expects to collect record revenue of $28.4 billion in its annual budget from non-renewable resource development.
Earlier Tuesday, Danielle Smith reiterated in a statement that her government would only use its Sovereignty Act occasionally, subject to a free vote by the Legislative Assembly, and in situations where it considers its constitutional rights have been violated.
She added that if the federal government is not happy, it can take it to court.
According to her, the objective is not to leave the Confederation, but rather to save it.
“Reclaiming and reaffirming provincial rights across our country will protect every province from Ottawa’s interference and appears to be the only viable way for Canada to remain a united country,” she wrote.
Government House Leader Jason Nixon and Prime Minister Jason Kenney have questioned the possibility that the bill will not even pass the House. Additionally, Lieutenant Governor Salma Lakhani said last week that she had a duty to refuse to sanction any unconstitutional bill.
Danielle Smith accused Jason Kenney of breaking his promise of impartiality during the race for his succession, but the latter replied that he was only defending the policies of his government.
Two law professors have already ruled that the plan of Mme Smith would constitute a fundamental betrayal of the rule of law and above all, an unnecessary violation.
Martin Olszynski of the University of Calgary explains that the provinces already have the power to challenge federal decisions in court as well as the possibility of obtaining injunctions if necessary to block things pending a decision. on the background.
“The constitutionality of laws is not decided by a vote – popular or otherwise. That’s not how it works in a functioning democracy,” he said.
“That’s basically what Smith rejects. She rejects the idea that an independent tribunal can make these decisions, he continued. She wants to make those decisions. »
His colleague Eric Adams of the University of Alberta says that if the province wants to start ignoring the Constitution, then the issue becomes one of separation or sovereignty-association and should be approached that way.
“These are issues that should be presented honestly, transparently and directly to the people of Alberta,” Adams said.
“The idea that a person who wins a leadership race takes control of a party and then can rush a province down the path to near-independence is simply unprecedented in Canadian constitutional history,” he said. he describes.
“In my opinion, this is deeply undemocratic,” concludes the professor.