Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Alberta

Danielle Smith: Just ‘watch me’ protect Alberta from federal restrictions on oil, gas production

Published

8 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

‘That is what the Sovereignty Act was about, sending the indication that we’re simply not going to comply with federal rules around this’

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith warned the federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to “watch me” over how she will shield her province from economic damage and high fuel prices after the feds announced a plan to cut oil and gas production by a third via an “emissions” reduction scheme by 2030.

“You’ll just have to watch me if you don’t believe me. That is what the Sovereignty Act was about, sending the indication that we’re simply not going to comply with federal rules around this,” Smith said while speaking to reporters at the United Nations’ COP28 climate confab on Thursday.

Smith warned that the Trudeau government is risking a full-blown “constitutional crisis” over what she said are “economic sanctions” on Alberta because of Trudeau’s oil and gas production cut.

On Thursday, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault unveiled a plan at COP28 to slash oil and gas emissions by 35% to 38% below 2019 levels. He claimed that Canada needs to reach “carbon neutrality in Canada by 2050.”

Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson claimed that the federal government’s new rules are needed to keep the planet from “burning up.”

Smith agreed to attend COP28 to paint her province in a positive light and to promote its oil and gas industry in direct opposition to the Trudeau feds. She said Alberta and Canada are under attack by the Trudeau government and his “eco-extremist,” admitted socialist environment minister.

Smith issued a joint statement with Alberta Minister of Environment and Protected Areas Minister Rebecca Schulz on Thursday that said the Trudeau government’s new rules amount to a “de facto production cap on Alberta’s oil and gas sector” that is an “an intentional attack by the federal government on the economy of Alberta and the financial well-being of millions of Albertans and Canadians.”

“Alberta owns our resources and under the constitution we have the exclusive jurisdiction to develop and manage them,” Smith said.

“We have done so responsibly by setting a price on carbon as far back as 2007, developing a carbon offset and trading program (TIER), investing billions in commercial scale carbon capture, creating an innovation fund that has so far supported 260 emissions reducing projects with $2.6 billion in grants.”

Smith noted that Alberta has its own plan for “reaching carbon neutrality across our entire economy by 2050,” which may or may not come to fruition.

She then took a shot at Guilbeault, calling him an “eco-extremist” whose ideals are “threatening the jobs of hundreds of thousands of Albertans.”

“Ironically, they are also significantly undercutting global emissions reduction efforts by effectively de-incentivizing capital investment by the oil and gas sector in the emissions-reducing technologies and fuels the world needs Alberta to develop and share,” she said.

Earlier this week, Guilbeault announced at COP28 his first attack on the oil and gas sector via a methane emissions cap. Smith blasted his new rules as “unrealistic” and “unconstitutional.”

The Trudeau government is trying to force net-zero regulations on all Canadian provinces, notably on electricity generation, as early as 2035. His government has also refused to extend a carbon tax exemption on heating fuels to all provinces, allowing only Atlantic provinces this benefit.

Trudeau’s current environmental goals are in lockstep with the United Nations’ “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” and include phasing out coal-fired power plants, reducing fertilizer usage, and curbing natural gas use over the coming decades.

The reduction and eventual elimination of the use of so-called “fossil fuels” and a transition to unreliable “green” energy has also been pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) – the globalist group behind the socialist “Great Reset” agenda – an organization in which Trudeau and some of his cabinet are involved.

Last month, after announcing she had “enough” of Trudeau’s extreme environmental rules, Smith said her province has no choice but to assert control over its electricity grid to combat federal overreach, by enacting its Sovereignty Act.” The Sovereignty Act serves to shield Albertans from future power blackouts due to federal government overreach.

Unlike most provinces in Canada, Alberta’s electricity industry is nearly fully deregulated. However, the government still has the ability to take control of it at a moment’s notice.

Guilbeault’s extreme eco-activist past

Guilbeault is as extreme as they come for an environment minister and his background shows a history of breaking the law via activism. In 1997, he joined Greenpeace and served for a time as a director and then campaign manager of its Quebec chapter for about 10 years.

He was arrested many times for environmental protests, the most famous arrest coming after an incident in 2001 when he climbed Toronto’s CN Tower with British activist Chris Holden. The pair hung a banner saying “Canada and Bush — Climate Killers.”

Greenpeace is a group that advocates for population control in addition to calling for an end to all oil and gas.

His extreme ideals have continued in his role as environment minister. He threatened arrest and jail time for Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe, who said that on January 1 his province will no longer collect a federally imposed carbon tax on electric heat in addition to natural gas.

Smith has repeatedly defended Alberta from Trudeau’s climate regulations and asserted Alberta’s right to control its power grid, also promising the province will not be “transitioning away” from oil and natural gas. She has called on Trudeau to replace Guilbeault because he is too “extreme.”

Alberta does have support from the Supreme Court, however, which recently sided in favor of provincial autonomy when it comes to natural resources. The Supreme Court ruled that Trudeau’s law, C-69, dubbed the “no-more pipelines” bill, is “mostly unconstitutional.” This was a huge win for Alberta and Saskatchewan, who challenged the law in court. The decision returned authority over the pipelines to provincial governments, meaning oil and gas projects headed up by the provinces should be allowed to proceed without federal intrusion.

The Trudeau government, however, seems insistent on defying the recent rulings by pushing forward with its various regulations.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Low oil prices could have big consequences for Alberta’s finances

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

Amid the tariff war, the price of West Texas Intermediate oil—a common benchmark—recently dropped below US$60 per barrel. Given every $1 drop in oil prices is an estimated $750 million hit to provincial revenues, if oil prices remain low for long, there could be big implications for Alberta’s budget.

The Smith government already projects a $5.2 billion budget deficit in 2025/26 with continued deficits over the following two years. This year’s deficit is based on oil prices averaging US$68.00 per barrel. While the budget does include a $4 billion “contingency” for unforeseen events, given the economic and fiscal impact of Trump’s tariffs, it could quickly be eaten up.

Budget deficits come with costs for Albertans, who will already pay a projected $600 each in provincial government debt interest in 2025/26. That’s money that could have gone towards health care and education, or even tax relief.

Unfortunately, this is all part of the resource revenue rollercoaster that’s are all too familiar to Albertans.

Resource revenue (including oil and gas royalties) is inherently volatile. In the last 10 years alone, it has been as high as $25.2 billion in 2022/23 and as low as $2.8 billion in 2015/16. The provincial government typically enjoys budget surpluses—and increases government spending—when oil prices and resource revenue is relatively high, but is thrown into deficits when resource revenues inevitably fall.

Fortunately, the Smith government can mitigate this volatility.

The key is limiting the level of resource revenue included in the budget to a set stable amount. Any resource revenue above that stable amount is automatically saved in a rainy-day fund to be withdrawn to maintain that stable amount in the budget during years of relatively low resource revenue. The logic is simple: save during the good times so you can weather the storm during bad times.

Indeed, if the Smith government had created a rainy-day account in 2023, for example, it could have already built up a sizeable fund to help stabilize the budget when resource revenue declines. While the Smith government has deposited some money in the Heritage Fund in recent years, it has not created a dedicated rainy-day account or introduced a similar mechanism to help stabilize provincial finances.

Limiting the amount of resource revenue in the budget, particularly during times of relatively high resource revenue, also tempers demand for higher spending, which is only fiscally sustainable with permanently high resource revenues. In other words, if the government creates a rainy-day account, spending would become more closely align with stable ongoing levels of revenue.

And it’s not too late. To end the boom-bust cycle and finally help stabilize provincial finances, the Smith government should create a rainy-day account.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Governments in Alberta should spur homebuilding amid population explosion

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill and Austin Thompson

In 2024, construction started on 47,827 housing units—the most since 48,336 units in 2007 when population growth was less than half of what it was in 2024.

Alberta has long been viewed as an oasis in Canada’s overheated housing market—a refuge for Canadians priced out of high-cost centres such as Vancouver and Toronto. But the oasis is starting to dry up. House prices and rents in the province have spiked by about one-third since the start of the pandemic. According to a recent Maru poll, more than 70 per cent of Calgarians and Edmontonians doubt they will ever be able to afford a home in their city. Which raises the question: how much longer can this go on?

Alberta’s housing affordability problem reflects a simple reality—not enough homes have been built to accommodate the province’s growing population. The result? More Albertans competing for the same homes and rental units, pushing prices higher.

Population growth has always been volatile in Alberta, but the recent surge, fuelled by record levels of immigration, is unprecedented. Alberta has set new population growth records every year since 2022, culminating in the largest-ever increase of 186,704 new residents in 2024—nearly 70 per cent more than the largest pre-pandemic increase in 2013.

Homebuilding has increased, but not enough to keep pace with the rise in population. In 2024, construction started on 47,827 housing units—the most since 48,336 units in 2007 when population growth was less than half of what it was in 2024.

Moreover, from 1972 to 2019, Alberta added 2.1 new residents (on average) for every housing unit started compared to 3.9 new residents for every housing unit started in 2024. Put differently, today nearly twice as many new residents are potentially competing for each new home compared to historical norms.

While Alberta attracts more Canadians from other provinces than any other province, federal immigration and residency policies drive Alberta’s population growth. So while the provincial government has little control over its population growth, provincial and municipal governments can affect the pace of homebuilding.

For example, recent provincial amendments to the city charters in Calgary and Edmonton have helped standardize building codes, which should minimize cost and complexity for builders who operate across different jurisdictions. Municipal zoning reforms in CalgaryEdmonton and Red Deer have made it easier to build higher-density housing, and Lethbridge and Medicine Hat may soon follow suit. These changes should make it easier and faster to build homes, helping Alberta maintain some of the least restrictive building rules and quickest approval timelines in Canada.

There is, however, room for improvement. Policymakers at both the provincial and municipal level should streamline rules for building, reduce regulatory uncertainty and development costs, and shorten timelines for permit approvals. Calgary, for instance, imposes fees on developers to fund a wide array of public infrastructure—including roads, sewers, libraries, even buses—while Edmonton currently only imposes fees to fund the construction of new firehalls.

It’s difficult to say how long Alberta’s housing affordability woes will endure, but the situation is unlikely to improve unless homebuilding increases, spurred by government policies that facilitate more development.

Tegan Hill

Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute

Austin Thompson

Senior Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X