Canada mercifully escapes the hard right’s rage
Lawrence Martin ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/authors/lawrence-martin/)Public[/url] affairs columnist
Special to The Globe and Mail
One of the striking things about the Alberta ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/alberta/[/url]) referendum campaign was the media frenzy it triggered: wall-to-wall coverage, over-the-top headlines that declared Confederation was at stake.
The outcome was never in doubt. As every poll testified, the result would be a rout. The hard-right separatists had about as much chance of victory as Eddie the Eagle winning the ski jump at the 1988 Calgary Olympics.
But you wouldn’t have known it from the tenor of the coverage of the campaign. Certainly the referendum demanded a lot of press. But the media turned a foregone-conclusion story into a bogus horse race. The tire-pumping made the whole exercise appear more justifiable than it really was, thus enhancing the credibility of the separatists.
Overreaction was the driving imperative of the referendum to begin with. Alberta has legitimate grievances. But do complaints like not getting cut in on equalization payments when you’re already the country’s richest province really reach the threshold of prompting a referendum? Is that really a legitimate cause for an exit vote – along with issues like having more say in judges’ appointments?
Many countries have regions with strong separatist leanings. In California, for instance, a YouGov poll ([url]https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/54090-how-many-americans-want-their-state-to-secede[/url]) to start the year found 27 per cent in favour of separating from the United States. That’s higher than the Alberta vote of 25 per cent, not all of whom favoured outright secession.
Other than California, another 11 American states were at 20 per cent or more in that poll. But you would never know these numbers because they don’t get air time. They don’t get air time because in the U.S., unlike in magnanimous Canada, states are barred from seceding from the union.
Still, while the leave side got a ton of hype from the plebiscite, traditional federalism was the big winner. The result showed that Canada mercifully continues to defy the political trend line that sees the authoritarian hard right on a roll – not just in the U.S., but all over the map.
In Europe, the reactionaries are on the march in France, Germany and Austria. Nationalist conservative parties are at large in Italy, the Netherlands, Hungary, Croatia and Czechia. After a lurch to the left, Latin America has recently moved swiftly in the opposite direction, with Argentina and Colombia being prime illustrations. In these countries, distrust of elites and mainstream institutions are among the issues that have fuelled the rage and the rise of what were once-fringe movements.
Here in Canada, we have the Alberta separatists, who are mainly of a hard-right persuasion. There’s the People’s Party, too, which has never gotten off the ground. And there’s the large radical-right component of Pierre Poilievre Conservative Party, a wing that was in the forefront not so long ago but has weakened in clout and visibility owing to its nearness (or suspicion of nearness) to many in the Alberta separatist camp and to Donald Trump ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/donald-trump/)’s[/url] MAGA crowd.
Mark Carney ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/mark-carney/)’s[/url] move to the middle, however, has appealed to moderate conservatives, and high public support numbers for the non-ideological approach signify a robust degree of stability in the country – despite the impression fostered by the Alberta campaign, which was triggered by a Premier trying to protect her political flanks.
In Alberta, a raft of concessions from Mr. Carney, who was raised in the province, was doubtless a factor in holding down the leave-side vote. He has eliminated the consumer carbon tax, cancelled the oil and emissions cap and announced the fast-tracking of the Pacific Link pipeline ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-ottawa-designates-pacific-link-line-as-project-of-national-interest/[/url]), and he is removing overlapping federal oversight for projects that fall under provincial jurisdiction. In addition, he is now signalling he is open to the possibility of constitutional changes. The effect has been to bring the Liberal Party, usually mega-miles behind the Conservatives in Alberta, into a near-dead heat with them. ([url]https://press.liaisonstrategies.ca/federal-tracker-conservatives-return-to-30-liberals-lead-by-15-october-19/[/url])
But one need only look at the province’s history to temper any belief that peace is at hand. Alberta is never appeased. The best example was what happened with the Progressive Conservative government of Brian Mulroney. It cancelled the hated national energy program, dropped the Foreign Investment Review, brought in free trade and included major senate reform in the Charlottetown Accord (which Alberta along with other provinces rejected) – and all Mr. Mulroney got in return was the rebellion of the Reform Party.
Despite the totally predictable shellacking, the malcontents aren’t about to go away. But the referendum showed that unlike in so many lands, the hard right is a receding force in this one.
Lawrence Martin ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/authors/lawrence-martin/)Public[/url] affairs columnist
Special to The Globe and Mail
One of the striking things about the Alberta ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/alberta/[/url]) referendum campaign was the media frenzy it triggered: wall-to-wall coverage, over-the-top headlines that declared Confederation was at stake.
The outcome was never in doubt. As every poll testified, the result would be a rout. The hard-right separatists had about as much chance of victory as Eddie the Eagle winning the ski jump at the 1988 Calgary Olympics.
But you wouldn’t have known it from the tenor of the coverage of the campaign. Certainly the referendum demanded a lot of press. But the media turned a foregone-conclusion story into a bogus horse race. The tire-pumping made the whole exercise appear more justifiable than it really was, thus enhancing the credibility of the separatists.
Overreaction was the driving imperative of the referendum to begin with. Alberta has legitimate grievances. But do complaints like not getting cut in on equalization payments when you’re already the country’s richest province really reach the threshold of prompting a referendum? Is that really a legitimate cause for an exit vote – along with issues like having more say in judges’ appointments?
Many countries have regions with strong separatist leanings. In California, for instance, a YouGov poll ([url]https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/54090-how-many-americans-want-their-state-to-secede[/url]) to start the year found 27 per cent in favour of separating from the United States. That’s higher than the Alberta vote of 25 per cent, not all of whom favoured outright secession.
Other than California, another 11 American states were at 20 per cent or more in that poll. But you would never know these numbers because they don’t get air time. They don’t get air time because in the U.S., unlike in magnanimous Canada, states are barred from seceding from the union.
Still, while the leave side got a ton of hype from the plebiscite, traditional federalism was the big winner. The result showed that Canada mercifully continues to defy the political trend line that sees the authoritarian hard right on a roll – not just in the U.S., but all over the map.
In Europe, the reactionaries are on the march in France, Germany and Austria. Nationalist conservative parties are at large in Italy, the Netherlands, Hungary, Croatia and Czechia. After a lurch to the left, Latin America has recently moved swiftly in the opposite direction, with Argentina and Colombia being prime illustrations. In these countries, distrust of elites and mainstream institutions are among the issues that have fuelled the rage and the rise of what were once-fringe movements.
Here in Canada, we have the Alberta separatists, who are mainly of a hard-right persuasion. There’s the People’s Party, too, which has never gotten off the ground. And there’s the large radical-right component of Pierre Poilievre Conservative Party, a wing that was in the forefront not so long ago but has weakened in clout and visibility owing to its nearness (or suspicion of nearness) to many in the Alberta separatist camp and to Donald Trump ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/donald-trump/)’s[/url] MAGA crowd.
Mark Carney ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/topics/mark-carney/)’s[/url] move to the middle, however, has appealed to moderate conservatives, and high public support numbers for the non-ideological approach signify a robust degree of stability in the country – despite the impression fostered by the Alberta campaign, which was triggered by a Premier trying to protect her political flanks.
In Alberta, a raft of concessions from Mr. Carney, who was raised in the province, was doubtless a factor in holding down the leave-side vote. He has eliminated the consumer carbon tax, cancelled the oil and emissions cap and announced the fast-tracking of the Pacific Link pipeline ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-ottawa-designates-pacific-link-line-as-project-of-national-interest/[/url]), and he is removing overlapping federal oversight for projects that fall under provincial jurisdiction. In addition, he is now signalling he is open to the possibility of constitutional changes. The effect has been to bring the Liberal Party, usually mega-miles behind the Conservatives in Alberta, into a near-dead heat with them. ([url]https://press.liaisonstrategies.ca/federal-tracker-conservatives-return-to-30-liberals-lead-by-15-october-19/[/url])
But one need only look at the province’s history to temper any belief that peace is at hand. Alberta is never appeased. The best example was what happened with the Progressive Conservative government of Brian Mulroney. It cancelled the hated national energy program, dropped the Foreign Investment Review, brought in free trade and included major senate reform in the Charlottetown Accord (which Alberta along with other provinces rejected) – and all Mr. Mulroney got in return was the rebellion of the Reform Party.
Despite the totally predictable shellacking, the malcontents aren’t about to go away. But the referendum showed that unlike in so many lands, the hard right is a receding force in this one.