Framing Western Alienation As Political Alienation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Framing Western Alienation as Political Alienation Paul Grewar (1004736155) Department of Political Science, University of Toronto POL214: Canadian Government & Politics Professor David Pond 24 February 2020 2 Framing Western Alienation as Political Alienation Despite retaining only 10% of their seats in Western Canada and losing the national popular vote in the 2019 federal election, Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party received a renewed mandate to govern Canada. However, cries of western alienation and Western political independence movements (the idea of “Wexit”) have surfaced. The notion of western alienation is not new to the Canadian political landscape; fervent discontent with the federal government has ebbed and flowed ever since the western provinces’ entries into Canada. Traditionally, the alienation Western Canadians experience has been explained as regional discontent with the seemingly asymmetrical nature of the relationship between the federal government and the West versus Central Canada and a lack of representation in the federal government — referred to as western alienation. A better explanation for the discontent Western Canadians face is political alienation as it accounts for how similar levels of discontent are experienced across Canada, better aligns with data on the ways Western Canadians feel alienated, and explains how the history of populism aligns with the alienation Western Canadians face; using this framework, we evaluate the Harper government’s response to western alienation (Senate reform) and whether or not political alienation is a solvable problem. Background Since joining Canada, many of the western provinces have felt as though they have been mistreated by the federal government to the benefit of Ontario and Quebec — especially concerning energy and natural resource policy. When Manitoba, Alberta, and Saskatchewan joined as provinces of Canada, the Macdonald government required that the federal government retain control of all crown land and natural resources “for the purposes of the 3 Dominion” (Kilgour & Harvey, 2013). In the 1980s, Pierre Trudeau’s National Energy Plan (NEP) aimed to reduce energy dependency on foreign oil and secure Canadian energy self- sufficiency. Petroleum producers were forced to sell oil and gas below world market prices and the federal government increased its share of oil and gas revenues by 140%. This came at the expense of firms, provincial governments, and the regional economy. More recently, the implementation of a carbon pricing scheme has been criticized by western provinces as antagonistic toward critical sectors of their economies and contributory in rising provincial unemployment rates. These policies all exacerbate the view that the federal government stands to exploit the economy and natural resources of the West to protect the interests of Central Canada and the policy preferences of political elites (Henry, 2001; Andrew-gee, 2019)1. Additionally, Alberta, BC, and Saskatchewan often argue that they contribute more to the national balance sheet than they receive in terms of equalization transfers (Government of Canada, 2019). Relating this to energy policy, not only is the Western economy demonized for having an economic dependency on petroleum extraction, but they are expected to share their profits with the rest of Canada through equalization (Lecours & Béland, 2010). Discussion Political Alienation as the Root Cause Historically, the grievances of Western Canadians have been explained as regional in nature, exclusive to the western provinces, and manifested as discontent towards their 1 The NEP is often referenced when discussing the permanent decline of the Liberal Party in Alberta. The distrust the policy created shut the party out of the province as Westerners viewed the policy as entirely consumer-oriented, as opposed to one that balanced the interests of both producers (centered in Western Canada) and consumers (Kilgour & Harvey, 2013). 4 representation in the federal government. Rather, the alienation Western Canadians experience is political alienation; this form of alienation occurs when citizens feel as though they have little opportunity to provide input in the political process or decision-making beyond voting, that government is unresponsive to their interests and concerns, or that their representatives are out of touch with their values. This diverges from the traditional view of western alienation in that it is not unique to western provinces and that it is not necessarily rooted in region — which are the two inconsistencies with reality in defining Western Canadians’ alienation as western alienation. This argument is bolstered by the rise of populism in Western Canada. Western Alienation: Not Uniquely Western, Nor Consistent Across the West Using data from the 1997 Canadian Election Study, Shawn Henry assessed whether or not western alienation could be attributed to being on the political periphery and if similar discontent persists in other peripheral provinces. Applying quantitative analysis, Henry found that the level of alienation experienced in the Atlantic provinces and Northwest Territories is comparable to that of the western provinces (2001). Thus, the regional discontent experienced in Western Canada is not particularly exceptional; instead, it represents a common experience among Canadians on the political periphery. Because peripheral provinces only represent small proportions of the seats/positions in Parliament, the Cabinet, and the public service, they often feel ignored to the vote-rich provinces of Ontario and Quebec, where politicians typically focus their attention. Consequently, peripheral provinces feel as though they cannot affect political decision-making and that the federal government is unresponsive to their interests and concerns — typical of political alienation. Henry also found that there were inconsistencies across provinces in the West. The 5 peripheral alienation experienced by Manitobans was on average lower than that of the other western and Atlantic provinces and Alberta’s level of peripheral alienation was significantly higher than any other province (2002). Proponents of regional alienation often generalize the experience of Alberta across other western provinces, calling into question the alleged ubiquity of regional alienation in the West. So then why is “Atlantic alienation” not a salient political concern — what about western alienation makes it so prevalent? Economic clout. The frustration in the West lies in their lack of political influence despite their economic success — resulting in vociferous protest movements (e.g., “Wexit”) (Henry, 2001). Indeed, Mildred Schwartz found a correlation between rising economic fortunes in the West and political activism related to Western separation (1974). While Atlantic Canadians are similarly frustrated by their lack of political efficacy, their dependency on the federal government for revenues and resources reduces their bargaining power with the federal government (Henry, 2001)2. Western Alienation: Not Regionally Focussed Second, political alienation better accounts for the behaviour of those in Western Canada in demonstrating that Western Canadians’ alienation is not necessarily rooted in region, but rather a lack of political efficacy. Data from the 1997 Canadian Election Study verifies this: Drawing data specifically from western Canadian respondents, they find that in the Prairies, 71% of respondents agree with the statement “People like me have no say,” 70% agree that “Government does not care,” and 83% agree that “MPs lose touch.” Similarly, 2 Henry cites the systematic underdevelopment of the Atlantic provinces as a result of federal policy since Confederation as the course of their subsequent reliance on the federal government. 6 in BC, 69% agree that “People like me have no say,” 66% agree that “Government does not care,” and 85% agree that “MPs lose touch.” (Clarke et al., 2002, as cited in Lawson, 2005, p. 141) Western Canadians’ reactions to these statements indicate high levels of dissatisfaction with their ability to provide input in the political process/institutions and the government’s responsiveness to their concerns, indicating feelings of low political efficacy3. Additionally, Western Canadians express concerns that their representatives are out of touch with their values — the statement “MPs lose touch” received the most universal support across the West. This is intriguing as it confirms that the alienation that Western Canadians face is not because they are Western, but rather because they are alienated from the political process. Members of Parliament (MPs) are from the regions they represent, thus sharing the same regional concerns as their constituents. This suggests that the primary issue plaguing Western Canadians is a lack of opportunity to engage in the political process — this is political, not specifically regional, alienation. It could be argued that characterizing the alienation Western Canadians face as political alienation neglects the federal government’s historical actions that have disadvantaged the West. However, these concerns should be viewed within the framework of political alienation as a failure of the federal government to consider the concerns of those in the West, intensifying individuals’ political alienation. This perspective is not dependent on alienation as a result of region, but rather Western Canadians’ feeling that they cannot engage with the political process, 3 As identified previously,