The Pearson Centre for Progressive Policy

Progressive Dialogue and Policy for a Better Canada

Options for AB & SK in the new Govt (Cardozo)

By

November 4, 2019

Options for AB & SK in the new Govt (Cardozo)

By Andrew Cardozo

ELECTION 2019
Trudeau has many options to include Alberta and Saskatchewan in his government
By ANDREW CARDOZO NOV. 4, 2019
THE HILL TIMES

The Senate route is the only way to have cabinet representation from these two provinces; people who will have a high-profile, public role in the decision-making process.

OTTAWA—There are just so many options for the Trudeau government to reach out and involve the citizens of Alberta and Saskatchewan, but there is no single silver bullet. The conundrum is this: on the one hand, the two provinces just declined to elect a single Liberal MP from either province, in part, because they felt their voice was not being heard, even though they together had elected five Liberals in 2015.

Yet now, if they are left out of meaningful inclusion the anger will only be stronger. We have both a policy problem and a systemic problem. One approach is to fix the systemic one which can lead to more responsive policies.

There are many solutions for outreach and inclusion that can help in these provinces, some of which can also be considered for any or all regions of Canada. There are many potential solutions that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau can choose from. Yes, there is no ideal solution and every suggestions here has its weaknesses. But several measures together can be effective.

Cabinet presence:
There is certainly a tradition exercised by Liberals and Conservatives to appoint Senators to cabinet for regions not represented by MPs from the party in power. Yes, Trudeau is committed to appointing Independent Senators to the extent that today the Independent Senators Group are the majority in the Upper Chamber, for the first time in history. Even Sir John A. Macdonald appointed partisan Senators only. So given these good results so far and given this critical situation of cabinet representation, there is certainly room to make two exceptions and appoint two Senators who will sit in cabinet.

And here’s an additional nuance: they don’t have to be Liberals, in the event that folks are really tied in knots about Independent Senators. There is no requirement that all ministers be members of the party in power, they just have to sit in either house of Parliament. They could sit in the Senate as Liberals or be Independents and yet be in cabinet. There are at least five good candidates in the current Senate who are Independent or Liberal: Grant Mitchell, Paula Simons, and Dr. Patti Laboucane-Benson from Alberta; Lillian Dyck and Marty Klyne from Saskatchewan—and they have various business, media, health and social work backgrounds. The others are Conservatives or former Conservatives and may not be such a good fit.

In addition, there is a new vacancy in the Senate.

Short of bringing in a Conservative MP or the lone New Democrat from Alberta, which seems completely unrealistic, the Senate route is the only way to have cabinet representation from these two provinces—people who will have a high-profile, public role in the decision-making process. Voters, whether they are angry at the Liberals or not, need to be able to have political representatives who they can engage with.

Cabinet allies:
The prime minister could identify two additional ministers as having special responsibility of liaison with the two provinces—for example, a Manitoba MP to be the liaison with neighbouring Saskatchewan and a British Columbia minister to be the liaison with neighbouring Alberta. They could also be from other provinces with some stated responsibility for provincial liaison.

Cabinet committee:
Given the considerable angst and economic turmoil in the West, a special cabinet committee on western economic development would make a lot of sense. The committee would have some very clear objectives on policy issues that needed attention, including oil and gas and the need to diversify and harness the green economy, while recognizing that the economic issues are different across the four provinces.

The committee can also meet in western locations regularly such that their meetings are coupled with outreach with provincial and municipal governments, business, labour, associations, farmers, workers and ordinary citizens.

House of Commons Committee on Western Economic Development:
A special committee of MPs or even a joint committee of MPs and Senators, will ensure that Parliamentarians from those two provinces have a clear and distinct role and voice on issues of importance. While it is obviously an opportunity for political hay to be made for the opposition, a good faith initiative can still be useful.

Besides, now that the opposition parties will control the House committees, it’s going to be a new world and the opposition parties will need to ensure that all committees are not obstructionist when all parties are under pressure to cooperate, after that divisive campaign.

Minister for Western Economic Development from the West:
In the last government, the minister of innovation, science and economic development was also the minister responsible for all the regional economic ministries. It is a good time to return these roles to ministers from each region, especially the West.

Advisers:
Having several well-placed external advisers is another idea that has been floated. Whether a formal or informal group, it is a worthwhile idea, but recognize that such advisers should come from various sectors, and be urban and rural.

Senior staffers:
Many are suggesting that the prime minister could appoint a chief of staff or senior advisers in his office from the West. This is all certainly worthwhile and can produce results, but may not contribute much to the urgent need for open and better communications. Not enough to say, trust us, we have some great people behind the scenes.

Communications:
It is time for the government to adopt a more distinct way of communicating. Buying the pipeline was about getting oil to tide water. But isn’t it also, if not more importantly, about saving jobs in Alberta and Saskatchewan? If it is, say so. The federal Liberals would do well to take some lessons in communications from provincial conservatives who have mastered the art of explaining complex policies in bumper stickers and hashtags, which most importantly are memorable to voters.

Better organization of House votes:
In the last decade, House voting has been increasingly unpredictable and chaotic, requiring all MPs to be close to the House at all times. Meetings with citizens, or committee hearings on the Hill are frequently interrupted and cancelled. It doesn’t have to be this way. All parties can agree to a more predictable scheduling of votes so that MPs of all parties can travel to interact with Canadians across the country and not have to cancel meetings and speeches regularly. It’s a matter of MPs respecting citizens and ensuring that they can travel, especially to regions far from Ottawa in the East and West.

The policy issues:
The two issues that western premiers have been highlighting most are building pipelines and repealing Bill C-69, “The modernization of the National Energy Board and Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency,” which Alberta Premier Jason Kenney has tactfully named the “No Pipelines Bill.” While the prime minister has re-committed to the pipeline since the election, repealing or amending Bill C-69 may be a tougher nut to crack, but is there room for amendments? The actual list is longer and covers agriculture, the green economy, innovation, immigration, Indigenous advancement, climate change, and other issues like the rest of Canada. A dynamic minority government, focused on all the regions, with an active and involved opposition, can make some real things happen. It’s been done before. Think of the Pearson government’s record!

Andrew Cardozo is president of the Pearson Centre