By Martha Hall Findlay

September 10, 2019

French version originally published as part of federal election series in La Presse, September 10, 2019

The wonderful (anglophone) observer of so many things Canadian, the author Roy MacGregor, once described Canada as being like a bumblebee. At first look – a big body, tiny little wings – one can’t believe that it could possibly fly.

But it does.

Similarly, Canada with its huge and incredibly varied geography and regional economic strengths; two official “founding” nations, cultures and languages; all of the tribes, cultures and languages that pre-dated European contact; a history of immigration leading to one of the most diverse populations in the world – how is it possible that this country actually works?

But it does. And not only does it work, it is by most measures extraordinarily successful – for the most part, we have the good fortune of living in one of the world’s most economically and socially prosperous places.

We recently celebrated that success – at least by way of celebrating 150 years of the political construct that is Canada. At the same time, we have all been doing better at acknowledging its mistakes, its bumps, its bruises. The federation has, over the years, certainly had its dark moments, its challenges and – particularly in Quebec – occasional threats to its very existence as a unified entity.

Yet the state of this success story, as a federation, is at the most dangerous place it has been, certainly in my lifetime.

And one of the biggest reasons why we are in such a dangerous place is so dangerous is that most people in central and eastern Canada have no idea just how bad things are.

Quebeckers, more than other Canadians, should understand what is happening. Yet the political discourse in the country’s central and Eastern regions, in the media, in Ottawa – but importantly also so many private conversations, everywhere – seem oblivious to a real and present problem in the nation. Oblivious even to the fact that a problem even exists.

There is a possibility that a large part of Western Canada could decide to separate from the Rest of Canada. This is not idle conversation. Serious discussions are taking place, with significant intellectual and monetary resources supporting the effort. It’s serious.

There are those who are quick to dismiss the concept. After all, “What really would be gained if Alberta and Saskatchewan were to separate together?” they ask. “It would be a country still landlocked between two parts of Canada. It wouldn’t help their biggest current concern, which is the inability to get oil, gas and other resources to world markets, either through British Columbia or across Ontario and in particular Quebec.” A good argument – except that the serious discussions don’t just involve Alberta and Saskatchewan, but a large portion of central and northwestern British Columbia – including coastline. Including, therefore, direct access to the ocean and Asian markets.

Many even in the West discount these rumblings, including many who are just as angry, who understand and feel the frustrations propelling these discussion, but believe that separation won’t solve anything. Indeed, during the last major energy controversy in Canada when the current prime minister’s father was prime minister, decades ago, a strong separatist sentiment emerged in Alberta, with serious people seriously promoting it at the time – but it died. Partly because of the recognition that land-locked Alberta would have a hard time doing better on its own that as part of Canada; partly because in time economic conditions improved.

But Alberta, Saskatchewan plus a large part of BC with access to the ocean? This is different. And very serious. Key leaders of the current federal government – as well as many central and eastern Canadians, have made it abundantly clear that they do not support the survival – let alone the success – of the oil and gas industry of the West (often conveniently ignoring the oil and gas industries in other parts of the country). The fact that, for the recent Federal Court of Appeal hearings, the federal government did not even bother to show up to defend its own consultations indigenous communities, on which it based its second approval of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, is seen by many in the West as proof that the Trudeau cabinet never really wanted the pipeline to proceed at all.

Will the rest of Canada respond the way the non-Quebecois ‘rest of Canada’ responded when so many Quebeckers wanted to separate? Will there be an effort to understand why so many people in the West are so angry that they feel that not being a part of Canada – this otherwise wonderful success story – would be better?

Will those now campaigning for election in October recognize the importance of this issue and be willing to engage in the all-necessary debate? Canada needs them to. Let’s hope they do.

– Martha Hall Findlay is president and CEO of the Canada West Foundation and a former Member of Parliament