Alberta Election 2012 - Watershed Issues (part 3)

Danielle Smith is the leader of the Wildrose party. A key aspect to the 
Wildrose energy platform is to "encourage understanding and support 
(for the energy sector) while resisting efforts by other governments and 
authorities to hinder growth through regulation," which 
columnist Deborah Yedlin calls "poppycock."
Photograph by: Ed Kaiser, Edmonton Journal

Yesterday, we posted two video presentations by Brad Stelfox on the subject of regional development plans.  Today, we give you columnist Deborah Yedlin's take on the subject. 

Wildrose push for property rights changes would serve little purpose

By Deborah Yedlin,

Calgary Herald

April 11, 2012

It's time to talk about what has made Alberta what it is today - a wealthy province with an educated population in an enviable position of being the place where the world wants to do business.

Some of this is the result of the dumb luck of its natural resource endowment, but it also relates to the fact the natural resources are owned by the province, not the federal government, that land rights are owned by the Crown, not the individual - as is the case in south of the border - and the royalty structure encourages exploration and development.

To be sure, there was a big hiccup under former premier Ed Stelmach on the royalty structure, but one is hard pressed to hear quibbling about royalties today. The real concerns in the oilpatch these days have to do with issues such as the development of new export markets, low natural gas prices, the regulatory burden, industry's social licence to operate and access to resources.

This last point includes property rights. In the current Alberta election campaign, the Wildrose party has made the point that without protection and preservation of property rights, the economy would cease to function.

True.

But given the strength of the Alberta economy, one would be hard-pressed to suggest the existing legislation governing property rights has had a negative impact on economic growth.

As an example: Is Bill 36 perfect?

No.

But having regional development plans is absolutely critical for certainty of land access; where things arguably might need to be tweaked is the split between regulation and policy - and what better achieves the desired ends.

The point, really, is that changing existing legislation to address one perceived problem does nothing but create uncertainty; no one knows what is coming, how long it will take and what the changes might be.

As a province that has been lauded for its political certainty in the context of being an attractive jurisdiction in which to invest - even with the royalty framework hiccup - the fact foreign companies have committed big dollars to development in this province speaks volumes to the mechanisms already in place.

One aspect in the property rights section that is troubling, however, is the suggestion Alberta will spearhead an initiative to entrench property rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The fact this is included as part of the election platform indicates the Wildrose doesn't understand the spirit of the Charter or the mechanism in which change is possible.

For the record, property rights were purposely excluded from the Charter because property is not deemed to be the defining characteristic of an individual.

As one lawyer pointed out, property doesn't make Canadians who they are; it's about the integrity of the individual not what titles in property they happen to hold. Moreover, to have anything entrenched in the Charter requires unanimous agreement from all provinces as well as the federal government. It's unlikely this would be the hill for any province to die on.

One possible explanation for the inclusion of this spurious promise is that it reflects the philosophy of one of the Wildrose strategists - Tom Flanagan - who is on the record as having said that something doesn't have to be true, "only plausible."

In other words, it's plausible something could be added to the Charter, but highly unlikely.

Either way, including something like this casts a parochial character to the Wildrose platform in the current Alberta election. But it's not unique to the property rights - the same tone is evident on its position on energy.

A key aspect to the Wildrose energy platform is to "encourage understanding and support (for the energy sector) while resisting efforts by other governments and authorities to hinder growth through regulation."

Poppycock.

Let's be clear: the federal government is just as aware as the rest of us the world's lens, right or wrong, is trained on Alberta and the responsible development of its energy resources. Suggesting the Wildrose will succeed in pushing back regulation from the federal level is disingenuous, at best. It's going to happen and the only thing Alberta can and should do is meet the new standards.

What's most disconcerting, however, is that there is no language of collaboration in evidence. No man, or province, is an island.

Recently, the line from Alberta's leadership has been about working with other jurisdictions to ensure that economic development of Alberta's natural resources is not compromised because the benefit accrues not just in the province, but across the country. The time for pitting Alberta against the rest of the country is passed but that is not how the Wildrose seems to read it. The adversarial tone would turn the clock back - and that's the last thing this province needs.

Via: Yedlin: Calgary Herald