If Trudeau didn’t cancel meetings, why should NDP?

It may well be that the Alberta government’s controversial Bighorn parks plan is far more benign than many of its critics fear or allege. It may well be that the charged atmosphere generated by a looming election means far too few people are approaching the matter with an open mind.

Therefore, it’s entirely possible that the public consultations around this project may end up being primarily the venting of opposition as opposed to the gathering of facts. Obviously, though, there’s no way to know for sure until those meetings occur. And if opponents of the project wish to portray themselves as irrational and intransigent, then they’re only hurting their own cause.

Ultimately, though, public consultations are an important step in this process and it would be wrong to view them as a favour from a beneficent government. We should be deeply concerned about arbitrary decisions to cancel such consultations, especially if they are driven by political considerations. It’s awkward for any government to be the ones providing the very forum which demonstrates the unpopularity of a policy or initiative.

Perhaps the current government ought to consider the precedent it is setting here by cancelling the upcoming sessions. No doubt a hypothetical NDP opposition would be deeply suspicious of such decisions being made by a hypothetical UCP government.

If there are legitimate security concerns, then the obvious answer is to increase security at the meetings. Cancelling the meetings altogether should be the sort of extraordinary step taken in the event of a bomb threat or someone threatening to shoot up the place.

The government has compounded this mess with a shifting narrative around exactly what has occurred or been said and what, if anything, is under police investigation.

We now know the RCMP did not advise the government to cancel the meetings and that the RCMP does not have any active investigations related to this.

Given that impressions have been created to the contrary, the explanation from Environment Minister Shannon Phillips is that she “misspoke.”

The province has pledged to reschedule the consultations at a later date, but given that we still don’t fully understand how and why they came to be cancelled in the first place, it’s difficult to know what the criteria are, or need to be, for a resumption.

It was a fascinating contrast last week. As the province was trying to find a narrative that would stick around its controversial decision to cancel these meetings, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was holding town hall meetings in Kamloops and Regina, despite the simmering tension in both communities around a variety of issues.

There’s a fair amount of anger coming from those who are sympathetic to Indigenous protesters in northern B.C. who are trying to block a natural gas pipeline. And then there is the so-called yellow vest movement, whose followers are angry about … whatever it is they are angry about.

In fact, a number of comments on the Facebook page have caught the attention of both Facebook moderators and the RCMP for their vitriolic tone. Some have even wished for — or outright called for — violence against the prime minister.

Despite all of that, the town hall meetings were not cancelled and there was no serious suggestion that they ought to have been. Moreover, these town halls are not about informing the public or answering questions about an important new government policy or initiative. These are of questionable public value, although in fairness to Trudeau, the events are clearly not scripted or orchestrated in any way.

If the prime minister of the country can hold town halls in the face of death threats and social media hostility, it’s hard to understand why the Alberta government would cancel important public consultations in the face of vague and unconfirmed reports or inappropriate comments.

The province should move immediately to reschedule these meetings, with an increased police presence if need be.

Cancelling them was a mistake.