Scheer blasts Blanchet for ‘hypocrisy’
tory leader steps into BQ-Alberta spat
OTTAWA • Conservative leader Andrew Scheer took aim at the leader of the Bloc Québécois on Thursday, calling Yves-François Blanchet “insulting” and “disingenuous” for dismissing concerns about western alienation earlier this week.
“Insulting because he accused westerners of faking a unity crisis when the frustration and anxiety out west is all too real,” Scheer said in a statement. “Disingenuous because he refuses to acknowledge how much his province has benefitted from the west’s economic success. His hypocrisy and double-standard are astounding.”
Scheer’s comments come after a long-distance exchange of barbs between Blanchet and Alberta Premier Jason Kenney on Wednesday over Alberta oil development and the federal equalization program. The Bloc Québécois opposes oil and gas development, including the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, while Kenney and other western political leaders have often claimed Quebec benefits disproportionately from equalization transfers, thanks in part to Alberta oil revenue.
Economists, however, say Kenney is misrepresenting the equalization program by suggesting incorrectly that Alberta is transferring money directly to Quebec.
Speaking to reporters after a meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Wednesday morning, Blanchet was asked for his thoughts on calls from western Canada for more independence. “If they were attempting to create a green state in western Canada, I might be tempted to help them,” he said. “If they are trying to create an oil state in western Canada, they cannot expect any help from us.”
Kenney shot back during a speech in Calgary, claiming Quebec benefits from Alberta oil development through the federal equalization program, which transferred $13 billion to Quebec this fiscal year. “If they want to take money from the oil from Alberta, you have to let us develop it,” he said. “Why do you oppose the industry that sends $13 billion to the Quebec government?”
The episode feeds into a broader narrative of regional tensions following the federal election, which saw the governing Liberals entirely shut out of Alberta and Saskatchewan, while in Quebec, the Bloc Québécois rode a new wave of nationalism back to prominence. Scheer and the western premiers are demanding more support for resource development from the federal government, while the Bloc Québécois has named climate change among its top priorities, and staunchly opposes any new pipeline through Quebec.
Quebec benefits directly from the Alberta oil industry — in fact, roughly 44 per cent of the province’s oil comes from western Canada.
Asked about this on CBC’s Power & Politics on Wednesday, Blanchet said Quebec’s “needs are fulfilled” and has no reason to support further pipeline development. “Our responsibility is to consume less and less oil, not more and more,” he said. “Therefore, there is no reason for Quebec to support being simply a territory that you cross in order to increase the exportations of Canadian oil to wherever they want.”
But when it comes to equalization, the link between Quebec and the Alberta oilsands is much more tenuous than Kenney is suggesting, economists say. “There’s a fundamental misunderstanding here. That is not Alberta’s money,” said Michael Smart, an economist at the University of Toronto. “Mr. Kenney understands that and he should start being honest about it.”
The federal equalization program transfers general revenue to lower-income provinces so that all Canadians receive comparable public services, regardless of where they live. Trevor Tombe, an economist at the University of Calgary, said Alberta’s oil industry benefits Quebec only to the extent that increased economic activity
INSULTING BECAUSE HE ACCUSED WESTERNERS OF FAKING A UNITY CRISIS.
contributes to federal revenue through corporate income taxes. “It’s a very indirect channel,” he said. “There isn’t any actual sharing of resource royalty revenues.”
Smart said that rich Canadians, no matter where they live, pay more in taxes that can be distributed through equalization, a point Tombe also made in an op-ed for the Globe and Mail in 2018. “So it’s not that Alberta pays more: high-income individuals do, regardless of where they live, and Alberta just happens to be home to a large number of them,” he wrote.
Natural resource revenue is included in a calculation of each province’s fiscal capacity — a measure of how much revenue each province could raise with tax rates equal to the national average that’s used to work out equalization payments. But André Lecours, a political scientist at the University of Ottawa, said even if resource revenue were left out of the calculation entirely, nothing would change for Alberta, and equalization payments for Quebec could even increase. “Oil is a small part of the story, I guess,” he said.
And while it is true that Quebec receives two thirds of the federal equalization transfer, that’s only because its population is much larger than any other province that receives equalization payments, Lecours said. On a per-capita basis, provinces like Prince Edward Island receive much more.