Behind-the-scenes of The Missive #12
Fairy tales told to Albertans: The Emperor's Alberta Sovereignty Within A United Canada Act (A free preview of content provided to paid subscribers)
My Scottish/Irish ancestors arrived on the east coast of so-called “Canada” in the late 1700’s or early 1800’s and were part of several waves of genocidal colonization of the Indigenous people who were already here. We arrived uninvited on the traditional unceded territory of the Wəlastəkewiyik (Maliseet) whose ancestors along with the Mi’Kmaq / Mi’kmaw and Passamaquoddy / Peskotomuhkati Tribes / Nations signed Peace and Friendship Treaties with the British Crown in the 1700s. I like to start every new post by explaining my family’s history and keeping this foremost in my mind (and my writing) at all times. I know I have benefited as a result of colonization, and I find the history deeply troubling. It is what motivates me to understand the true history and advocate for real reconciliation. As a child in the 1970’s, I moved west with my family and am grateful to be writing this newsletter now in Moh’kinsstis, and the traditional Treaty 7 territory of the Blackfoot confederacy: Siksika, Kainai, Piikani, as well as the Îyâxe Nakoda and Tsuut’ina nations. This territory is also home to the Métis Nation of Alberta, Region 3 within the historical Northwest Métis homeland. I recognize that the land I now work and live on was stolen from these nations (truth) and I support giving the land back as an act of reconciliation. Lands inhabited by Indigenous Peoples contain 80% of the world’s remaining biodiversity. Indigenous Peoples’ traditional knowledge and knowledge systems are key to designing a sustainable future for all.
There’s a folktale, a version of which was written down by Hans Christian Andersen in 1837 that sprang to mind after Danielle Smith held a news conference to announce her government’s latest “public display of disaffection” with the federal government.
The story is called “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” Perhaps you’ve heard of it?
The tale concerns an emperor who has an obsession with fancy new clothes, and spends lavishly on them, at the expense of state matters. One day, two con-men visit the emperor's capital. Posing as weavers, they offer to supply him with magnificent clothes that are invisible to those who are incompetent or stupid. The gullible emperor hires them, and they set up looms and pretend to go to work. (Wikipedia)
In our modern retelling, Danielle Smith is Alberta’s emperor obsessed with sovereignty. She’s willing to spend lavishly to boost her standing with the United Conservative Party members who feel the same and swept her to power in 2022.
Two lawyers (Rob Anderson and Derek From) got together with a political scientist (Barry Cooper) and concocted an idea for something they called “the sovereignty act.”
They later convinced Smith it was a good idea, all while admitting the whole thing was deliberately “unconstitutional.” Only those who were incompetent or stupid would not be able to see how brilliant their idea was. And so, the stage was set.
A succession of officials, starting with the emperor's wise and competent minister, and then ending with the emperor himself, visit them to check their progress. Each sees that the looms are empty but pretends otherwise to avoid being thought a fool. Finally, the weavers report that the emperor's suit is finished. They mime dressing him and he sets off in a procession before the whole city. (Wikipedia)
Newly elected and basking in her power, Smith introduced the act into law as her very first bill as premier. Even though many of her ministers had previously called the idea preposterous, they abruptly changed their tune to avoid being thought a fool.
The first time Smith took her new legislation out for a promenade in the legislature, a motion was woven together with the thread of a constitutional threat and all members of her caucus fell in line.
A year later, nothing had happened or changed but there appeared a second opportunity to parade the act once again in the legislature. The question remained, would anyone call out the leader’s transparently unconstitutional proposal?
Read “Alberta’s ‘Pointless’, ‘Performative’ Sovereignty Act Move Won’t See Court Anytime Soon: Expert” by Jody MacPherson in The Energy Mix
The weavers report the suit is finished
Columnist and former reporter Don Braid had the scoop on the Alberta Sovereignty Act motion on Nov. 25.
Leaking information to a “friendly journalist” in order to frame the announcement early is a common public relations (PR) strategy. But it does come with some risks, including alienating other media. Some argue that it is a borderline unethical PR practice, but Alberta government press secretaries don’t seem all that concerned with the study of ethics. (Author’s note)
The headline on his story was: “Alberta’s ‘most provocative anti-Ottawa action coming Tuesday to block emissions cap” there was a smaller sub-headline: “Government sources say the motion will 'make it virtually impossible for Ottawa to impose the cap in Alberta'.”
Braid recounted how the first sovereignty act motion last year, which was very similar to this new one, did not slow “Ottawa’s drive to control Alberta’s industry.” That might indicate some healthy skepticism was in order…but nope. One might say he mimed dressing up the legislation to avoid being thought a fool.
Smith is moving defiantly toward more direct, practical action. The source says the measures now coming will be the “most provocative” Alberta has used yet. (Don Braid)
He then repeated talking points from the government about the province’s “constitutional authority over energy and electricity.” In reality, both energy and the environment are overlapping responsibilities between the federal and provincial governments. Like that empty loom, this is something Smith and the UCP fail to acknowledge to this day.
With the table set for Smith to announce her upcoming promenade, the rest of the media finally had a look at the motion on Nov. 26. You can be the judge with this small sample of the headlines:
National Post: Alberta to fight back against Trudeau government's emissions cap
Globe and Mail: Alberta Premier Danielle Smith to test sovereignty act in emissions cap fight with Ottawa
CBC: Alberta to use Sovereignty Act to push back on proposed federal emissions cap
The Canadian Press/CTV News: Alberta takes aim at emissions cap, proposes rules on trespass and data gathering
CityNews: Alberta invoking Sovereignty Act in fight against Ottawa’s proposed emissions cap
Most of the early headlines picked up and used the word “fight” direct from the government news release and fair enough, Smith is in some kind of battle, but who is going to tell her she’s been duped?
The CBC’s first headline tempered the tone a bit by using “push back.” CTV went with a “fight-adjacent” weapons reference (“takes aim”) but at least mentioned the actual content of the motion in the headline.
As we’ll learn, the media looked at the sovereignty act with suspicion, but were not quite comfortable leading with what the experts told them. And so, with Smith determined to brand herself as someone who is fighting for Albertans, the media obliged. A win for the press secretaries…er…weavers.
Seeing an empty loom
Journalists know they need to put the most important information at or near the top of the story. Newsworthy stuff - like the fact that this may be the Alberta version of The Emperor’s New Clothes - shouldn’t be buried deep in the article.
Here’s the motion that was eventually introduced on Dec. 2:
In many of those initial media reports, there were already indications the seven things the government was proposing were:
not all new (another legal challenge to the federal government’s jurisdiction);
not possible under current laws (the legal challenge would first need to be successful)
lacking in any detail (probably because of the next point)
subject to changes after consultation (with industry, for example).
And yet, none of that journalistic skepticism was given much focus in the headlines or anywhere near the tops of many of the stories. Even though the experts were saying quite loudly (and have been for a while) that the premier’s motion may be unconstitutional and possibly illegal, that wasn’t what you’d conclude from the headlines.
In its story, the Globe and Mail made only passing reference to the fact that experts said the proposed actions were “constitutionally questionable.”
Quotes from both the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers and the Pembina Institute were added, possibly to represent both sides of the issue, but neither provided much clarity on the motion.
This reminded me of an old journalism saying that can be traced back to the 1970’s or possibly earlier. An unnamed NBC journalist repeated the standard most succinctly in a later retelling: “Our job is not to report both sides. One side says it’s raining and the other side says it is not raining. Our job is to look out the window.”
The risk of being thought a fool
Who will look out the window and confront the question of whether the motion will actually do what it claims?
The Canadian Press provided the media with multiple quotes and perspectives, which were then repurposed in multiple ways. There was a statement questioning the legality issued by the federal government, and a constitutional law expert who was quoted repeatedly saying the measures “likely wouldn’t stand in court.”
Yet, doubts from experts continued to appear further down in the stories, with little focus on the questionable constitutionality and legality. More focus was placed on the pomp of the procession.
CTVNews credited its full story to The Canadian Press which did try to explain the process, which is noteworthy since no other media included this explanation.
FACT: A motion is a procedural step but it doesn’t mean
anything in the motion is a formal regulation or law yet. (Author’s note)
So, on the day of the announcement we had heard questions about the act’s constitutionality, accusations of the motion being “performative,” and an expert saying the government was unlikely to win in court.
None of that made it into the headlines or the ledes (the first line of a news story).
The townsfolk uncomfortably go along with the pretense, not wanting to appear inept or stupid, until a child blurts out that the emperor is wearing nothing at all. The people then realize that everyone has been fooled. Although startled, the emperor continues the procession, walking more proudly than ever. The fate of the con-men is not revealed. (Wikipedia)
Which brings us to The National Post, which reported the government’s claims almost verbatim. They did not talk to any experts or include any opposing views.
They also have a factual error in their story, which is still on the website as I write this, uncorrected: “On Tuesday afternoon, Alberta’s governing United Conservative Party introduced a motion in the legislature under the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act.” There was a news conference on Nov. 26 but the motion wasn’t officially introduced until almost a week later on Dec. 2.
The National Post, the Calgary Herald, and the Edmonton Journal are all owned by Postmedia. Although coverage of the motion didn’t make the pages of the Alberta dailies until Dec. 2, the opinions on the motion appeared in their publications the SAME DAY. David Staples wrote about it in the Journal, and Chris Varcoe had an “explainer” in the Herald. The actual news coverage didn’t appear until five days later.
You can read their glowing reports on the emperor’s sovereignty act by following the links provided in my story for The Mix. I’m not going to repeat them here.
Not wanting to feel inept or stupid
In the days between the news conference and the tabling of the motion, some media headlines started to question the motion’s seven strategies, most notably the CBC. They also picked up on Canadian Press reporting on the lack of consultation. Although, this is like complaining there weren’t enough weavers around the empty loom.
Here is a sample of the subsequent headlines:
Global TV: Alberta threatens to invoke sovereignty act over federal emissions cap
Calgary Herald/Edmonton Journal: Alberta premier tables sovereignty act motion challenging federal emission cap
CBC: Guilbeault warns of violation of federal law as Alberta heats up Sovereignty Act challenge
The Canadian Press/CBC: Industry not consulted on Alberta's plan to challenge federal emissions cap
CBC: Black cloud: Alberta's latest fight with Ottawa could drive oilpatch investment away
Only one mention of the f-word, and by now, you can be sure the social media townsfolk are feeling a bit uncomfortable.
Going along with the pretense
The Canadian Press story quoted Tristan Goodman, president of the Explorers and Producers Association of Canada who was clearly caught off-guard and admitted, "we weren't broadly consulted.”
He said companies “need to see more detail, particularly around Smith's suggestion that the provincial government could take exclusive control and ownership of emissions data collected at oil and gas company sites.”
"That's where we would like to be collaborated with. We would like to be talked to, to see how that would specifically work." (Tristan Goodman)
Goodman was perhaps feeling a bit uncomfortable with the whole spectacle. Smith appeared startled by his outburst of honesty and quickly went on the defensive when asked about it by reporters:
"That's our approach … we firmly believe that the companies should look at this and thank us for being willing to protect them from federal government overreach." (Danielle Smith)
The premier continued the procession, walking more proudly than ever.
With more time to think about it, here’s what Goodman said to the Calgary Herald later in the week: “...it’s clear the province doesn’t have a willing partner to work with in Ottawa. We would need to see the details of what the province is doing but, overall, we appreciate the premier is stepping up and defending the sector.”
And of course “the fate of the con-men is not YET revealed.”
Read “Alberta’s ‘Pointless’, ‘Performative’ Sovereignty Act Move Won’t See Court Anytime Soon: Expert” by Jody MacPherson in The Energy Mix
I’ll leave you with this live performance of “Emperor’s New Clothes” by Panic! at the Disco.
I'm taking back, back, taking back, back the crown
I'm all dressed up and naked
I see what's mine and take it
(Finders keepers, losers weepers), oh, yeah
The crown, so close, I can taste it
I see what's mine and take it
This was fascinating to read. Brilliant stuff, Jody. Thank you for helping us look out the window!