In its perpetual sea of political blue, Alberta’s two largest cities stand out as islands of progressive resistance. In the 2021 municipal election, Calgary and Edmonton elected progressive councils, while in the 2023 provincial election, the NDP won all seats in Edmonton and most of those in Calgary. Now, it appears, Danielle Smith’s UCP government has decided to punish them for their disloyalty.
Bill 20, the “Municipal Affairs Charter Amendment Act,” would give Smith’s cabinet the ability to fire mayors and council members, repeal charters and even postpone elections if it sees fit. The only limitation on this power would be public protest, and with a majority government that might have to wait years to be heard. For a government that complains endlessly about federal overreach, its new Bill 20 reaches stunning new levels of hypocrisy.
The proposed bill does not technically conflict with our Constitution. It dictates that municipalities are entirely beholden to the provinces that created them, meaning they have no real legal capacity. “They can absolutely exert this control over those cities or any city if they want,” said University of Alberta law professor Eric Adams. noted in an interview with Global. “The province could make Edmonton and Calgary disappear if they wanted to through legislation. But just because one has power, of course, doesn’t mean one should exercise it.” Even Tyler Gandam, chair of Alberta Municipalities and mayor of Wetaskiwin (hardly a bastion of progressive politics), described it as a “power grab.”
The bill’s first target could be the proposed amendment to Calgary’s land use bylaw, which would see the city move forward with so-called “blanket zoning” recommended by its Housing and Affordability Task Force. His declared opposition, unsurprisingly, is informed by the federal government and its interest in “rewriting the zoning laws” in Calgary. Yes, having Calgary city council take up this issue would clearly put the province at odds with federal Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and his promise to eliminate housing “gatekeepers,” but that’s a fight for someone else. day, and neither of them is particularly eager to start it.
But Smith’s looming fight with Naheed Nenshi, who will almost certainly become leader of the Alberta NDP in June, is an entirely different matter. Bill 20 is a gift to the likely future leader of the opposition, who will be able to brandish his credentials as a former mayor and remind Albertans of the importance of strong municipal leadership and political independence. Indeed, given that the Alberta NDP’s path to power runs through cities like Calgary and Edmonton, as well as smaller urban centers like Lethbridge, Red Deer and Medicine Hat, this UCP attack on cities seems particularly ill-advised.
It could even provoke some resistance within the ranks of the UCP. Take Back Alberta, the group that now essentially controls the party executive and clearly influences many of its political decisions, is directed by someone who self-identifies as a “decentralist.” As David Parker said National mailDonna Kennedy-Glans said in January: “I believe in localism. “I think we need to take power away from the institutions.” Now, Parker and his traveling companions will have to decide what they believe in more: his supposed principles or his proximity to power.
But Smith’s attack on the independence of Alberta’s municipalities will resonate far beyond its provincial borders. It is a reminder to other municipal leaders across the country – especially in provinces with their own Conservative premiers – that their independence and autonomy are now clearly at risk. It wouldn’t be at all surprising to see this legislation adopted in places like Saskatchewan or Ontario, where Doug Ford has meddled in municipal political issues many times before.
It may even increase tension in the long-simmering conversation about the need to give Canada’s cities more constitutionally guaranteed authority than they had in 1867. In the 21st century, as demand for commodities like As oil and gas inevitably begins to rise, Canada will need to develop new sources of economic strength and opportunity. These will be found almost entirely in our cities, where the vast majority of people and our centers of knowledge and learning are located, and where they can be combined to develop, harness and commercialize knowledge and ideas.
We will not be able to do this effectively if our major cities are mere vassals of their respective provincial governments. Yes, constitutional change is difficult at the best of times, even in difficult times when it is most needed. But if the Trudeau government is looking for a way to advance its political argument against the provinces and their corrosive impact on Confederation, Smith’s new legislation offers a rather tempting target.