Does Premier Smith side with Albertans or Big Oil?
By Lethbridge Herald on April 10, 2025.
By Gordon Laxer
Where do Danielle Smith’s loyalties lie? People asked this question after she revealed on MAGA-aligned media that she counselled Trump officials to pause the tariffs until after Canada’s federal election is over. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is close to Trump’s agenda, she said, but the trade war is boosting Liberal support.
Trump changes his mind hourly, but the tariffs against Canada were imposed on April 2. The issue isn’t whether Smith swayed Trump. It’s about where her loyalties lie.
Being offside with Team Canada is not new for Smith. In January, she undermined Canada’s bargaining position by breaking ranks with all other premiers and the prime minister when she balked at signing their joint tariff statement. Smith vehemently refused to include Canada’s strongest bargaining chip in its retaliation arsenal — an export tax on oil.
Does this mean Smith is disloyal? To be charitable, perhaps it is not that she doesn’t love her country, but that she loves Big Oil more. Smith first made her mark by riding the wave of oil patch anger at a boost in provincial oil royalties under then-premier Ed Stelmach and his Progressive Conservatives. The Wildrose Party was pulled from obscurity in 2009 by Big Oil with Smith at its head. She rode the party to the brink of power in 2012 before a disastrous merger attempt with the governing Prentice PCs two years later.
Smith stepped away from politics for a while and lobbied for Big Oil on their “RStar” scheme to convince Alberta’s government to forgive $100 million in royalty payments to reimburse Big Oil for cleaning up orphan oil and natural gas wells they were legally obliged to clean up at their expense.
Promoting a sweetheart deal for Big Oil corporations was standard for a paid lobbyist, but Smith crossed the line when she was later elected premier and implemented the massive giveaway scheme she had lobbied for.
Did Smith’s counselling Trump to pause tariffs constitute an attempt to spark foreign political interference? That’s debatable. What’s not debatable is that Smith’s unswerving loyalty to Big Oil makes her loyalty suspect. Every Big Oil corporation in Canada is either wholly or majority foreign-owned. Most of the foreign ownership is American.
No majority Canadian-owned big oil corporation has existed since Suncor took over Petro-Canada in 2009. In researching Bloomberg terminals in 2021, I found that Suncor was 66 percent foreign-owned. Canadian Natural (CNRL) was 55 per cent foreign owned, Cenovus 72 per cent, Imperial 94 per cent and Shell 100 per cent.
Calgary’s big five oil corporations are a major part of Danielle Smith’s base. They may wave the maple leaf and pose as Canadian, but when the showdown hits between Canadian sovereignty and annexation, what side will they be on? And what side will Smith be on?
Recently the UCP government made a fuss about foreign-funded environmentalists conducting what they called “anti-Alberta energy campaigns.” Prodded by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), the UCP government set up a public inquiry to examine the extent of foreign funding of environmental groups.
Ninety-seven percent of CAPP’s funding comes from foreign-owned corporations. CAPP uses its foreign funds to meddle in Canadian politics. Before the 2019 federal election, CAPP strategized behind closed-doors with the federal Conservatives to oust the Trudeau Liberals.
The public inquiry was headed by Steve Allan. It found that only a pittance ( six per cent) of environmentalists’ funding was foreign. Nevertheless, when its report was released, Alberta’s Energy Minister, Sonya Savage, said it was a “real concern” that any group is “influencing political and regulatory change using foreign funding.”
Agreed. But if the premise that whoever pays the piper calls the tune is sound, the overwhelmingly foreign-funded oil industry is a real concern. So should be the perception that Alberta’s premier is in its pocket. These questions are crucial when Canada may be annexed against Canadians’ consent.
Albertans are proud of their province and proud Canadians. When the chips are down, they will want to be sure their premier will hold her elbows up to defend Canada and our way of life.
Gordon Laxer is the founding director of Parkland Institute at the University of Alberta and author of the peer-reviewed report Posing as Canadian: How Big Foreign Oil Captures Canadian Energy and Climate Policy. This column was originally published in the National Review.
17-16
The economies of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador and the territories rely heavily on natural resources. Alberta is the largest exporter of energy products to the United States and Alberta is the backbone of Canada’s natural resources exports. Alberta employs around 150,000 oil and gas sector workers in Alberta and thousands more are indirectly employed across Canada supplying various needs, from semi-trucks, to automobiles, buses, machinery/equipment, tools, clothing, safety equipment, work camps, and the list ripples down into many industries and businesses..
Alberta exported $134 billion in oil and gas to America, representing over 80% of Alberta’s total exported goods.
So the Premier has every right to defend our vital economy! Her loyalties lie with and for the people of this province and the province!
Other reports found much higher influence in funding and training protesters and not for environmental reasons, but for their own increases. Billionaires in some cases making more money!
Foreign money from competing oil and gas countries in the market did help fund some of the pipeline protests and protests against tidewater shipping facilities as well. . .as billionaires with major investments in CN Rail and CP Rail who would be impacted by pipelines did funnel money into some of their own non-profits which then ended up paying for protests against the oil and gas industry. One of those billionaires was the biggest shareholder of CN Rail at that time!
We needed those tidewater facilities and pipelines and now realize it, and it would have helped several European countries end their dependance on Russia, so those decisions impacted other parts of the world negatively as well!
I quit listening to the academics a few years ago after many began their progressive moves to change Canada, which in my mind has created the worst division ever seen in this country!
The Premier has a job to protect our jobs, and to protect our revenues and it is sad that an educated person has allowed themselves to follow the other sheep!
I think you should clean up your own house since we have seen a lot of unrest at universities due to foreign influences in many cases that are not positive for Canada!
No doubt you’ve heard of the “Dutch Disease?” I was introduced to the term in that left-wing rag The Economist. The concept aptly describes our economy. And just think for a moment, if Ralph Klein had not gutted alternative energy research in the 1990s, at the behest of Big Oil, Alberta could well be a global leader in those technologies.
Quebec offers a good example for comparison purposes. Starting with construction of the Saint Lawrence Seaway and the James Bay Project, Quebec became a global leader in concrete science, dam construction and electricity transmission over long distances.
Had Klein and those who followed him not been so cozy with Big Oil, we would probably not be in the pickle we are today with so many eggs in one basket. Sorry for mixing my metaphors.
What river in Alberta can you think of that would be conducive to damming for hydroelectric energy production?
My example was not meant to be taken quite so literally. But since you asked there is a dam proposal for the Peace River.
Why all the hate on “big oil” anyway? Why not hate on big convenience stores, big accounting, big data, big government?
Obviously you’ve lost track of the topic under discussion.
So who is the leader in “alterative energy research” that you are referring to?
GHG, why would I do your homework for you? I stopped doing that many years ago.
As a retired educator, my preferred approach is to be a support by pointing you in the right direction. So, here goes, you could do a simple Google search, which is the modern equivalent (although not as reliable) as starting your high school social studies project by consulting a general reference tool such as an encyclopedia. Or you could adopt a more advanced research approach and use, for example, Google Scholar. There are other search engines, but Google Scholar is pretty good, user friendly, easily accessible, and much improved in recent years.
Finally, I just noticed you haven’t answered my initial question about the “Dutch Disease.” Why don’t you start there.
And then there are the impacts of climate change correlated to the burning of fossil fuels. What ethical position supports hobbling our future for the profit if a handful of multinationals. Every decision the premier makes forecloses on the future.
The world isn’t ending. You can relax Sophie.
The companies you mentioned are Canadian domiciled companies with shareholders all over the world. Many of those shareholders are Canadian pension funds including the CPP. There are thousands more Canadian companies of every size both privately and publicly owned that are involved in the exploration, production and delivery of a vital product the world wants and needs.
Please stop with the foreign-owned, big oil drivel.
What confuses me is why does the Canadian taxpayer subsidize the oil industry which makes enormous profits and leaves us on the hook for billions with their orphaned wells. The UCP has failed to legislate the oil companies to fully pay municipal taxes. The UCP supports and protects the oil industry during this tariff war with Orange Man. The UCP does not accept Albertans must stand with the rest of Canada during these trying times but instead promotes separation. Smith continually states that majority of Albertans support her actions without any factual evidence when in fact her referendums and independent polls have shown the majority do not support her radical views.