The Economist 07Dec2019

48 The Americas The EconomistDecember 7th 2019

2

1

sold almost all its oil-sands assets.

Albertans blame many of these setbacks

on Mr Trudeau. He is the son of a prime

minister, Pierre Trudeau, who during the

1970s and 1980s forced Alberta to sell its oil

domestically at a discount to world prices.

Although Mr Trudeau’s government

bought the Trans Mountain pipeline and

the project to expand it, which is to begin

laying pipe this month, it has vetoed other

pipeline projects. Canada needs to phase

out the oil sands, he has said. The national

carbon price, which will be imposed on Al-

berta after it scrapped its own scheme, is

another insult to the oil patch. Albertans

are just as angry about an overhaul of the

law for giving regulatory approval for infra-

structure projects, including pipelines.

This gives the public more say and obliges

builders to consider such issues as climate

change and gender equity.

A third of Albertans now think they

would be better off outside Canada, the

highest level on record, according to a poll

by Ipsos. In November advocates of

Wexit—western exit—applied to be recog-

nised (by the federation they want to leave)

as a political party. Wexit Canada imagines

that if Alberta secedes, neighbouring Brit-

ish Columbia—which resembles Califor-

nia the way Alberta does Texas and has a

coast—will have no choice but to join it.

Alberta’s leaders, and most Albertans,

are more realistic. Among the hurdles on

the road to separation are old treaties

signed by indigenous First Nations with

Canada’s rulers. These would be difficult to

change. Moreover, separatist sentiment

caused one firm to cancel plans to put its

headquarters in Calgary. That cost the city

1,000 jobs, says its development agency.

Last month the province’s canny Con-

servative premier, Jason Kenney, argued

that separation would landlock Alberta’s

oil. He said he would host town halls and

convene a panel with a more modest aim:

to devise a “fair deal” for Alberta within

Canada. This is likely to be a package of

measures that the province can take unilat-

erally. They may give Alberta a status with-

in the confederation closer to that of Que-

bec, the French-speaking province.

Mr Kenney’s fair deal is likely to include

a new force to take over provincial policing.

Quebec and Ontario already have forces

that operate alongside the Royal Canadian

Mounted Police. Alberta, rather than the

central government, might collect rev-

enues destined to be spent within the prov-

ince, as Quebec now does. The province

may also try to opt out of some federal pro-

grammes, such as the Trudeau govern-

ment’s plan to pay for patients’ prescrip-

tions. Alberta could withdraw from the

Canadian Pension Fund as long as, like

Quebec, it sets up one with comparable

benefits. That might lower Albertans’ con-

tributions (because its population is rela-

tively young) and raise those of other Cana-

dians. Many of these measures would

increase administrative costs, which is one

reason the province has rejected such ideas

in the past. Quebeckers, for example, com-

plete two tax returns.

On most money matters Alberta can do

little on its own. Since 2000 the difference

between what it has sent to the federal gov-

ernment and what it receives in transfers

and services has amounted to 8% of the

province’s gdp. Much of the anger focuses

on “equalisation”, a transfer from rich

provinces to poorer ones, mainly Quebec,

that is supposed to even out social spend-

ing. During the provincial election cam-

paign in May, Mr Kenney promised to hold

a referendum on equalisation if the federal

government did not expand the Trans

Mountain pipeline.

It would have no legal force. Mr Trudeau

is unlikely to cut Alberta’s subsidy to the

rest of Canada, even though it largely de-

rives from oil dollars. Nor is he likely to

scrap his environmental policies. He and

Ms Freeland will no doubt seek other ways

to placate the west. But these will probably

not overcome its sense of alienation. Wexi-

teers may be gathering at the Boot Scootin’

dance hall for years to come. 7

Regional roller-coaster

GDP, % change on a year earlier

Source: Statistics Canada

Canada

Alberta

2000 05 10 1815

9

6

3

0

-3

-6

T

wo days after a military court found

Desi Bouterse, Suriname’s president,

guilty of murdering 15 political foes, he re-

turned home from a visit to China. A

throng of supporters, many wearing the

purple of his National Democratic Party,

turned up to greet him at Paramaribo’s in-

ternational airport on December 1st. Mr

Bouterse brought back a promise of $300m

to upgrade airports and roads and install

solar power and 5ginternet services. But

the welcome was a defiant show of loyalty

to a leader who has dominated his tiny

country’s politics for four decades.

Mr Bouterse’s conviction for murders

that took place in 1982, and the 20-year sen-

tence that goes with it, are unlikely to dis-

lodge him. He helped lead a “sergeants’

coup” against an elected government in

1980, five years after independence from

the Netherlands. He was elected democrat-

ically as president in 2010 and re-elected

five years later. He may well repeat that feat

next year. Few Surinamese expect Mr Bou-

terse to serve a day of his sentence. The ap-

peal process could drag on for ten years,

says the vice-president, Ashwin Adhin.

The murder victims were foes of Mr

Bouterse’s regime—journalists, lawyers,

scholars, soldiers and businessmen. Fear-

ing a counter-coup backed by the Nether-

lands, the regime rounded them up at night

and held them in Fort Zeelandia, built in

the 17th century. They were summarily

tried, then tortured and shot. Mr Bouterse

claimed at the time that they had been try-

ing to escape.

He went on to fight a civil war. This pit-

ted the army against disgruntled ethnic

groups, especially Maroons, descendants

A murder conviction will not much trouble the president

Suriname

Desi’s unjust desserts

Bouterse soldiers on