So what’s next for Rachel Notley?
The buzz grows louder by the day that sooner than later Ms. Notley is going to move on from her present role as Alberta’s Opposition leader.
Gossips are hinting at sometime early in the new year, possibly January.
As for Ms. Notley herself and her inner circle, they’re playing it close to their vests. For now.
Unusually for a party leader who has just lost an election on which many supporters had pinned their hopes, there is no clamour within the NDP Caucus or most of the party for Ms. Notley to go.
Oh sure, there are few cranky voices, mostly associated with the leftward reaches of the party, nowadays a definite minority, who express bitterness about the strategy adopted by the NDP in the 2023 election campaign.
But really, caucus members and party supporters alike wonder, who else is there?
Indeed, a lot of time is spent in NDP circles nowadays quietly ruminating about who else there is, whether or not they’d run for the leadership, and how much they’d mess it up if they got it.
To a remarkable degree, Ms. Notley has rebuilt the party in her own image since she became leader in October 2014 – that is to say, progressive, but also quite conservative in a small-c, lawyerly sort of way.
Lose in 2019 and 2023 though her party did, she brought it to government in 2015 – something no one expected until about two weeks before the vote on May 5 that year, and that includes Ms. Notley and the NDP – for which she is still honoured, even loved, in Alberta NDP circles.
In Edmonton, the NDP has become is a well-oiled machine, painting the town solid orange in provincial politics. In Calgary, not so much. United Conservative Party Premier Danielle Smith only had to appear reasonable in one short debate, it would seem, to scrape up another Conservative victory, although surely many Albertans are now suffering buyer’s remorse.
As for rural Alberta, it is utter darkness for the NDP – probably for all of eternity. Never mind what’s the matter with Kansas. What’s the matter with Red Deer?
The thing is, you need two out of those three to win the Legislature in Alberta, and while the NDP gained ground in Calgary it couldn’t gain enough. Close may count in more recreational activities than horseshoes and hand grenades, but politics isn’t one of them.
So what’s left for Rachel Notley to do? She’s only 59 and astoundingly fit. She remains as sharp as the proverbial tack.
Right now, according to her husband’s social media pages, she’s taking a break at a lake in B.C. She looks very relaxed. Thinking about retirement? Thinking about something else? Or just chillin’ in the Kootenays?
Andrew Traynor has an idea.
“Rachel Notley could win basically any seat in Edmonton if she ran federally. Edmonton-Centre is particularly winnable for a New Democrat,” Mr. Traynor, known on Twitter as Robert Andrew Francis, tweeted Tuesday. “It’s likely this is the last Federal election with the current NDP & LPC leaders.”
You may ask: Just who is Mr. Traynor? The short answer is he’s an articling student at law with an Edmonton legal firm.
But he’s had a long involvement in NDP politics and I fondly remember the day in 2012 he and a few others met in my living room in St. Albert and formally re-established an NDP constituency association in the riding. Soon, he was president of the constituency association.
It seemed a bit like tilting at a windmill at the time, but who knew there’d be an NDP government in less than three years and that St. Albert would be represented by a good New Democrat MLA, Marie Renaud, ever since?
So I give Mr. Traynor some credit for good political instincts, and his tweet prompted these musings.
“After three campaigns for government and even more as MLA, it’s totally fair to decide to pack it in and cap off a legendary career,” he went on. “But there *is* a potential path to Prime Minister Rachel Notley.”
Now may seem to you to be unlikely. As Mr. Traynor admitted, he was just “throwing it out there with a massive grain of salt.”
Still, think about it.
After almost a decade, the country sure feels like it’s had enough of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Despite recent bad polls, he still might win in a year or two, though. As veteran political commentator Michael Harris put it yesterday in The Tyee, “there are few things less relevant than a mid-summer poll with no election in sight.”
And it would seem that for every Canadian who can’t stand the PM, there’s one who finds Conservative Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre repellent. As Mr. Harris pointed out, the Conservatives’ record in office is even worse than that of the Liberals.
In May 2011, the natural place for Canadians who couldn’t abide the Conservatives and felt no love for the Liberals to turn was the NDP, led by Jack Layton. It nearly worked, and had Mr. Layton survived, he might well have been prime minister soon enough.
After Mr. Layton’s death on Aug. 22 that year, the party chose Thomas Mulcair, perhaps the most effective federal Opposition leader of the modern era, but too Liberal, it would seem, for many NDP activists.
The best that can be said about their successor, Jagmeet Singh, is that he has been underwhelming. And what kind of an alternative is an NDP that supports the Liberals at every turn and keeps their government afloat? That strategy has its proponents, but at this point it’s turning into not much more than an effective talking point for angry Conservatives.
And where did the NDP gain a seat in the last federal election in 2021? In Edmonton – a victory, arguably, that the federal party owes more to Ms. Notley than to Mr. Singh.
One way or another, the NDP risks a drubbing in the next federal election – probably at the hands of the Liberals as voters who abhor the Conservatives hold their noses and vote for Mr. Trudeau’s party.
But considerable numbers of NDP voters in Western Canada could hold their noses and vote for Mr. Poilievre as well – it’s happened before, in 1993 and 1997, when anti-establishment New Democrats in the West voted for Preston Manning’s Reform Party.
To be blunt, if the national NDP is going to survive it needs a leader stronger than Mr. Singh.
Who, in Opposition, would be more like Mr. Mulcair than Ms. Notley?
And who would be more like Mr. Layton in the minds of Canadian voters than Ms. Notley?
And wouldn’t it be nice to see former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney’s dream come true that, finally, the premiership of Alberta could be a stepping stone to the Prime Minister’s Office? Only just not for him.
I personally believe that Rachel Notley should and will remain as the leader of the Alberta NDP. She’s the closest thing we’ve had to Peter Lougheed, and one of his former cabinet ministers even said that. The Alberta PCs were taken over by phony Conservatives and Reformers, and made a horrific mess, from robbery oil royalty rates, which lost us hundreds of billions of dollars, the worst tax rates, which lost us billions of dollars more, the most priciest shenanigans, which cost us so much money, increased utility and insurance costs, damagaing cuts to public education and public healthcare, and a massive cost to cleanup abandoned oil wells, that is $260 billion, or more. Ralph Klein’s own daughter, Angie, even voted for the NDP in 2015. The Conservatives in Alberta seem to have had a bad time retaining their leaders for nearly 20 years. Under the UCP, they are at their second leader. No Conservative premier in Alberta completed a full term, in a long time. As the UCP are emulating the aforementioned bad policy ideas of the Alberta PCs, we are back to square one. I also don’t think Danielle Smith will complete her term as premier of Alberta. She will continue to have foot and mouth disease, and end up like she did when she was the Wildrose leader. It was interesting for me to read about someone who was not happy with the Alberta PCs, because they were not like Peter Lougheed was. They weren’t interested in becoming a politician, a
but were asked by someone to join the Wildrose. When they heard Danielle Smith giving Ralph Klein accolades, they wisely declined to join the Wildrose, because they said that he was very bad. They knew Ralph Klein and his family for a long time, and weren’t impressed with him even then.
The comparison has been made between Jagmeet Singh and Jack Layton many times. In terms of their accomplishments, I’d say Singh, dispite being having to bear the taint of being around PMJT, he has accomplished more than Layton. Under Layton, the NDP got to be the official opposition, but that lead to a CPC majority, which caused comsiderable damage. One could say the NDP achievement under Layton aided Harper and his tribe of grifters ran riot and showed their idiocy 24/7.
As for Jagmeet Singh, he holds a hammer over the Liberals and has scored some significant policy moves. Has been able to move the cause of social-democracy? No. But this is he greatest failing. In a way, when he promotes social-democratic reforms, it’s regretable isn ‘t taken seriously because he is keeping Trudeau from walking into a potentially devastating election. Based on that, Singh should be praised for keeping the CPC out of government for another day, and that is his most worthwhile contribution.
I have to agree.
Keeping the trolls and the fascists out is a major contribution.
Rachel Notley would be an excellent choice to lead the Federal NDP. The only downside is the CPC would love nothing more than a strong Federal NDP. The progressive vote would be split and the CPC would slide up the middle. Canada would be unrecognizable with Skippy as PM emboldening Premiers, Smith, Ford, Moe, Higgs and Stefanson.
An interesting thought. Though based on ideology, it might make more sense for Rachel Notley to do a Bob Rae and switch to the Liberals to run federally. I have often heard it said that the more successful NDP provincial governments (Manitoba, Sask, BC, Alberta) have more in common with the federal Liberals than with the federal NDP. There is no obvious successor to Trudeau in the party (and the recent cabinet shuffle had some insiders scratching their heads as they tried to read the tea leaves), yet it is increasingly clear that he is a major liability and should probably jump before he is pushed.
Michael: Your observation about the more successful NDP governments, I think, is true. That said, that would be a jump that would be hard for Ms. Notley to make, I think, given her father’s history and her connection to the labour movement earlier in her career. Still, stranger things have happened. DJC
Until I got more than halfway through this piece, I thought you were softening us up for the idea of Notley getting a job in Trudeau’s PMO as some kind of token western liason figurehead. Seemed plausible, until you had to spoil it.
“And where did the NDP gain a seat in the last federal election in 2021? In Edmonton – a victory, arguably, that the federal party owes more to Ms. Notley than to Mr. Singh.”
Really? Before the 2019 federal election, Notley famously declared that she was not committed to voting for the federal NDP candidate in her riding.
“Rachel Notley not sure she’ll vote NDP in federal election” (CBC, Oct 04, 2019)
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/notley-federal-election-ndp-vote-jagmeet-singh-pipeline-trans-mountain-opposition-1.5308758
“What was Rachel Notley suggesting when she said she’s not committed to voting for Jagmeet Singh’s New Democrats?” (Alberta Politics, 2019)
… “So, just what is Ms. Notley saying? That because she doesn’t agree with Mr. Singh’s policy on pipelines maybe Alberta shouldn’t have a voice in the NDP Caucus in Ottawa, or the opposition generally, after Oct. 21?
“And what does she think voters in Edmonton Strathcona should actually do about it? Vote for the Liberal and split the vote so a Conservative can win? Or go right out and vote Conservative, for crying out loud?
“These are rude questions, I know. We’ve all been kind of reeling since we heard Ms. Notley’s comment. But they need to be asked. And those of us who have long supported the NDP and want to know the answers are entitled to an explanation.
“If voters in Edmonton Strathcona want my advice, it is that they should ignore Ms. Notley’s post-election ennui and get the hell out and vote for Ms. McPherson, which is the right thing to do for both Canada and Alberta.
“Regardless of what Ms. Notley is trying to achieve, electing a Conservative in Edmonton Strathcona, which is the probable outcome of weakening the turnout for Ms. McPherson, means electing someone who supports the approach to economic development taken by Alberta Premier Jason Kenney.”
https://albertapolitics.ca/2019/10/what-was-rachel-notley-suggesting-when-she-said-shes-not-committed-to-voting-for-jagmeet-singhs-new-democrats/
Reakash Walters, federal NDP candidate in Edmonton Centre 2015: “As one of two people who nominated Rachel in 2015, I am truly disappointed in the direction the provincial party has taken and that they have chosen to prioritize oil extraction in the middle of a climate crisis.”
In 2023, towns across Canada are burning. Thousands evacuated. Many homes lost. Wildfire smoke fills the air. This is where Ms. Notley’s petro-progressivism leads us.
Not a team player. Not a progressive on energy or climate. Not a viable choice for federal NDP leader.
Not unless the federal NDP want to look like the Alberta NDP. And suffer the same fate.
Notley’s attempt to out-conservative the conservatives on energy and pipelines was a flop. Pipeline supporters will vote for the real thing.
In 2014 most NDP supporters would have rejected any suggestion that the NDP should push oilsands pipelines, throw billions of dollars in subsidies at the O&G industry, reject a “just transition” for Alberta workers, sabotage Canada’s climate targets, embrace Vivian Krause’s conspiracy theories, deny science, throw environmentalists under the bus, and attack the federal NDP leader for “elitism”.
In 2023, these same NDP supporters don’t blink an eye at such antics. Tribal to the last, they are ready to follow Dear Leader over the climate cliff. “Pragmatic” environmentalism, they call it.
Notley’s petro-progressivism is not a winning strategy. Pandering to fossil fuel dinosaurs just feeds the right-wing frenzy. A pipeline project became the rallying flag for Albertans, whose sense of grievance against Ottawa burns eternal. Fuelling the right-wing rage machine. Stoking Albertans’ perennial resentment over pipelines and everything else under the sun only helps the UCP. Most pipeline boosters would not vote NDP if Notley built a billion pipelines. Right-wingers who want oil industry flunkies in power will vote for the real thing. Notley’s shift to the right only alienated progressives.
Goaded by jibes from Danielle Smith, Notley’s flip-flopping on energy/climate issues has made the NDP look even weaker.
Notley’s new NDP climate plan:
●Drop the federal ‘just transition’ plan.
●Drop Canada’s 2030 emission reduction goals.
●Invest even more in oilsands CCS projects.
Instead of hauling her party clumsily to the right whenever D. Smith barks, Notley needed to find some principles and stick to them. She also needed to fire the NDP’s ill-advisors who led her down this dead-end path.
The federal ‘just transition’ plan has been in the works for years. Climate change has been on the agenda for decades. Notley’s advisors couldn’t see this coming?
The NDP does not have a climate plan, much less a science-based response to climate change. Poor leadership and poor politics.
Alberta’s petro-progressive climate champion, fighting against her grandchildren’s right to a healthy planet to the bitter end.
What a shame!
Geoffrey, you really need to read the writing on the wall. In this province if you are against the NDP you are for the UCP. By constantly proselytizing against Notley you are ignoring the fact that the alternative (the UCP) is 100 times worse. So are you happy with what we got after the election?
Yes, in a perfect world there would be viable options for every view point and the legislature would be full of diverse members who work together for the betterment of Albertan society but that’s just not reality. Sorry that Notley can’t live up to your impossibly lofty expectations. I hope you realize that NO PARTY will ever form a government in Alberta that has an anti-oil platform. None, zilch. And when moderates like Notley are pushed to the sidelines by people like yourself “leaders” like Fraulein Shmidt end up in power. Sometimes in life you need to choose the lesser of two evils and it’s pretty clear whose side you’re on. Sorry to say it but it’s time for you to grow up and see things for how they really are and act accordingly.
Firth: applause for your reply to Mr Pounder. His perfection is the mortal enemy of good.
FoF: “if you are against the NDP you are for the UCP”
Same response from federal Liberal supporters. If I don’t support Trudeau’s plan to fail on climate, I must be for Poilievre’s “Conservatives”. Nonsense.
When it comes to the O&G industry and climate, the NDP and the UCP are on the same page. I oppose that disastrous policy, no matter who promotes it.
Federally, Liberal climate policy is based on fossil-fuel expansion. If I oppose that contradictory policy, it does not follow that I support the same fossil-fuel expansion promoted by the Conservatives.
Notley and Trudeau claim the laurels of “climate leadership”. Leadership entails making the strongest case possible for rational climate policy, not capitulating to the status quo. Notley and Trudeau made little or no attempt to sell science-based climate policy to Canadians. Instead, they promoted fossil fuels. Notley capitulated to the O&G industry on Day One.
Abandoning the high ground, sacrificing your principles, is not the path to victory. It is not leadership, but an abject admission of failure.
Is being led over the climate cliff by progressives a better fate? Whether we go over the cliff at 100 kmh or 50 kmh, the result is the same.
Scientific reality is non-negotiable. Either you accept the science and respond accordingly, or you don’t.
Political parties who ignore scientific reality do not deserve the votes of responsible citizens.
Rapid man-made global warming is a disaster. So are govts that fail to address it.
Petro-progressives like Trudeau, Notley, and Horgan claim to accept the climate change science, but still push pipelines, approve LNG projects, promote oilsands expansion, subsidize fossil fuels, and let fossil fuel interests dictate the agenda. All in defiance of IPCC and IEA reports.
Who’s worse on climate? The deniers who deny their house is on fire, or the deniers who accept their house is on fire, but throw fuel on the flames — then stand back and watch it burn?
If your house is on fire, you do not accept compromises for the sake of achieving power or buy-in from your neighbours. No, you do everything in your power to save your kids and put the fire out.
FoF: “I hope you realize that NO PARTY will ever form a government in Alberta that has an anti-oil platform.”
I accept that, for now. Come back in a century.
At what cost power? If you must abandon your principles and adopt your opponents’ policies to attain power, is that worthwhile?
Despite their rightward shift and capitulation, the NDP lost the last two elections. How many more losses will it take to convince Notley and her supporters that kowtowing to O&G is not a winning strategy?
Notley could not defeat someone so obviously unfit for the job as D. Smith. What does that tell you?
If the UCP had chosen a non-controversial leader, the UCP would have won by a landslide.
FoF: “constantly proselytizing against Notley”
As Notley has shown, there is no progressive plank on energy and climate that the AB NDP is not willing to compromise in its vain quest for power.
Politically, Notley’s rightward shift is a disaster for the AB NDP and the progressive movement in Alberta. Support for progressive rational policy does not imply loyalty to any particular party or leader. Progressive voters must support progressive policies, not parties. When progressive parties go astray, it is up to progressive voters to bring them to heel. Keeping parties and politicians accountable is a democratic norm and the responsible citizen’s duty. When accountability fails, responsible government fails, democracy erodes, and tribalism takes over.
No apologies.
The NDP have fallen off the progressive map. This voter will not follow them.
Some things are worth fighting for. Our children’s future, for one.
Notley and her NDP wrecking crew stand on the wrong side of science and history. Notley’s reward will be a seat on the board of directors at Suncor.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
On climate, the AB and BC NDP and federal Liberals do far worse than nothing. They build pipelines, greenlight LNG projects, and approve offshore oil projects. Worse, they lead their followers over to the Dark Side. Putting a progressive stamp on petro-politics.
When it comes to “climate villainy”, right-wing politicians and climate change deniers are noisy but ineffective. When centre-left leaders join in, that’s when the fire takes hold and spreads.
Both sides serve the same master: the O&G industry, the Big Banks that back them, and Corporate Canada.
The Liberals and AB NDP have proved far more effective than the Conservatives in delivering on Big Oil’s and Corporate Canada’s agenda. Trudeau & Co. have persuaded many Canadians that we can both act on climate and double down on the problem: fossil fuels.
Trudeau and Notley moved the ball on the Trans Mountain pipeline down to the ten-yard line. Their signal achievement was to “push country-wide support for pipelines from 40% to 70%.” Something Harper, Scheer, and Kenney could never dream of doing.
Trudeau and Notley did something else Harper and Kenney could never do: lead progressives over the climate cliff. Their acolytes now embrace a contradictory position: Pipelines to fight climate change.
Who’s worse on climate? The deniers who deny their house is on fire, or the deniers who accept their house is on fire, but throw fuel on the flames — then stand back and watch it burn?
When Harper, Kenney, Scheer, Poilievre, and Smith say no to a shift away from fossil fuels, the progressive option is still ON the table.
When Trudeau and Notley say no, they took the progressive option OFF the table.
When Harper and Kenney deny the science, progressives reject their arguments and head in the opposite direction.
When Trudeau and Notley contradict the science, progressives accept their arguments and enable their climate sabotage.
The pre-2015 AB NDP was a force for good in opposition. The only voice of sanity on climate and energy. Notley eliminated that option.
Now we have zero oil industry critics in the AB Legislature. Banished to opposition benches, the NDP caucus can say nothing about oilsands expansion, oil & gas pollution, and climate inaction — because they shilled for Big Oil in office.
We no longer have a mainstream party that champions science.
We no longer have a progressive party in the NDP.
The AB NDP took away our last hope for real action on climate in AB.
Doesn’t matter what your policies are on farm labor, GSAs, childcare, etc. If you’re not progressive on climate, you’re not progressive. Fires raging across the province burn up farms, schools, Pride flags, and childcare centres.
“The New Climate Denialism: Time for an Intervention” (The Narwhal, Sep 26, 2016)
https://thenarwhal.ca/new-climate-denialism-time-intervention
Great column, DC, but with respect I disagree. We need Rachel in Alberta!
Thanks, Simon. I couldn’t agree more, in fact. I think the decision to leave, though, has been made. What to do after that, of course, is the topic of speculation – or, perhaps, speculative fiction. DJC
With respect Simon. You are confusing loyalty with effectiveness. When your star hockey player no longer scores goal you trade him, no matter how loyal you are.
Athabascan: Or, if you’re Peter Pocklington, when he’s still scoring. DJC
“Who, in Opposition, would be more like Mr. Mulcair than Ms. Notley? And who would be more like Mr. Layton in the minds of Canadian voters than Ms. Notley?”
Notley has compared herself to Richard Nixon, which may be more apt. Former Edmonton Journal columnist, now Senator, Paula Simons compared Notley to Margaret Thatcher.
Notley wielded her steely resolve on behalf of Big Oil. Less stalwart in defence of future generations, those most vulnerable to climate change, and life on Earth.
Notley and Trudeau dubbed themselves “climate leaders”. Followed by immediate capitulation to Big Oil. Pathetic.
Mulcair was a stellar parliamentarian. Layton had real fire in his veins.
Notley not so much. Except on behalf of oilsands companies.
I did not watch the TV debate where Ms. Notley squared off against Danielle Smith. Reports suggested Notley looked nervous. No shortage of points to score against Smith, but she failed to land a knockout blow.
Unscripted, Notley sometimes comes across as rambling and barely coherent.
How would Lougheed respond to climate change and IPCC reports? Build more pipelines?
Would Lougheed act on the best available science? Or ignore it?
Would Lougheed drive Alberta and Canada over the climate cliff in deference to Big Oil?
Would Lougheed attack environmentalists?
Some praised Notley’s “pragmatism”.
Our house is on fire. “Pragmatic” is putting the fire out.
Oilsands expansion and new pipelines are not “pragmatic” politics — just plain lunacy. Climate change disproportionately affects women and children. The global poor are the most vulnerable. Doesn’t matter what your policies are on farm labor, GSAs, childcare, etc. If you’re not progressive on climate, you’re not progressive.
Scientific reality is non-negotiable. Either you accept the science and respond accordingly, or you don’t.
Political parties who ignore scientific reality do not deserve the votes of responsible citizens.
Rapid man-made global warming is a disaster.
So are governments and politicians that fail to address it.
Notley is not a leader for our time. Any politician who endorses Vivian Krause’s conspiracy theories is not fit to be leader of the NDP. I hear Friends of Science has an opening.
If Trudeau did not buy the Trans Mtn pipeline back in 2018, Notley would have. The dilbit pipeline that will cost taxpayers at least $30.9 billion to build — and sabotage Canada’s climate goals.
“Faced with the prospect of cancellation, Alberta Premier Rachel Notley has made the extraordinary threat to choke off fuel deliveries to B.C.’s Lower Mainland and has vowed to buy the expansion project outright, if necessary, to ensure its survival. Meanwhile, Ottawa has said it would consider loan guarantees and other mechanisms to prop it up.”
“What if the Trans Mountain pipeline is never built?” (Globe and Mail, 2018)
Lucky for Notley, Trudeau will end up wearing that white elephant.
Notley: “Here in Alberta we ride horses, not unicorns, and I invite pipeline opponents to saddle up on something that is real.”
“‘In Alberta we ride horses, not unicorns’: Rachel Notley calls pipeline opponents unrealistic” (CBC, 2018)
From Premier Notley’s 2018 keynote address to the Alberta Teachers’ Association:
“And I submit that the approach of anti-pipeline activists is a disaster not only for working people but, quite frankly, for effective climate action as well because if we write off the jobs and livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of working women and men, I guarantee you we will write off the ability to move forward on climate or, quite frankly, on just about any other progressive change.
“…But here’s the bottom line. Climate action is not free. There is a cost. And to cover that cost, we must grow our economy. We must diversify our economy. We must create jobs. We must fund the things working people depend on. And, that’s why we need to build Trans-Mountain.
“…And I would say to those who oppose our fight to build this pipeline that they are being extremely foolish.”
When it comes to pipelines and oilsands expansion, Notley and the UCP are on the same page.
Michael Harris on iPolitics:
“To avoid a political divorce, Singh must stand up to Notley”
“…Making things worse, Premier Rachel Notley of Alberta, the Nurse Ratched of Canadian politics, is the one wielding the razor. A supposed political colleague, she couldn’t even be bothered to attend the first NDP national convention with Singh as leader.
“Nor has it helped that she has publicly knifed him at every opportunity. When Singh justifiably criticized the Trudeau government for its breathlessly foolish offer of financial assistance to Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline expansion (possibly out of the Canada Pension Fund no less), Notley pounced, declaring that she looked forward to the day when Singh would take a more “mature approach” to his leadership.
“More mature, like banning a fellow province’s wine? Or cutting off its supply of oil? Or refusing to sign the statement at the most recent western premiers’ meeting?
“And oh yes, like refusing to talk about pharmacare until she imposes her dubious fossil fetish on every other province with taxpayers’ money. Mature, like a dyed-in-the wool harper conservative.
“…But Earth to Jagmeet: Notley is saying much the same thing. So why does the national NDP leader continue to refer to her as a tremendous premier who is invaluable in the war on climate change? If anything, the opposite is true.
“Singh may call his schmoozy accolades for Alberta’s premier political expedience, fluffing up a bird of the same political feather. No it’s not. When someone is as far out to lunch as Notley is on what the NDP is supposed to stand for, the national leader has to speak up, not suck up.
… “But with each day that Singh equivocates about Notley’s militant promotion of Big Oil against the principles of the NDP’s climate position, the political benefactor is more likely to be the Green Party than the NDP.
“Jagmeet Singh didn’t get a political honeymoon. If he doesn’t want an early divorce, he’s going to have to stand up to Nurse Ratched.”
Future generations — your grandchildren — will not think kindly of those who betrayed them.
Could be she didn’t want to die in a mysterious plane crash…
OK, little bird, assuming you’re referring to the demise of the late Jim Prentice, that’s in bad taste, given that her father also died in a far less mysterious plane crash, attributable in part to the poor pilot scheduling practices of a small shoestring airline in northern Alberta.
Actually you might come to the conclusion that Grant’s death was more than a little suspicious if you actually read the detailed reports on the crash. The only independent witness – the guy with the bush smarts who kept the rest of the injured passengers alive, was mysteriously dead a few months later. Sometimes a coincidence just means you did not see the whole picture. Especially in this case when they went into the abyss.
anon: I’ve read (and now own on my Kobo) the book written by Carol Shaben — daughter of then-provincial PC Cabinet Minister Larry Shaben — about that crash, which her Dad survived, despite being quite badly injured, but Mr Notley didn’t. There’s nothing mysterious about it: the pilot was under pressure from his employer to make the flight despite the worsening weather conditions, lack for a copilot, and being over his maximum flying time.
As for the young RCMP prisoner who saved so many lives, his tragic death on the streets of Grande Prairie a few years later, freezing to death by the CN railway tracks through the centre of town, was not all that mysterious. He was a victim of his mental health and addictions challenges. Temperatures falling to -30°C and colder are not compatible with a life on the streets.
Read Ms Shaben’s book; it’s called ‘Into the Abyss’.
jerrymacgp: You would be better served to read the Transportation Board’s findings and learn to read between the lines of official reports just as Eastern Europeans did while living under the authoritarian single party states that occupied those unfortunate lands. I purchased and read Ms. Shabin’s even-handed book upon its release.
The Ab NDP was full of good intent and thought it was possible to engage constructively with the oil and gas industry. If anyone thinks that is still possible, the attack on renewables should end that illusion.
Like children in a car’s baby seat, the Ab NDP got to honk the fake horn and turn the fake steering wheel in our captured petrol-state. They took office, but they never took power.
Notley is scrupulously honest and accepts facts. Unfortunately that included accepting Alberta’s status as a vassal of gigantic US oil and agricultural interests. In my view, her realism made her administration too timid. Smith is not hampered by reality or even prudence. 53% of Alberta voters preferred Smith’s reckless fantasy to Notley’s careful realism. Who can blame them when there is still fossil fuel left to loot and none of them have a clue about changes in the bigger world?
PS: enjoyed this insightful interview with one D. Climenhaga on Engeri Media the other day: https://youtu.be/h84CKQpYSOY
Don’t get me wrong, I love Rachel Notley. Her heart is in the right place, and she cares about making Alberta and society as a whole better for us and future generations. However, in an era of Trumpism, clown convoys, Take Back Alberta terrorists, and PP, the AB NDP need a fiery leader like Tommy Douglas. At this point in her career she’s worn out, and not up to the nasty fight that must be fought against the UCP Fascists/Nazis. She reminds me of Neville Chamberlain.
As much as I like Notley, I am disgusted with the weak and ineffectual election campaign. It was like that kid in school that people generally like, and will share his lunch with you, and watching him getting beaten up by a school yard bully. In Notley’s case she didn’t even fight back, or if she did, she forgot kicking to the going or biting or gouging and eye. That’s what she had to do to get elected, and now? Well, we all suffer for the next 4 years. So, yeah we need another NDP leader, but he/she has to be a dirty low-down street fighter who will pull no punches. As the saying goes, we need someone who will bring a gun to a gun fight and not a dull knife.
I also agree with this Athabasca.
Conservatives will do anything to get their way. Anything!
They have long given up on anything legal or even socially acceptable. They rely on their ignorant, uneducated and evangelical supporters for tactics and direction.
These people must be stopped.
The fight in defence of democracy, egalitarianism, indeed any semblance of a modern first-world society cannot step aside for niceties, good manners and fair play.
It’s a gun fight and our side needs a very big gun. And the willingness to use it.
I agree. I don’t know who that person would be. I think Chuck Angus woulda been a much better choice for leader, but that ship has sailed.
Athabascan, I live in Notley’s riding and duly voted for her in the recent election. I’m in complete agreement with you except for one thing: she brought a dull spoon to the gunfight.
“Rachel Notley could win basically any seat in Edmonton if she ran federally. Edmonton-Centre is particularly winnable for a New Democrat,” Mr. Traynor, known on Twitter as Robert Andrew Francis, tweeted Tuesday. “Rachel Notley could win basically any seat in Edmonton if she ran federally. Edmonton-Centre is particularly winnable for a New Democrat.
Double double sentences sentences, I think.
Lars: Yes, the product of late-night blogging, I’m afraid. It’s been fixed.” DJC
The coming federal election is probably the only chance in the next fifty years for an NDP majority, but I think we all know this is going to be brought to us as more of the same, vs the guy who is so dumb he thought there weren’t any French people in alberta so they changed how they pronounced their family name when they headed west. There is a paucity of democracy in this country, and I would say it’s getting worse.
The only question I have is how exactly the liberals will try install freeland as PM, as I doubt she would see Canadians support her in the same way they have supported Trudeau. (I certainly hope not anyway)
Interesting speculation, David!
Notley would probably be the best choice for the federal NDP if that party was looking for someone who could open up the electoral map in Western Canada outside of Edmonton, Winnipeg, Vancouver Island and pockets of the Lower Mainland.
Notley is an outsider to Ottawa and the Central Canadian establishment and she would follow the tradition of provincial NDP leaders jumping into the federal ring (Tommy Douglas, Dave Barrett, Alexa McDonough, etc).
If something doesn’t change, it sure feels like Mr. Trudeau’s dancing partner is going to have their lunch eaten by Mr. Poilievre in the next election.
It is a very interesting exercise to contemplate this. Singh, while competent, is no Jack Layton, but perhaps that is a high bar for anyone.
Having Notley as Federal NDP leader could really shake things up, particularly in the west, where many people tend to vote Conservative, but a number would probably support the NDP if it had a western leader. It probably wouldn’t change the dynamic as much in eastern Canada, as western leaders tend not to do well particularly in Quebec, but who knows.
However, I think the biggest, perhaps an insurmountable challenge would be trying to reconcile the different approaches to resource development and climate change between the Alberta and the Federal NDP. I think having Notley as Federal leader would result in or require changes in the Federal NDP policy on this and I don’t feel that is something a number of party members outside of Alberta would be comfortable with.
Personally, I feel it would be best if Notley stayed in Alberta. We will need someone experienced with a steady hand to put things back together again after Smith wrecks them and likely eventually self destructs.
After retiring from the Royal Bank I had lunch , once a month, with former temporary leader of the Social Credit Party Jim Henderson. Who had become a good friend, and neighbour , over the years as a customer and fellow member of the Devon Lions Club. Jim made no bones about it he had a lot of respect for Peter Lougheed and what he was doing for this province and stated a lot of the members of the Social Credit Party felt the same way. He wasn’t surprised that their party failed. His comment “ How can you be in opposition to Peter Lougheed when you agree with everything he is doing.” In 2003 he announced to me that he had had it with Ralph Klein and his Reform Party stupidity and what he was doing to this province and was moving to B.C. He gave me a copy of the study “ Giving Away The Alberta Advantage “ put out by the Parkland Institute , that proves what Klein was doing to us. He was collecting less than half as much in royalties than Lougheed was doing. Albertans were losing $3.78 billion annually in revenues. He died in Kelowna in 2019 at the age of 93.
David, you write “the country sure feels like it’s had enough of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau”. Yes, but why? Is there a source for the widespread dislike, not to say insane hatred, other than a relentless campaign of lies in the conservative media? I mean, media? As far as I can see, Mr. Trudeau’s government has done a pretty good job on every issue except housing, on which he has always been wrong-headed—one might with rare accuracy say “neoliberal”, even. Elite approval for his positions in that regard is almost universal, so that can’t be it.
I am not sure if I told here my story about meeting some hard rock miners in the Soo last November who were hating on the PM for advocating …. more hard rock mining. They hated the man, and I can see no possible explanation other than a) abortion if they go to church, or b) racism because rural Ontario is slightly less white than it was 30 years ago, or c) they’re just dimwitted and eagerly swallow certain kinds of lies. If they have better reasons, they were unable to articulate them.
So I would ask you in all sober earnest: what are your specific objections to Mr. Trudeau? Let’s make sure we bring on the apocalypse that our ideas are our own. In this propaganda environment, no general impressions may be trusted.
Mr Trudeau talks a good game on so many issues, but despite his first mandate’s alleged focus on “deliverology”, has failed Canadians on multiple important issues. They simply can’t seem to get stuff done. I’ve often referred to him as Mr Dithers.
Nevertheless, while he and his government have underperformed on their campaign rhetoric, they have been far more preferable than their only realistic opponent. Were Mr Poilièvre to become Prime Minister, we’d need to brace for a government that is far more effective at delivering on bad policies than the current government has been on good ones. I for one don’t see that as a good trade.
On the housing crisis and the cost of living, the Liberal government’s few accomplishments have been totally at the behest of Jagmeet Singh and the NDP. As for Mr Poilièvre, his biggest challenge is that there are no conservative solutions for these problems. All he offers is simplistic attacks on the current government, loud bafflegab about “gatekeepers”, and conspiracy theories.
Finally, regarding Rachel’s political future, there is likely to be enough snow in Old Strathcona come January for her to go for a walk in — although cross-county skiing is probably more her jam. But IMHO there is simply too much separation between the Alberta and federal parties for her to be a candidate for the federal NDP, let alone for Leader after Mr Singh. Maybe she’ll get a job in academe after politics.
Very interesting and thought provoking article. In no particular order:
I don’t see Mr. Singh as the NDP’s problem, I see the NDP as Mr. Singh’s problem. They lack the depth of institutional talent and knowledge that the Liberal party has, and also lack a coherent ideology or vision for Canada. By choosing Mulcair (who would have been much more at home in the Liberal party IMO) they renounced their social democrat principles without ever saying out loud that that is what they were doing or what their new principles were. I am not aware of what the NDP, as a party, is all about anymore, beyond a desire to be “nicer” than the Liberals and, of course, the desire to sit in the Big Boy Chair.
I can’t see Mrs. Notley restoring the NDP’s credibility as the “party of Canada’s left,” precisely because she would be another Mulcair. People on the left will see her as a sort of “Liberal in sheep’s clothing.” People on the right will easily dismiss her because of her association with the NDP. People concerned about the environment will be turned off at her years of support for Alberta’s oil sector. People on the center will vote for whoever can keep Poilievre out, and without massive appeal to someone, I can’t see Mrs. Notley being that person. All JMO of course.
I think the NDP has been trying to get dental, pharmaceutical and child care for decades, and the current NDP leader has made more progress on all three fronts than any other that I’m aware of. Kind of a shame he doesn’t seem to be being given any credit for that by Canadians. Grousing about him keeping the Liberals in power ignores that politics is the art of the possible, and he found a way to make those things possible from the weak position of being the third party. It also ignores the fact that keeping the Liberals in power keeps the Conservatives out of power, which is, as always, a goal worth pursuing all by itself. Finally, being angry at this NDP leader, or any other, for not getting elected kind of ignores the fact that the FPTP system all but guarantees perpetual Liberal or Conservative governments – that is why the Liberals and Conservatives like it so much!
It is probably time for Mrs. Notley to sail on from her current position, but there is a troubling lack of a credible successor. That said, the Albertan voting public has shown pretty clearly that they lack the sense, politically, to pour water out of a boot (not trying to be a jerk here, just saying what most reasonable adults are thinking). If I were a talented politician who wanted to change things I wouldn’t try to do it from inside of Alberta – what a waste of time. Given the blend of nastiness and stupidity she has endured over the past decade plus, she may not want to get into the even more nasty and stupid situation of crossing swords with Mr. Poilievre.
No matter what she does, I wish Mrs. Notley all the best. She fought the good fight, as she saw it, as best as she could, for a long time. She deserves a life where people aren’t shrieking bad-faith nonsense to, at, and about her.
Mr Lore: “he [Mr Singh] found a way to make those things possible from the weak position of being the third party.” Fourth, actually, behind the perpetually obstreperous Bloc, which only strengthens you argument.
Whoa! You all need a reality check! So spin this 45 three times, and you’ll be right back to normal! What ever that is! https://youtu.be/thyJOnasHVE
I’m sorry. However Alberta Health (UCP) buying out Dynalife after paying more than $50 mil to cancel the “Superlab”? That’s a big black eye for our UCP! Double money down the toilet. And who was at the helm? Oh boy! Dani! You’re the world’s smartest dumb girl!
I suppose it’s natural that when an Albertan scopes a German-made ferry in BC it’s probably a harbinger of retirement— even way out to the Left Coast where erstwhile Wildrosers shed their petals to become Rose hipsters and delight in discovering the Bud ain’t so Lite out here as Kid Rock makes out. And I suppose on these lazy afternoons (at least where wildfire isn’t interrupting cabins, cottages, condos, and castles) it’s natural to wonder what a former Premier does after two consecutive electoral losses for her party: ‘two-in-a-row and out-you-go’?
And so it might appear with respect NDP leader Rachel Notley’s future. At this juncture when the former premier of Alberta happens to still be young and energetic enough to consider the opportunities ahead, the world might look as if it’s her oyster. After all, her credentials cast her as something of a counter and parallel to the once dominant force of Western Reform movement which roared out of Alberta and became the Conservative Party government for almost a decade in Ottawa before those “Let the Eastern Bastards Freeze in the Dark” bumper stickers faced the rising sunny ways as they hightailed it back to the Wildrose homeland in defeat in 2015.
Indeed, Alberta remains the national antagonist even though the “Eastern Bastards” have reclaimed half of the CPC and the critical electoral mass of moderate Canadian voters remains, as it likely always will, in the big urban poleis of Upper and Lower Canada. One exception might be the fact that the current Liberal minority, the one which puts fire in the bituminous bellies of the petro-provinces, does owe at least some of its parliamentary confidence to the bastion of salt-chuck Dippers on the West Coast—and, despite Notley’s indisputable political stature, not from the steaming tar-stills of the western prairies. Anyway, that’s not exactly what Preston Manning meant when he said “the West wants in!”
My darling is admirably pithy: “No way! Rachel must stay!” —stay in Albetar, that is, to counter the impressionable expressionist-secessionist Danielle Smith and her UCP government with its four-year mandate newly won. And, anyway, Notley’s moderate position—often likened to ProgCon Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed’s—would probably be received by the federal Dippers as too far to the right—heck, look what they did to former NDP leader, Thomas Mulcair, who took the torch of Loyal Opposition —the first ever and, so far, only time for the NDP—from Jack Layton’s dying hands, became one of the greatest parliamentarians we’ve seen in a lifetime, went into the 2015 election in first place, another NDP first, and led his party to its second-highest number of seats ever—but failed to win power: in his case it was ‘one-in-a-row and outs-you-go,’ and all because he had the audacity to campaign on a balanced budget which, to the burning ears of Marxist-Leninist ideologues, was “pulling the party way too far to the right.” Has the party changed that much since then that it wouldn’t think of Rachel Notley as perhaps twice, even thrice as “too far to the right?” (I confess I was mightily displeased with this kind of Leftie-dinosaur thinking and let everybody who probably didn’t want to know about it all about how much I disapproved. Then my Charlie Angus vote got squashed on the first ballot to replace Mulcair—and I grumbled that my party really does prefer opposition to power, at least in the federal realm.)
I’d like to think that the choice of a practicing Sikh for NDP leader might indicate some sort of evolution from dinosaur thinking. Perhaps even to the extent that the option of another female candidate for leader would not stir-up the memories of the first two women under whose leadership the federal party reached a near-existential nadir and provoked the New Policy Initiative faction to near-schism (out here in BC much grumbling was also heard when the BC NDP set ‘affirmative action’ quotas for nominations that, in my own riding, disqualified the plainly superior candidate simply because he was male—and a number of party members I know tore up their membership cards because of this kind of overweening idealism whilst the party was still festering in its 16 year-long doldrums which only ended in 2013 when a highly unrealistic “positive politics” campaign blew a 20-point lead and lost to the bubble-headed BC Liberal premier Christy Clark. Only then was the pragmatist John Horgan acclaimed. He went on to win the first back-to-back NDP victories with the same leader).
But Rachel Notley is different because, among her sterling performances in 2015 (when the NDP became the upset victor and government of Alberta), 2019 (when the NDP lost power but retained a Loyal Opposition with several times the number of seats it held hitherto), and 2023 (when she led her party to an increased number of Loyal Opposition seats), she is from Alberta. That’s a factor which far outweighs whatever gender prejudices that might still exist in the federated party—a specialness illustrated by the reticence the Alberta and federal NDP leaders showed in not endorsing each other’s campaigns and generally pretending the Alberta and federal parties don’t have glaring policy differences when it comes to bitumen production. As they say in my ancestor’s homeland: Remember Glen Coe (or, in the NDP’s case, Thomas Mulcair).
I would be remiss not to acknowledge Jagmeet Singh’s federal leadership which, if not brilliant, is steady, nonetheless. But he, too, fits the two-strikes-and-you’re-out formula. Let us just say for now that there’s a good deal of political time ahead before anything precipitous is gonna happen with respect who leads what Dipper party.
Meanwhile I think it’s apropos to ask: which parties are rending under factionalism and potential schism? I’m happy to say it’s not the BC NDP anymore—even in spite of its veeeerrrry slim acquisition of power (by way of a vote of no confidence in the newly-elected BC Liberal, one-seat-shy minority in 2017). So long’s the federal NDP holds the balance of power in Ottawa, whatever differences about Singh’s leadership might exist are being kept discrete. Certainly Notley’s NDP is solidly behind her leadership because, despite the two-strikes reality, the homer in 2015 and the accumulative progress of seat-counts hold her in good stead (and doubtlessly inspires speculation of even greater feats, whether federal or not). Heck, even the Trudeau Fils Adonis—now almost unbelievably long in the tooth and maritally aged—leads a party without apparent faction, an important point since it was the Chrétien-Martin schism which tanked the party and gave us over nine years of the HarperCons by default. Remember, Layton’s success, like Notley’s, was also by default. (I’ll only mention the Greens because, despite their near-self-disqualification from serious politics, they still present a very real potential to split the nonCon vote in many BC ridings—and that’s always at the expense of the NDP). Nope, the real factionalism is what drives the political narrative of our times: the steady march of nominal conservative parties toward the far right extreme despite repelling moderate, centre-right Tories who are vital to conservatives’ electoral success.
Of course these happy days of summer could end at some point before electoral realities come into play. For example, I’m not so sure JT’s claim to candidacy —a very rare fourth mandate, at that—is sincere: there’s still time for him to change his mind and someone like Marco Mendicino to throw his hat into the leadership ring. (I’m sure they both get a bang out of Poilievre’s incessant JT-bashing).
Too speculative, you might ask? Well, I’d sooner wonder why he wasn’t included in the latest cabinet shuffle than to wonder where Rachel Notley will go in the next few years.
But you never know: a snap election, loss of confidence, or catastrophic schism in any of the nominal conservative parties in Canada could scramble everybody’s eggs.
I hope Rachel enjoys her BC holidays before getting back to holding the renegade UCP to account. In Alberta.
I’m heck no, Rachel must not go! Not when the UCP are so weak, the Alberta NDP is so strong, and …just a little bit more. I’ve canvassed enough for the NDP that my nickname is “oh, it’s you”. Last time in Calgary was an eye-opener.
We have an awesome team too. Most of all, Alberta needs the NDP.
Notley, as national leader of the NDP, will bring back the NDP to a respectable showing at the polls. Although Singh is good, she will raise the popular vote to at least 25%, up from the current level of about 20% of support for the NDP, taking back the lost support that the Liberals gained from the NDP over the last two elections. I’m not sure of her fluency in French, but if it’s not great, it would cost her unfortunately. But in terms of character, she is light years ahead of PP, who appears nothing more than a mouthy troll who would ravage this country for the 1%.
I would never vote for Notley, she’s burned her bridges in BC. I like Singh, he’s accomplished much as kingmaker, but I never thought this country was progressive enough to allow leadership by a Sikh. Angus probably would have accomplished great things, he has a great rapport with the common folk. I don’t know where we go from here. Honestly, I voted Green in my (Horgan) riding recently, because Horgan lied to us so bad. Notley is another Horgan, centre/right. Not for me.
That’s all good Kim, but do you think the Greens are “Left” of centre? It would be interesting and maybe worthwhile to give them a shot at governing a province but they are nothing like “Left”.
Ok Geoffrey Pounder, thx for clarifying things. You’ve submitted 2900+ words all slagging Rachel Notley and the NDP, with nary a negative comment about Ms. Smith or the UCP. It’s pretty clear where you’re coming from…
As a Québécois living in Alberta, I can’t see her as a federal leader. She would win zero seats in Quebec. Thr NDP would barely top a thousand votes in 80% of Quebec ridings. She might get 2 to 3% of the Francophone vote.
Thr party is in bad shape if it looks To be ‘rescued’ by Notley who ran a somewhat pathetic campaign against an unpopular Alberta leader. Better to return to the roots and choose a guy or gal who understands why it’s like to ork in a warehouse or wait on tables at a diner. Otherwise just it I’ll just win leftover Liberal crumbs.