Many Albertans are tired of federal carbon taxes, emissions caps, tanker bans, Bill C-69 and other policies aimed at restricting the very industry that pays the bills.

 

Liberal commenter David Herle says Albertans should ask North Dakota what happens to a landlocked, oil-producing jurisdiction. Many Albertans have.

North Dakota produces roughly CAD$141,679 in economic output per person, compared to approximately CAD$71,708 in Alberta. Personal income is also substantially higher, at roughly CAD$90,662 per person compared to Alberta's approximately CAD$61,200.

That's remarkable when you consider North Dakota has a fraction of Alberta's oil reserves and population.

The comparison highlights exactly why many Albertans are frustrated.

Albertans look south and see a resource-producing jurisdiction that has been allowed to develop its energy industry with fewer political obstacles. They look at home and see years of federal carbon taxes, emissions caps, tanker bans, Bill C-69 and other policies aimed at restricting the very industry that pays the bills.

The argument isn't that Alberta would become North Dakota. The argument is that Alberta should be outperforming North Dakota.

Many independence supporters believe Alberta's economic potential is being constrained by federal governments repeatedly elected by voters in Ontario and Quebec, leaving Albertans unable to meaningfully change the direction of national energy policy.

North Dakota is not evidence that a landlocked energy-producing jurisdiction cannot prosper. Many Albertans see it as evidence that they can—and that Alberta could be doing even better if its largest industry wasn't being targeted by federal policy.