Public sector facilities managers in Alberta could be forced to snub available funds for building and infrastructure improvements under proposed legislation that will constrain agreements between provincially controlled entities and the federal government. Through the newly tabled Bill 18, Provincial Priorities Act, the Alberta government is moving to tighten its grip on municipalities and health and education-related agencies and institutions that are defined as “creatures of the province,” yet have conventionally had leeway to seek and accept direct federal investment.

The proposed legislation would require provincial approval before any such conveyance of funds could occur — a move that is presented as a response to federal activity in matters that are constitutionally designated as provincial responsibilities.

“Since Ottawa refuses to acknowledge the negative impacts of its overreach, we are putting in additional measures to protect our provincial jurisdiction,” says Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.

“Alberta’s government will ensure federal funding is aligned with provincial priorities, rather than with priorities contrary to the province’s interests,” states the media release issued along with the introduction of the bill. “Under the proposed legislation, provincial entities include Alberta public agencies and Crown-controlled organizations, as well as public post-secondary institutions, school boards, regional health authorities, Covenant Health, municipal authorities and housing management bodies.”

The Act would give the provincial government authority to validate or invalidate any new, extended or amended agreement a provincial entity enters into with the federal government or its various agencies, boards, commissions and corporations — including organizations such as Canada Infrastructure Bank, Accessibility Standards Canada and the National Research Council. Details of the envisioned provincial vetting process would be contained in yet-to-be-developed regulations.

Provincial government departments and specified public agencies — Alberta Gaming, Liquor and Cannabis; Alberta Securities Commission; and Travel Alberta — already must receive approval from Alberta’s Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs before embarking on intergovernmental agreements with the Canadian, other provincial/territorial or foreign federal and state governments. Adding the broad slate of provincial entities into that mandate would replicate a policy that is in place in Quebec, but no other Canadian province.

Both Premier Smith and Alberta’s Minister of Municipal Affairs, Ric McIver, conflate the effort to intensify provincial oversight with ongoing tension around overlapping federal and provincial spheres of influence and the transfer of federal funds to the province. They contend the provincial government’s rightful role is being circumvented.

“For years, the federal government has been imposing its agenda on Alberta taxpayers through direct funding agreements with cities and other provincial organizations,” McIver says. “Not only does Alberta not receive its per capita share of federal taxpayer dollars, the money we do receive is often directed towards initiatives that don’t align with Albertans’ priorities.”

Public sector facilities managers nationwide have long tapped into federal funding to upgrade buildings and infrastructure, whether through special arrangements or more widely available incentive programs. Many recent examples are tied to federal programs to promote energy efficiency, reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, climate change adaptation and accessibility. Proponents of those measures are wary that such funds could either become more cumbersome to obtain or be taken off the table entirely in Alberta.

“The health care sector has shown great enthusiasm for reducing its carbon footprint and we have had a lot of support from federal government programs that help health facilities do that,” observes Dr. Myles Sergeant, executive director of the Canadian Coalition for Green Health Care. “If health facilities in Alberta are not able to participate in these kinds of programs, they will fall behind the rest of the country.”

Provincial/territorial governments have also been included among the prospective recipients for most of these recent federal funding initiatives. Brendan Haley, director of policy research with Efficiency Canada, which promotes the dual economic and environmental benefits of energy and water efficiency, gives the example of funding that assists either provinces/territories or municipalities to adopt progressive building codes and support compliance with more rigorous energy performance standards.

“Federal energy efficiency initiatives often work best when partnering with provinces or municipalities,” Haley says. “I don’t understand why the Alberta Premier wouldn’t want money invested in the province.”

Commenting on Bill 18 in the Alberta legislative assembly, Rachel Notley, leader of the official opposition, New Democratic Party, called it unduly intrusive in local decision-making and damaging to economic development.

“Albertans democratically elect entire councils who fight to get funding for their communities. That’s local representatives standing up for their community. No one has elected this Premier mayor or councillor, so why does she think she has the mandate to pretend that they did?” Notley said. “This bill is giving major cities in every other province a huge competitive advantage over the Alberta mayors that she has now shackled with her red tape.”

Information posted on the Alberta government’s website notes there will be “comprehensive stakeholder engagement” to gather input for the regulations. That’s expected to occur in the summer of 2024, after the bill has passed into law. “It is anticipated the legislation will come into force in early 2025 once the regulations are finalized,” the website states.