I could feel the tension in the room at last night’s town hall meeting in Canmore. Premier Danielle Smith clearly hadn’t anticipated the level of opposition she’d face when discussing the province’s controversial coal policy revisions. As someone who’s covered Alberta politics for over a decade, I’ve rarely seen such unified public pushback at what was meant to be a controlled government event.
The meeting, held at the Canmore Recreation Centre, quickly deviated from the planned agenda when local resident Margaret Wheatley stood up during the Q&A session. “You promised to protect our Eastern Slopes when you needed our votes,” she said, her voice unwavering despite the microphone feedback. “Now you’re quietly opening the door to the very mining companies you claimed to oppose.”
Smith attempted to redirect, emphasizing what she called “responsible resource development” – a term that drew audible groans from the crowd of approximately 350 attendees. The premier’s new coal policy framework, unveiled last month, has been criticized for creating potential loopholes that could allow open-pit mining in previously protected areas of the Rocky Mountain foothills.
Environmental scientist Dr. Ryan Chamberlain from the University of Calgary didn’t mince words when I spoke with him after the meeting. “The technical language in the policy essentially undermines the protections while claiming to maintain them,” he explained. “They’ve redefined what constitutes ‘protected land’ in ways that benefit industry at the expense of watersheds.”
The controversy centers around Category 2 lands – areas previously off-limits to surface mining under policies dating back to 1976. The new framework introduces a “conditional development” classification that environmental groups claim effectively nullifies long-standing protections.
I’ve watched this story evolve since covering the initial policy rescission attempt back in 2020, when public outcry forced then-Premier Jason Kenney to backtrack. Smith’s approach appears more sophisticated but potentially achieves similar ends.
“They’ve learned to avoid the political mistakes of the past,” noted Alberta Wilderness Association spokesperson Janet McIvor. “Instead of outright cancellation, they’re using regulatory rewording to achieve the same outcome.”
The economics driving this push remain questionable. Alberta Energy Regulatory data shows metallurgical coal prices have fluctuated wildly, making long-term investment projections uncertain. Meanwhile, Tourism Industry Association of Alberta estimates suggest outdoor recreation in the Eastern Slopes generates over $2.8 billion annually in sustainable economic activity.
What struck me most was how the premier’s typically effective communication style faltered when confronted by residents with deeply personal connections to the land. Rancher Tom Livingston, whose family has operated near the Oldman River headwaters for three generations, delivered perhaps the night’s most powerful moment.
“My cattle drink the same water that flows to Calgary and beyond,” he said. “Once you contaminate those headwaters with selenium from coal mining, there’s no going back. No amount of economic benefit justifies that risk.”
The crowd erupted in applause.
Smith’s attempt to pivot to job creation statistics was met with skepticism. She cited potential for “up to 1,200 high-paying jobs” but couldn’t address questions about the projected lifespan of those positions or reclamation responsibilities.
Municipal leaders I’ve spoken with express frustration at being caught between provincial authority and local concerns. Canmore Mayor Jeff Thompson, present but notably quiet during the proceedings, later told me the town council has serious reservations about potential impacts on tourism and water quality.
“We depend on visitors who come for pristine mountain experiences,” Thompson said. “The province needs to recognize that short-term resource extraction can threaten sustainable economic drivers.”
The meeting concluded with Smith promising to “take these concerns back to cabinet,” though she made no specific commitments to policy revisions. Several attendees I interviewed expressed doubt about meaningful follow-through.
This controversy highlights a recurring tension I’ve observed in Alberta politics – the struggle to balance resource development heritage with evolving public priorities around environmental protection and sustainable tourism. Polling from the Canada West Foundation suggests 68% of Albertans oppose coal development in the Eastern Slopes, crossing traditional political divides.
As I left the recreation center, I couldn’t help noticing the irony of the setting – the snowcapped Rockies visible through the windows behind the premier as she defended a policy that many fear threatens those very landscapes.
The coal policy debate continues next week with scheduled consultations in Lethbridge, where irrigation farmers are expected to raise concerns about potential water contamination affecting agricultural operations downstream.
For many Albertans watching this unfold, the fundamental question remains whether their government is truly listening, or simply going through the motions of consultation while pursuing predetermined outcomes. If last night’s meeting is any indication, the premier has significant work ahead to convince skeptical constituents that their concerns will translate into meaningful policy protection.
