Alberta’s border crackdown draws support and criticism from experts, rural leaders

As one southern Alberta community welcomes the crackdown on border security unveiled Thursday by Premier Danielle Smith, some experts are questioning the need for the investment. Randy Bullock, the reeve of Cardston County, which shares a border with Montana, believes that having a two-kilometre-deep border zone policed by the province’s new Interdiction Patrol Team (IPT) is an important step in protecting against illegal activity. However, he admits that incidents of trafficking illicit drugs, weapons, or people across the border are rare in his community.

The $29 million investment announced by Alberta to create the IPT, consisting of 51 officers, patrol dogs, surveillance drones, and narcotics analyzers, is aimed at intercepting illegal attempts to cross the border and bring drugs or firearms into the province. This initiative comes in response to threats from U.S. President-elect Donald Trump regarding the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs, particularly the smuggling of fentanyl.

While some support the effort, others, like former CBSA senior official Richard Huntley, are skeptical of the plan’s practicality, legal authority, and effectiveness. Huntley, who managed southern Alberta’s inland CBSA office, believes that deploying sheriffs at the border may not be the most effective solution due to the challenges posed by the remote and rugged nature of the border region. He calls for better federal coordination, increased surveillance, and properly trained border patrol teams to manage the situation effectively.

Experts like Benjamin Muller, a professor at King’s University College and a border security expert, point out that the amount of contraband crossing the Canada-U.S. border is significantly less compared to the U.S.-Mexico border. While the IPT may serve as a deterrent, there is limited data to support concerns about fentanyl trafficking over the border.

Premier Smith defended the border policy as legitimate, emphasizing the need to address the issue of incoming and outgoing criminal activity. The IPT will mainly focus on checking vehicles crossing the border at secondary stations to gather more information about border crossings.

Ultimately, the effectiveness of Alberta’s border security plan remains to be seen, as experts question the need for such a significant investment in light of the relatively low levels of illegal activity along the Canada-U.S. border. The province’s proactive approach may serve as a deterrent, but the practicality and long-term impact of the IPT deployment will require further evaluation.