So, is Danielle Smith pulling the Alberta Prosperity Project’s strings, or are the pushers of the prosperity project pulling the premier’s?
Yesterday, a separatist sub-faction of the Alberta conservative movement’s extremist base announced the question it hopes to ask in the separation referendum it’s collecting signatures to demand – which, to give the group its due, cuts right to the chase.
Jeffrey Rath, a lawyer associated with the group, donned a brown cowboy hat to stage-manage the Big Reveal for media yesterday at a hotel in Calgary. The question hidden under Alberta’s uninspiring blue flag: “Do you agree that the province shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province of Canada?”
As for who’s pulling whose strings, though, it beats me. Premier Smith, who is quick but not particularly thoughtful, certainly has lots to fear from the far-right crowd embedded in her United Conservative Party base, its Legislative caucus, and perhaps even in her cabinet.
With a quick march across the floor of the Assembly reminiscent of Ms. Smith’s notorious Wildrose walk of shame on Dec. 14, 2014 – when she and eight of her Opposition Wildrose MLAs joined the Progressive Conservative government of the day – four or five of her current UCP MLAs could leave her with a minority in the House.
She also knows what happened to UCP founder and former premier Jason Kenney, deposed by essentially the same group of people, just before her current job was bestowed upon her. It was Mr. Kenney, it should be remembered, who first agreed to sup with the separatists while forgetting the folk advice to use a long spoon on such occasions.
Or maybe Ms. Smith had a big, overarching plan cooked up by someone like Chief of Staff Rob Anderson, one of the authors of the Free Alberta Project, another one of the fringy actors in Alberta’s separatist movement, that requires a pawn to play the role of an honest broker in her constitutional drama.
Seriously, it’s hard to know and for the time being we can only speculate, which brings me to some thoughts by Jean-François Lisée, journalist and former leader of the Parti Québécois, who offered an elegant explanation of Ms. Smith’s strategy in the pages of Le Devoir on Saturday, republished in his own blog.
Readers should note that it’s been many years since I’ve been called upon to translate from French into English, so they must forgive me for following the advice of my multilingual PhD daughter that DeepL is the best online translation tool. As a result, any errors in translation are, of course … DeepL’s fault.
Under the heading, “The Alberta Strategy, a Job Well Done,” Mr. Lisée rather admiringly describes Premier Smith’s strategy in seven steps, summarized in my words below:
- Declare the status quo to be intolerable. Even though, as anyone who lives here understands, it is not, unless you’re having a tantrum about how your favoured federal party just lost an election. Mr. Lisée quotes Ms. Smith’s false claim that successive Liberal governments, abetted by the NDP, have attacked the provincial economy.
- Present clear, ambitious demands. Withdrawal of all environmental legislation, access to the Arctic, the return of plastic straws, as much equalization cash as Ontario and Quebec, etc.
- Insist on a tight deadline. And prepare to present even more demands, cooked up by a tame panel.
- Plan a simultaneous referendum. It would occur just as the new list impossible demands were announced.
- Normalize the separatists. Examples include the terminology of the Sovereignty Act and the claim in Ms. Smith’s May 5 video address that petition organizers are “not fringe voices to be marginalized or vilified – they are loyal Albertans.”
- Pretend there’s hope. “Faced with this gloomy picture and the unrealistic level of Alberta’s demands,” Mr. Lisée writes, “Ms. Smith pretends there’s a chance her province might win.”
- Wash her hands of it. And when the pre-determined disappointment sets in, “she would reluctantly come to the conclusion … that there is only once choice: independence.”
I’m not sure I’m 100-per-cent persuaded by this outline – it frankly seems too sophisticated given the actors on Alberta’s separatist fringe, or in Ms. Smith’s government for that matter. Still, it’s a more thoughtful analysis than we’ve heard from any professional commentator in this province. If nothing else, it strongly suggests Quebec is better served by its punditariat than we are by ours.
Mr. Lisée wrapped up: “I remember a remark Jacques Parizeau made to me about one of Robert Bourassa’s twisted but effective strategies: ‘Now that’s a job well done!’ The same can be said of Ms. Smith’s strategic construction … but only if she wants to lead her province to independence.”
(Speaking of premier Bourassa’s strategies, University of Alberta political scientist Jared Wesley observed Sunday: “Smith stole Robert Bourassa’s ‘five conditions’ strategy in developing her ‘Alberta Accord.’ Thing is: Bourassa spent years building consensus on the much broader Meech Lake Accord, which eventually included something for everyone. And failed miserably. Smith isn’t even bothering to try.”)
Returning to Mr. Lisée, he continued: “Otherwise, the failure of negotiations with Ottawa – or the achievement of a disappointing fraction of her demands – can only fuel the frustration of Albertans who, if they can’t take revenge by punishing Canada, will find another scapegoat, closer to home.
“Danielle Smith is therefore simultaneously gambling with the future of her province, the future of Canada, and her own personal future,” he concluded.
In this regard, Mr. Lisée has nailed it.
Yes, the Quebecois have seen this game before and know well how it can be played. What works in Chicoutimi can work in Cold Lake. It’s hard to say whether the separatists are being played by Smith or vice versa and at this point probably each thinks they are controlling this.
One thing I am fairly certain of, unlike Quebec with its unique culture, Alberta independence is probably just a way station to it becoming part of another English speaking country and neither the separatists or Smith are being honest about that. Being landlocked will not ensure or maintain our prosperity, so Alberta will need to be part of a larger entity. In this regard, Albertans are being played.
I feel Smith is mostly using separatism to distract from her political troubles, in particular her health care scandals and as a way to try control the always restless right wing of the UCP that may have developed a taste for regicide. However, just like her predecessor Kenney, I don’t think she can play their frustrations both ways. If she proves to be ineffective in resolving them, like Kenney she may be replaced by someone more radical.
The UCP may then be transformed into the United Separatist Party.
Desperate times may have led to desperate measures by Smith, but it is a dangerous game. It is foolish for her to think she can control this process which could easily get out of hand.
What goes around, comes around. Looks like the brown hats are going to beat Ms. Smith to the punch and she like Jason and others will get the heave. Quebec has always been better organized and smarter. Smith and the rest of them simply don’t have the work ethic to get this done successfully. A number of political organizations worked long and hard to get to where they could negotiate the deal to have more autonomy .
Smith wants as much money as Ontario and Quebec, omg, has she and hers lost their minds. They don’t have the population. If that is her price for staying in Canada she isn’t serious about leaving. She just wants more money. Perhaps on her trips to mara la go, she was convinced she can pull this off. I’m certain maga would love to take over her oil business. The U.S.A. will use people and countries to achieve their goals and walk away when they are through.
It is doubtful smith will be able to pull off an exit or better deal. No military, no large population, no great industry, land locked, a population not used to paying sales tax. Alberta politicians haven’t even been able to build a large bank account with all their oil since the days of Lougheed. The federal government can drag “negotiations” out long enough, smith will die of old age.
On top of that huge corporations thinking of building their headquarters or building their corporate bases in Alberta will shy away from, or leave Alberta outright, as corporations require stability
For their forecasts. Better for them to think of B.C. than any other province in Canada. Read up what happened to Quebec!
This wonderful lady, or Premier, wants to separate Alberta from Canada like she is separating $200.00 from the poorest, most defenceless Albertans from their $200.oo from Canada. What a wonderful lady -rolling around on her $280,000.00 rug at the expense of the AISH recipients. Special!
Danielle Smith would be flat out lying if she claims she does not feed, or endorse this separation rubbish. She has given multiple hints that she does. A provincial pension plan, a provincial tax collection system, so that the money can be controlled by the provincial government, and be scrutinized for how much is sent to Ottawa, a provincial police force, and other initiatives show that Alberta being separated from Canada is her goal. Allowing a referendum on secession, and lowering the threshold to make it happen, is yet another dead giveaway. When there were separation zealots at the Alberta Legislature, this month, Danielle Smith didn’t condemn them for their anti Canadian conduct. Danielle Smith sure got an earful when First Nations chiefs spoke out against this separation nonsense that Danielle Smith is obviously endorsing. Their treaty rights are clearly being violated. At one point, Danielle Smith claimed to have Cherokee roots, and said that she could speak for Indigenous people. She doesn’t have any Cherokee ancestry, and that’s been confirmed. There are people who do have Cherokee ancestry and will tell you that they can prove it, with family records, photographs, a DNA test, and the like. Watch investment flee from Alberta, when Danielle Smith continues to fuel the separation garbage. Other Conservative premiers in Alberta, such as Peter Lougheed, loathed this separation foolishness. He was a true, dyed in the wool Conservative, not a Reformer, and he respected all Albertans and Canadians, including the Indigenous people. Peter Lougheed did have Indigenous ancestry, and that was proven.
This Jeffrey Rath? “https://www.lawsociety.ab.ca/hearing/jeffrey-rath-3/”
It would be interesting to know what the overlap is between evangelical christians who are still dead-set against abortion rights in Canada, and separatists. It seems to include Danielle Smith in her healthcare maneuvering: https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/opinion-albertans-reproductive-rights-are-under-threat-heres-why
And elected UCP member:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ucp-jason-kenney-anti-abortion-1.5122314
I suspect that there is a strong undercurrent of anti-vaxxers, anti-abortionists in the separatism clan, and with that, being reasonable about the consequences of separation is no longer a consideration for them.
LM: You are absolutely right. I will have a lot to say about this in the months and weeks ahead, I am sure. Alberta separatists, transphobics, anti-vaxxers, anti-abprtionists, anti-immigrationists, anti-wokers, gunnutz, “Christian” Dominionists, convoyers, voting machine truthers, etc. are by and large the same small group of people moving in and out of a group of fringe political parties, fake economic institutes, clubs and societies. For some it is a grift. For many it is genuine conviction. Almost all, since the beginning of the 21st Century, are heavily influenced by MAGA. But never before – and this is what is new and dangerous – have they dominated a governing political party in Canada. DJC
@DJT
The problem with a room full of “anti” this-and-that is that they aren’t fighting FOR something.
The end result of it, since they’ve all got their pet peeves is that eventually, everyone in the room isn’t “pure” enough for them about their specific topics and they wind up infighting and splintering off.
Thus we see all the disparate separatist groups–instead of one well-managed, with singular focus.
If that happens, that’s the threat.
Albertans, by and large, don’t want to stop being Canadians. This fringe notion now dominating our political discourse is a classic example of the tail wagging the dog, and it’s premised on a temper tantrum by certain players — Premier Daniellezebub foremost among them — over the fact that the hard right wing of Canadian politics wasn’t able to get more than 37.5% support outside Saskaberta.
About the only good thing you can say about this is that this putative referendum question is absolutely clear on what it’s asking — unlike the vague, mealy-mouthed, wispy-washy questions used by the Parti Québécois in 1980 and 1995.
This was intended to read “wishy-washy”. Autocorrect changed it.
The entirety of the Alberta Separatist Scam (ASS) worries me to no end. I receive pensions from both Canada and Alberta. Should the separatists prevail, I fear that one, or both, incomes will be imperiled.
I have no faith in any assurances which might be supplied by the separatists. Too often, promises made by such advocates are nothing more than empty lies meant to lull the unsuspecting to their doom.
Just as a side note, one claim for separation is that Alberta sends rail cars full of money to Quebec. This is a falsehood. Alberta sends money to the federal government in Ottawa. Do these people not understand that, should Alberta join the US (which I am sure is the ultimate goal), those rail cars will continue to roll? Only the destination will be Washington, D.C.
Read Andrew Coyne in today’s Globe on why Alberta cannot separate. Stormy Danielle is wasting everyone’s time with this garbage. She should just shut up already.
The primary difference is Robert Bourassa was an intellectual who was an economist. Smith is no intellectual, and I rather doubt she could even hope to compare to the late mr, Bourassa.
Add my vote to your comment. Smith isn’t even in the same building as Bourassa nor does she have the personality that other Quebec Premiers had.
I was listening to “Good Talk” on Peter Mansbridge’s podcast, The Bridge, yesterday, and Chantal Hébert was scathing in her mockery of the Alberta separation cabal. She stated they are not serious people.
She discussed how intelligent, educated and thoughtful Jacques Parizeau was leading up to the near-miss 1995 referendum — he had a PhD from the London School of Economics. Then she said that any PQ Leader arguing that Québec should separate so it could have plastic straws back would be adjudged not fit to remain Leader.
She’s right: these are not serious people and this is not a serious idea, and yet they are now dominating public discourse in Alberta and drowning out the very serious allegations that have been made about government corruption and incompetence — which is probably the point. Flooding the zone with sh!t, indeed.
I remember a time when respectful gentlemen removed their hats indoors and tucked in their shirts and did not throw flags on the floor. Surely a successful lawyer with a thriving and profitable law practice such as Mr. Rath knows to wear a suit in court. Judges expect respectful comportment. What are the people of Alberta in this instance but judges?
Clearly this display was meant to convince viewers that Mr. Rath is merely one of the local yokels, fresh out of the barn, probably wearing the same ****kickers he used to muck the pens, instead of a legal beagle who challenges cases in the Supreme Court. Will it work? Doesn’t everyone in the big cities that make up this province of 5M souls wish they could show up for work like this and toss a flag on the floor in a fit of pique? We shall see.
In the meantime, Mr. Rath can go back to wearing whatever he normally wears for court appearances. I’m assuming that includes custom-made shirts with cuff monograms and made-to-measure suits. While mere mortal men shop at Moore’s for non-casual business attire, I find that an unlikely and improbable choice in Mr. Rath’s instance.
What do you think, gentlemen and gentlewomen of Alberta?
Abs: I suggest we all follow Derek Guy at @dieworkwear on Twitter/X before jumping to conclusions we may regret. DJC
Oh, I do follow Derek Guy and especially appreciate his “collar gap” posts. Mr. Guy is a proponent of authenticity in one’s style. So am I.
Would it be worthwhile to organize a competing referendum negating the one separatists are organizing? Maybe a question along the lines of “Should Alberta continue to be a province of Canada?”
A competing referendum promoting Canadian unity could negate the bandwagon effect of allowing the separatists (and Smith) to set the parameters of the public debate.
Interesting idea. At the least, it’d force Miz Smith to recognize the opposing position. She might even be dumb enough to ban the “let’s stay in Canada” referendum, while waving through the “I wanna leave NOW” poll.
While it would be great if the ditchbillies managed to can Marlaina, look what happened last time. It seemed there could be no bigger liar and grifter than Kennochio, but Marlain-a-Lago made him look like an amateur. Maybe this Rath fellow will be our next premier.
I think Jason Nixon has been jonesing for the job of Alberta Premier…I’m pretty sure he wept real tears when JK was voted out.
Who knew that Samuel Johnson saw the coming of Danielle Smith hundreds of years in the future when he wrote, “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel”.
A very plausible explanation, but I would suggest it’s the oil and gas industry pulling the strings. They are the paymaster, past, present and future (future seats on the boards of directors of O&G corps, for abiding petro-politicians … ching ching).
Regardless, I propose that we revoke the citizenship of the separatists and deport them to Afghanistan or Yemen, if the referendum fails, using the notwithstanding clause, to follow PP’s lead. After all, they are fake Canadians trying their best to destroy Canada.
David, add to O&G, American money, including dark money–driving these efforts.
While I’m not a huge fan of government over-reach into citizen’s private banking affairs, corporations should be exempt from that and we need a way to follow the money spent by the most egregious of these groups.
Dixie Danny’s Daddy was reportedly a C-Suite guy with oil companies in Calgary. I haven’t been able to discern which companies but it’s not at all surprising to learn she had the sort of upbringing she did. I’m assuming high level C-suite guy because someone definitely pulled some strings to have her groomed by Tom Flanagan when she flamed out of her ambition to be an actor. (Did she though?, Dani’s always wanted to be on TV).
Her dad also reportedly worked for Firestone, doing what isn’t publicly available. Would be really interesting if he spent any time working for Talisman energy.
Anyway all that to say, oil and gas pumping money into this is as likely as it’s ever been, it’s been their thing since before alberta was a province, trying to pull the richness of our resources away from Canada.
@Bird, helpful tidbits to know, thanks. Explains a lot. Like the wasted time, daily pressers–I mean, who has half a day for prepping for all that then delivering if they were *actually* doing their job as Premier? That’s not needed information–it’s a sales pitch.
I leave it to the number crunchy accountants but I still say the best way out of this is to re-Nationalize oil, gas and mineral extraction. Give say, 5% of the profit to every province and territory, double that for the province/reservation where the resource is located and the rest into the federal government to pay for infrastructure and emergency services plus a pad of savings for rainy days and for future-looking exploration where the profits won’t accrue for awhile.
That also explains why Dixie Dani is so backwards-looking. O&G is rapidly going downhill due to renewable energy resource, losing profitability and by now, there must be panic in the boardrooms knowing most of their jobs and massive profits will be gone in a few decades. Also explains the excessive amount of plastic packaging on everything these days.
Oil is going the direction of coal. They know it, most of us know it and the more instability they can cause while they’re still in the game–the better for them.
It’s an idea, but I don’t think it’s really possible to renationalize oil and gas in alberta, at least not now. Remember, albertans fought Ottawa for twenty five years over the resource / schools question. A fringe want to separate but it’s much more likely a rather large majority see that as belonging to Alberta.
@Bird,
That’s why I say “do it in every province” because if that’s part of belonging to the country, Alberta isn’t being singled out. It becomes the right of every Canadian citizen. Alberta will get more oil money than they’re getting right now and a bit of everyone else’s money, as well.
Add in what the infrastructure and services the feds could invest in or submit a portion of payment, for.
This would make everyone (and Alberta) richer, not poorer.
@djc
Do you think Ric McIver’s resignation has anything to do with the APP & Smith?
And yes, I agree, with all due respect to Mr. Lisee’s cogent analysis, Smith & and the separatist lunatic fringe are not competent enough to pull off all 7 points.
Hi Gerald. I wondered if McIvor’s resignation was to clear the way for a run at the speaker’s job. I doubt that, after everything he’s sat through while Q-adjacent Danielle screwed up by the numbers, he’d feel compelled to walk out now. We’ll know soon enough.
THEY MADE ROTTEN RICK THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE !?!? Jfc
Bird: Yes, and Mr. McIvor’s many detractors won’t like my qualified words of kindness in tonight’s blog either. But there you go. DJC
He’s resigning for cabinet to become Speaker, I believe.
Correct. I can’t keep up with you guys! DJC
Somewhere in my storage locker is my large “NON” sign from the last referendum. As I lived in Chelsea, QC but worked in Ottawa, ON, the result of the vote would really impact me. But the question! OMG, it was a dandy employing more twists and turns than Chef Boyardi.
But I doubt we’ll see crowds and bus loads of folks descending on the Leg, geography notwithstanding. Many, many people (irrespective of postal code) don’t quite ‘get’ Alberta’s grievances.
Hopefully, there will be an effective education campaign from bloggers, journos and others who are deeply concerned.
DJC you may want to trademark a potential new name for the wannabe separatists that was provided to me by an eastern based peer, the Bloc Redneckois.
Middle, got a chuckle out of the name, which I plan to adopt!
I had heard it a little differently, when the Wexit crowd was birthed. The Block Redneck Wah!
I wish this wasn’t so simple but Dixie Dani is engaging the “dead cat” strategy as Boris Johnston put it. “If you don’t like where the conversation is going, throw a dead cat on the table” or words to that effect–meaning, if a politician is under legal scrutiny, throw a dead cat on the table because all that anybody will be able to speak about…is the dead cat. Conservatives the world over have been using this strategy and frankly, it’s getting old.
Now, maybe I have an odd mind, but while Dani’s behaviour doesn’t fall under the laws that govern traitors, I fail to see how it does not fall under the category of “fomenting sedition”–as she swore an oath to defend Canada and is now, regardless of her mealy-mouthed denials, actively legislating to break up the country.
Alberta is not *sovereign*. It’s a province, not a country or territory or even a reservation for Goat’s sake.
And Dixie Dani believes in “direct democracy” about as much as I believe in sacrificing kittens to appease Baphomet.
She’s also a major distraction and irritant that takes eyes away from the actual real threats this country is facing from our southern neighbour while actively making the job of the feds, harder.
Then the Wexit group whinges that everyone hates them.
It’s like running around punching everyone in the face then complaining that nobody in the schoolyard, likes you.
B: One small point of disagreement, or at least clarification. In Canada, and in any true federation, sub-national jurisdictions like provinces and “states” are sovereign within their jurisdiction and territory, subject the the terms of the national constitution. Whether Ms. Smith likes it or not, the Canadian Constitution does give the federal government a couple of mechanisms to overrule provincial governments. The proper mechanism for settling jurisdictional disputes is the judicial branch of government. Despite its constant complains of the opposite, sometimes justified, the UCP has made it clear it demands the right to invade federal jurisdiction and exert authority in other provinces’ territory. DJC
Thanks for the clarification, DJC.
Yes, if I am not misinformed, her carbon cap nonsense falls under the perview of the feds and thus…she’s either bullspitting and will get caught out as she plays her base claiming the feds are being mean–or she’s unable/unwilling to read.
My fav of her idiotic stances is that she wants “sovereignty” but the same doesn’t apply to anybody else if she wants to run a west-east pipeline.
David, what do you think the chances are that four or five UCP MLAs have had enough of her stupid shenanigans and will cross the floor? Surely, some of them must be loyal Canadians who are sick to death of her.
MIchele: You’d think so, wouldn’t you. But if anyone crosses the floor, I think it’sa more likely to be some of the outright separatists. Things are far gone in the UCP. However, it would appear that voters are not really paying attention. DJC
The Gripes of Rath. But a comedy this time.
+1
It is unclear whether voters are paying enough attention.
But, there’s a reality about the electorate in Alberta, and across Canada, that I, with my limited reading, have not see addressed.
That reality is based in the wave of immigration to Alberta in the past few decades. Madame Smith has an ambition of expanding Albert’s population to 10 million.
With the dramatic changes in the make-up of our society, I just don’t see the majority of citizens accepting the turmoil and disruption that a push for separation would bring.
I have to admit, I was surprised by the 36-per-cent support for separatism in the recent Angus Reid poll. Maybe wishful thinking on my part, but I don’t see support rising beyond that figure. The numbers can only decline as new people come to live here motivated by building new lives in Canada, rather than an Alberta run by a bunch of good, old boys with big guts and cowboy hats.
You know, a few years ago progressives in Alberta were optimistic that the wave of in-migration from other parts of Canada, where provincial politics are far more competitive and voters routinely throw the bums out on a somewhat regular basis, although not at predictable intervals, might moderate Alberta politics and end the 80+-year domination by right wing parties. Sadly, I fear this optimism was misplaced.
I think people who moved here from elsewhere in Canada are self-selected conservatives themselves, especially those who moved to those parts of Alberta where the economy and labour markets are dominated by extractive industries and agriculture. I can’t think of any other explanation as to why voters in Red Deer, Fort McMurray, Medicine Hat and Grande Prairie continue to vote so reliably and so monotonously for conservatives at both the provincial and federal levels.
The 4-year Notley NDP interregnum notwithstanding, I think it entirely possible that Alberta will revert to its traditional monotonous conservatism year after year after year.
The assumption seems to be that Alberta’s separation would be peaceful. Don’t know how other Albertans feel about it, but no one is taking away my Canadian citizenship!
I guess we will find out who’s pulling whose strings if or when Premier Schmidt starts announcing details that “coincidentally” match up with the demands of this mysterious APP group.
As for this Rath character, isn’t an oath of allegiance to king and country required by all lawyers under the Legal Profession Act and the Oaths of Office Act? Shouldn’t pushing a separatist agenda be grounds for sanctions, if not full disbarment? Perhaps in other parts of the world but not here in Oilberduh.
FoF: Who knows. Maybe even here in Alberta. Someone would have to make a complaint to the Law Society. It seems to me ridiculous to require new layers who do not believe in the monarchy for whatever reason to swear an oath of fealty to it, when any clown in a cowboy hat with a law degree can ignore said oath. Eiter the oath needs to go, or the person who ignores it. DJC
Firth:
Giving the APP the distinction of being mysterious is crediting them with far more than they are worth.
One of the head honchos is Mitch Sylvestre of Bonnyville. He is/was the Captain of Take Back Alberta’s northern chapter, a UCP constituency president, and a local anti-vaxxer. However, he is just one of many anti-vaxxers in the area. The area is full of like-minded wealthy oil patch company owners with a lot of money to donate to the APP. They network and text and are actively recruiting. He loves a microphone and the spotlight. He has a history of rallying for various ’causes’ and trying to influence government decisions. He has been promoting and building the APP for at least 2 years. He had APP posters printed with Uncle Sam front and center and was handing them out at his local sporting goods store. Covid was the perfect storm to consolidate all this dangerous nuttery.
I think it is important to expose the players behind this movement. I’m guessing for some it’s the ’cause’ of the day. It is similar to a cult leader in terms of the motivation – in that the cause becomes secondary or a vehicle to fulfill the bigger need, which is the power of influence and a love of being center stage. Social media amplifies the reach.
Only one thing to note: “SHALL” is a biblical term. Interpret as you see fit.
Since Dani is facilitating referendums, I think we should put up at least two others! Dump Dani in Florida: yes or no. Get rid of the catholic healthcare: yes or no. I have other referendum questions.
Take the traitors to Koutts. Build a wall around it and forbid them entering canada. Smith could be the queen or whatever nazis want to call their leader. If you can separate them from the Albertans who are respectful and intelligent I would love to visit.
My biggest concern if the question is put to a referendum, is that people will not take it seriously, and will not bother to vote. Isn’t that how Trump won his second term as president?
The same Jeffrey Rath that believes residents of a breakaway Alberta republic would keep their CPP pensions and their Canadian passports. Yeah right. How do these clowns dream up drivel and think Albertans will buy into it?
Jimmy: Mr. Rath is without a doubt full of hooey, but the questions of the CPP and passports are not so simple. Canada recognizes dual citizenship and Canadian citizens live in other countries. Certainly it would not be inconsistent for Canada to allow residents of a separated Alberta to keep their passports. Indeed, there would be compelling reasons to do so, including having a powerful cadre of real Canadians in place for when they are needed. Likewise, the CPP pays pensions to Canadians in Mexico and the United States and many other countries. The problem here is that CPP is not going to keep liabilities (CPP pensioners who worked all or some of their careers in Alberta) without keeping the funds to pay them (the money Alberta wants to start its own pension plan). So in fact not just Alberta CPP pensioners have to worry about this, but many other Canadians who live in other provinces but worked in Alberta for part of their career. DJC
Dave you are of course right. I know people to which both circumstances apply. I just wonder if the people and governments of Canada would adopt a hard line “you’re either in or your out” type of approach towards separatists similar to the EU’s approach to the UK during Brexit and that of the Royal Family’s toward Prince Harry.