On Thursday, a mostly anonymous group of some 47 individuals identifying themselves as “the Alberta Transition Council” dropped a document they called “The Alberta Transition Plan, a Practical Analysis of Alberta’s Transition from Province to an Independent Country.”
Only two authors are named in the document, St. Albert lawyer Keith Wilson, a leader of the Let Alberta Decide third-party-advertiser group, and retired business executive Dennis Kalma, who based on his Internet presence is connected to the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project.
As for the “council” comprised of the other 45, the document says they prefer to keep their role covert “in order to respect professional, employment and personal considerations.” Under the circumstances, it’s hard to blame them.
For this “plan” is an utterly unserious document, either hopelessly naïve or deeply cynical. It is a fair comment to say that either the authors actually believe the charming nonsense peddled throughout its 214 pages, in which case they are fooling themselves, or they don’t, in which case they are trying to fool the rest of us.
And for all the talk in its pages about analysis, research and findings, there is very little here but propaganda intended to create a reassuring sense of inevitability, thereby leaving Albertans with the impression that transitioning to citizens of the new state of Alberta will be a painless and quick process that would leave our lives and financial circumstances intact and inevitably result in a mutually beneficial new relationship with Canada.
It does, however, contain one interesting idea that perhaps could be explored further as a way out of the ridiculous situation Premier Danielle Smith’s United Conservative Party Government and her separatist allies have ensnared all of us who live here in the confusing, divisive and possibly rigged separation “referendum” they have scheduled for Oct. 19.
To wit: Allowing citizens of Alberta’s First Nations the option of remaining in a permanent relationship with Canada, or even for their land, encircled by the landlocked new statelet of Alberta, to remain Canadian territory.
“Canada could, for example, continue to own or administer certain reserve lands and services while the reserve remains inside Alberta,” the authors write, adopting a serious tone. “A different possibility would be to negotiate that particular reserve territory remains Canadian territory.”
The key flaw with this, as the authors must surely know, is that their own separatist base would never abide such an arrangement. Indeed, it runs directly counter to the ridiculous draft “constitution” cobbled together by the bright lights of the APP, which would constitutionally entrench the present provincial borders of Alberta for all time as the boundaries of their imagined new republic.
This part of the text continues: “That would create additional questions involving borders, roads, policing, taxes, utilities and access. Neither result would happen automatically.” To which one can reasonably respond: “No shit, Sherlock!”
Still, if Alberta First Nations can remain Canadian on Canadian land inside Alberta, why not the rest of us? The remaining 75 per cent or more of us loyal Canadians who want no part of separation but would nevertheless prefer to remain in our Alberta homes, living as Canadian citizens on Canadian territory?
All of Edmonton, for example, including its airport and Canadian Armed Forces base. Calgary, one is certain, would desire similar status. Well, this is unlikely to fly with the separatist base or the cabal of cynical schemers on Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s political staff, of course, but it is nevertheless a fine illustration of just how silly this document is despite its faux scholarly tone.
“This plan assumes that a successful transition should seek a new cooperative relationship between Alberta and Canada, not the unnecessary disruption of existing relationships,” the authors write. “In many cases, services can continue without interruption, while responsibility for their regulation, funding or oversight transitions from Canada to Alberta.”
So, the authors would have us believe, no one need fear problems accessing their bank accounts, continuation of their mortgage, receipt of their pension payments, access to health care services or education for their kids. That lawsuit you launched in a Canadian court? It can continue in an Alberta court where it left off, the authors also promise, because some of those federal judges you don’t trust will become Alberta judges you do. And those jurists’ judgments, the authors argue, will still be honoured in the rest of Canada.
Plus, federal Canadian services now offered by Ottawa will continue, quite possibly delivered by the same civil servants in the employ of the new state, the document startlingly suggests. “For those current federal employees working in Alberta who are asking if they can keep their jobs after Day 1 of independence, the short answer is yes.” One wonders how many federal employees would accept such a deal – and, if they were so foolish as to do so, how that would go over with the separatist base?
The authors say elsewhere: “RCMP members can be offered to transition to become Alberta sheriffs.” What’s more, a “cooperative agreement could allow temporary (Canada Revenue Agency) collection or data services under defined terms while Canada builds full capacity.” The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation could continue to operate too, they say. And so on.
And, hey, don’t worry about Canadians to the east and west being pissed about our frivolous decision to break up their country based on half-baked promises and U.S. and Russian Internet memes. “Geography makes an ongoing relationship both inevitable and important,” the “plan” avers.
Anyway, if that fails to work, Alberta can always threaten British Columbia. “Although British Columbia has direct access to the Pacific, it is effectively continentally landlocked by the Rocky Mountains when moving goods eastward to the rest of Canada and inland North American markets.” Moreover, B.C. “has a strong interest in preserving reliable access to Alberta energy because there is no readily available near-term replacement for supply.”
Nowhere is the absurd naivety of this work of fiction more obvious than on the question of dividing up Canada’s debt, post separation.
“The debt and assets analysis does not support using a simple per-capita or federal debt as Alberta’s final settlement formula,” the authors declare with boundless optimism. “Instead, the settlement should examine the broader financial relationship between Alberta and Canada, including federal assets and liabilities, records, historical investment, who benefited from debt-funded programs and infrastructure, contingent obligations, transition costs and Alberta’s historical fiscal contribution to the federation.”
After all, they argue, apparently forgetting that all Canadians pay the same tax rates, “Alberta taxpayers have contributed substantially more per capita to federal programs than Albertans have received through major federal transfers and spending programs.”
“Canada may propose that Alberta assume a share of federal debt based primarily on population,” the authors cheerfully continue. “However, such an approach would ignore Albertans’ historical contributions, which should be taken into account in any fair calculation methodology.”
“Should be …” That phrase does a lot of heavy lifting in this document. But good luck getting voters in other provinces whose country you have just broken up to be in a mood to let their politicians agree to any such deal, even if their leaders were in a mood to do so.
Elsewhere, under the general heading of health care, the authors seem to presume that transfer payments from Canada should continue.
What is the basis for this unwarranted optimism? Well, according to the authors, it worked for Peter Lougheed in the 1980s. “Difficult Canada-Alberta disputes have historically been resolved in negotiated arrangements,” they say. They seem to have forgotten, alas, that despite his differences with the first Trudeau government, Premier Lougheed was a patriotic Canadian and Alberta was a Canadian province.
Look, there’s plenty more foolishness in this effort. I could write another 1,000 words on the disadvantages of a country with no currency of its own, the functionality of a diplomatic service that would only pay attention to North America, or the dangers of waiting until after a separation engineered by extremist right-wingers like the leaders of the APP to find out what your constitutional rights and protections in the new country would be. On that last point, the APP has already tipped its hand in its draft constitution, and it’s not pretty.
Oh, and they’re in a hurry. All this is supposed to be basically wrapped up by the fall of 2027!
Do members of the secretive cabal who cooked up this “plan” imagine that after independence Albertans will still get to send a huge cohort of separatist MPs to Ottawa every four years or so to lecture Canadians on how to run their affairs? This is not stated explicitly in this document, but such an assumption seems to underly much of what is written there.
In fact, what they propose would be a bitter and angry divorce. Worse, no matter what the vote is in Premier Smith’s bogus referendum, at least half the population of the new country, more likely two thirds, would side with the missing parent.
And the APP wants us all to be armed to the teeth!
No wonder the anonymous “council” thinks the new state would need an army and a spy agency – not to “coordinate with neighbouring states,” as the plan suggests, but to keep its own population down.
“The report will speak for itself,” Mr. Wilson told a CBC reporter. Indeed, I think it does, regardless of whether he thinks “Canadians, and many people in the world, are growing leery of the ‘experts say’ stuff anyway.”
I can trust these people as far as I can throw them. Possibly rigged separation referendum on October 19. My bets are on it being rigged, because the UCP doesn’t play fair. Look at how the UCP dealt with the coal mining issue as an example. A judge ordered the UCP to produce a bunch of documents on coal mining in the Eastern Slopes, and it was brought to light that the UCP were lobbying for coal mining over half a year prior to them trying to abolish Peter Lougheed’s 1976 Coal Policy, on a Victoria Day long weekend, around five years ago. How did Corb Lund’s Water Not Coal Petition manage to fail, when he followed the rules for his petition? Danielle Smith pushed the 2027 provincial election from the spring to the fall of that year. Wildfires were deemed the reason. Now, the second referendum on separation is scheduled for the spring of 2027. So it wasn’t wildfires, after all. More games from the UCP and Danielle Smith were happening beforehand. The separatists definitely control the UCP and Danielle Smith. If she doesn’t do their bidding, they will dump her. We really have a horrible mess on our hands in Alberta. This could have been easily avoided if the UCP weren’t given another term. Hopefully, Albertans have learned their lesson by now, but the damage the UCP have caused and are causing is so deep that it will be very difficult and very costly to reverse. If Albertans haven’t learned their lesson, it will only get worse.
Might as well call it, “The Alberta Transition Plan, a Practical Analysis of Alberta’s Transition from Province to the 51st State.”
Ronmac: I’m pretty sure that’s the actual idea. DJC
Many Maple MAGA types are obtuse.
Trump in one of his many slip-of-the tongue moods is already calling this place “Oilberta.”
Alberta would not become a state. It would become a US colonial possession, with less constitutional status than even Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, or the US Virgin Islands.
And even if Alberta did become a state, it would rank something like 25th in population and get 6-7 congresspersons in the house of representatives, so max 1.6 % of the total, as opposed to the current 10.8% in Canada. Seems like a lot less influence to me (even if you figure in 2 senators out of 102)
That’s a good reminder to Albertans.
So the seperfools want the right to bear arms.
I agree – but not in the fashion they want.
1) I vote centre & centre-left
2) I own firearms (and have the license & training to do so)
3) I will bear arms to protect my country – which is Canada, consisting of 10 provinces & 3 territories
Hear, hear!
I had a chilling realization the other day.
All along, my wife and I have been saying we will leave Alberta to continue living in Canada if the votes go the wrong way. Our neighbours have also talked about the same thing. I read a report the other day that suggested about three quarters of the people who intend to vote to stay in Canada have said they would leave an independent Alberta.
If, for argument’s sake, half those people do leave, they will be joined by many others who might have stayed here, but their employer chose to relocate, so they had to move to keep their job.
My first thought was how this will have a huge effect on the value of homes, going way down in Alberta, and way up in the rest of Canada.
My second thought was how much easier it would be for the US to move into the resulting underpopulated jurisdiction with huge resource reserves. This gives me pause to reconsider our plans to leave – someone needs to stay behind to vote against annexation.
Many people who want desperately to leave will simply be unable to afford to do so, Bob, because not only will property values collapse in Alberta but they rise dramatically in other provinces. It’s as simple as supply and demand. DJC
It’s so bizarre watching these so-called grown-ups making up this “fantasyland”. Honestly, these “separatists” are like a bunch of kids in unstructured playtime, creating their magical world with forts and tree-houses with blankets and cardboard boxes:
“We need a flag!”
“Let’s just use this one …”
“What’s our clan’s colour?”
“How about blue?”
“We should have weapons!”
“Who are fighting?”
“Those imaginary enemies!”
And then they take a break and Mom makes them a bunch of sandwiches. And, away they go again, all fuelled up, all fun and games until someone gets hurt and stuff gets real. The adults enter the scene and it’s game over. Only this game being played in Alberta is darker and unfortunately, we are all being dragged into it, whether we like it or not. There’s no freedom in this fledgling society, and we know the game is contrived towards an ending we won’t like. In this sick scenario “Mom” is one of the script-writers and diabolically part of the grisly ending. We’re all waiting for Dad to come home and save us from our deranged matriarch and this nightmare shit-show.
Where is “Dad”, anyway? Still at work? Gone to the pub? Drunk? I guess will just have to save ourselves. Let’s just stop this nonsense game and everybody go home.
Dad (Carney) is afraid to upset Mom (Smith).
Looks like there is no shortage of nut jobs that are coming out of the woodwork and spewing goofy ideas on this separation thing.
In paragraph 14 you note: “federal judges you don’t trust will become Alberta judges you do.” My thought is the do should maybe replaced with know?
That only 2, supposedly educated, people let their name be public, out of 47, tells me exactly what this bunch of paper is, and those who participated in are.
This was the lie from Danielle Smith, and her real intentions are now known.
Alberta bill would change election date, allow province to assume control during local emergencies | Globalnews.ca https://share.google/JWomsTyxMSIqypkFZ
Smith says Alberta could have a binding referendum on secession in early 2027 – The Globe and Mail https://share.google/mqiexObidUL5MUD6G
Control over municipalities during emergencies like invasion by foreign troops? That would be awfully convenient. The UCP could guide the invaders into the bomb shelters, assist them in turning off power, gas and water to homes, and shutting down emergency services. They could guide them into hospitals and force staff to treat only the invaders.
It makes so much sense, now that I think of it. All the groundwork has been laid. Now the only thing missing is the invasion.
Not completely off topic, but readers should know that an Amber Alert was issued this morning for Alberta’s Opposition Leader and his NDP MLAs.
Anyone seeing a punctured purple dirigible trailed by an aimless flock of deflated orange balloons is asked to called police.
Do not approach, as NDP MLAs missing in action may be comatose, immobile, visionless, and hopelessly ineffectual.
They’re all doorknocking in Calgary-Shaw.
Okay, that is uncalled for. Every day, I read what is being said by the opposition NDPMLA’s. They are in their constituencies speaking to people about the issues and often offering the policies that the NDP would bring forward. They are very active promoting remaining in Canada.
Being in opposition is tough for any party but especially so for the NDP as they encounter Alberta’s fixation with anything conservative and a press that deigns to cover any policy but that of the UCP, thus sucking up all the air in covering Danielle Smith’s constant blathering.
I dare you to keep up with Janis Irwin, Rakhi Pancholi,or Sarah Hoffman. And those are just some dedicated mla’s from Edmonton. You may not care for Naheed Nenshi but he is who he is and bad mouthing what is does and says is definitely not helpful.
And as our host DC says…Thus ends the lesson. Have a good day.
Geoffrey Pounder: Sorry, but blaming the NDP is quite weak, when it’s not their fault that the media doesn’t acknowledge them, and when they do, they lie about them. The NDP can have any leader they want to, and the media will still lie about them, while endorsing the UCP. The media doesn’t acknowledge the other legitimate political parties in Alberta either. If it was years ago, the UCP’s corruption wouldn’t be allowed to slide. The media lied about Rachel Notley and they are lying about Naheed Nenshi. If the NDP found a cure for a debilitating disease, the media would still ignore them, or they will still lie about them.
Copy editors checking facts? That’s thing of the past at Postmedia, apparently, as election column illustrates – Alberta Politics https://share.google/M85eQ3RfCo9wJ6FEy
Bell: Danielle Smith gut punches Nenshi with 14 months to the election | Calgary Herald https://share.google/hoOyK9yXPt4R0ZYpw
This whole document is based on assumption. Trade deals will need to be negotiated, border guards and crossings, will need to be built and hired. Are they going to create tolls, for trucks and tourists that are just passing through? We’ll need a new banking system and we’ll need to figure out taxation, in which to fund our aging infrastructure. For crying out loud, Daffy Duck has more brains and foresight, then Smith and theses separatists.
Hello DJC and fellow commenters,
I wonder why “they prefer to keep their role covert ‘in order to respect professional, employment and personal considerations.’” Aren’t they claiming that this will be easy-peasy? You would think they would be proud of their achievement of showing how this would work and how seamless the transition would be. (No, I’m never sarcastic.) What are they afraid of?
On a more serious note, would you trust a group who want to keep their their identities secret when trying to destroy a country, many of whose citizens would consider the group members to be traitors? I wouldn’t. What knowledge or expertise do any of them have? This is not known, and it looks as if they have little expertise if you consider the kind of suggestions they are propounding.
I wonder how many Albertans will buy into this odious “report”.
Health care should not be a problem in the new country of Alberta. Since everyone will be expected top pay for their own, surely they wouldn’t expect to receive money from the Canadian government since they won’t have anything to spend it on. Danielle Smith will make sure that there is no health care publicly available, it will be pay as you go for everyone. Considering the cost, most people won’t be able to afford any health care or even the cost of health insurance. (I lived in the U S for almost 3 years with my husband and children, so I had a first-hand view of how it operated for middle class Americans.)
Perhaps they are concerned, as Benjamin Franklin is supposed to have said, that if they don’t all hang together, they’ll all hang separately.
As is usual, the seppies are, deep down, abject cowards.,
Readers of this blog realize that this piece of propaganda is a steaming pile of horseshit. However, knowing how stupid the average person is, it may convince just enough people.
If you are convinced that you– and presumably the enlightened few in your exclusive community –are significantly less stupid than the “average person” then we might as well kiss democracy good-bye!
You’ll notice I humbly disagree….
As Stephane Dion said in 1995,
“If Canada is divisible, so is Quebec”.
The only part of Quebec that would have been separable (pre-1867 borders) would have been the traditional boundaries of Lower Canada, along the Saint Lawrence River.
Not James Bay, not portions of Labrador. No more hydro dams, no more mining.
Which led Matthew Coon Come, then the AFN Grand Chief, to drive in the final coffin nail, to whit, “if Quebec separates, then we separate from Quebec. And we take Churchill Falls with us.” Jaques Parizeau did a gaffed fish impersonation.
Poor lil Keith, in way over his head.
Hopefully he can explain how his overt actions, designed to break Canada apart, are not treason and why he should not be held accountable for that crime.
I won’t hold my breath.
I suspect the authors of this document might eventually appear in public wearing hoods.
How nice of these anonymous individuals to appoint themselves leaders of this movement that Albertans don’t want. How nice of them to “allow” First Nations, Canada and the citizens of Alberta to do certain things, or not.
The only way any of this can come to fruition by October 2027 is by deus ex machina, i.e. a US invasion. The current premier could roll out her red carpet as she hands over the keys. Didn’t she say we should be nice and irresistible to our aspiring overlords?
There’s reason to imagine that the US might try this. Just look at their choice to bomb oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz this weekend. How very odd, when they know of the diesel fuel shortage, plus high diesel fuel prices during peak demand season plus the Irving Oil refinery in New Brunswick heading into a maintenance shutdown tomorrow that will last until late November, plus all the other problems they have created in the oil market, including a decreasing number of oil tankers. Are they creating an excuse to seize Alberta and our oil? This might not be a classic false flag but it sure is a red flag.
Thanks for writing this, David, and for giving us a chance to share our thoughts.
The entire existence of a transition plan really exposes the flaw in the plan to vote against something some people know they don’t like, when they do not know what they will get as an alternative. For example, how many people considering voting for pursuing the leave option support the idea of living in a country allowing the open carrying of firearms? Or, as other commenters have already suggested, the elimination of medicare?
If the referendum on Oct 19 results in a vote to pursue a legally binding referendum to leave, I think that second referendum should only happen after residents have had the opportunity to examine the constitution an independent Alberta would have, so they know what they are voting for, as opposed to what they are voting against.
Bob: I believe you meant to say “…the plan to vote FOR something some people know they don’t like.” Correct? It can bee guaranteed in the circumstances described that we will NOT be given the chance to see the constitution and bill of rights before the vote. DJC
Hi David,
If my comment left room for doubt I guess I did not write it well.
My point is that the separatists are asking people to vote against Canada, even though they have no idea what they will get when they vote against Canada.
No worries. DJC
Funny stuff, as always. There is no congruence of Russian and US aims, despite the kooky prog allegations about the wicked Pewtins and the Drumpf. The US is doubling down on re-colonizing the Americas, which includes Canada and Derpberta. Vassals sometimes need a reminder of who is actually in charge. The Carny Banker has Larry Fink coming to visit, just to remind those who need to know, who is actually in charge. The grifter-yokels are generally in lock-step with overt US imperialism, with progs adhering to the touchy-feely “let’s save the women by murdering everyone with bombs” kind of imperialism, but because Derpberta is the only real hydrocarbon producer in Canada, their desires in this case are at odds with the Empire. Pinning the separation nonsense on the Russians ranks with some of the goofier assertions made by the failing progs in the last forty years. The US has always had aspirations to gain de jure control of Canadian territory, not satisfied with its de facto control of the economy, through the old-timey branch plant system and the total ownership of Alberta’s oil and gas assets, and the intelligence and military and banking systems. Should the grifter-yokels manage, by dint of criminality or who knows what, to win the referendum, the resulting chaos would suit the Americans just fine. The upshot will be the nipping in the bud of oil flows to China, which, although doubling last year, remain miniscule compared to the fluvial nature of trade to the US. Should the “practical centre” prevail and the status quo hold, alternate measures will have to be deployed by the Empire to manage Alberta’s tar. Aside from the Reader’s Digest/Catholic Women’s League take on the Pewtin as New Hitler 5.0, no serious person could allege that the Russians, who are under unrelenting assault by the US empire, are doing the US dirty work in Canada. Russia is a rival to the US in Europe, and the Drumpf’s grifting notwithstanding, they are at war with the unforunate Ukrainian population serving as the US cudgel. The support by the Canadian state for the outright theft of Venezuela’s oil by Canada’s most important trading partner and closest national security ally, along with the Carny Banker’s unwavering support for the US hired killer in Palestine and the Blackrock operation in the Ukraine, give a pretty good indication of what lengths our owners will go to in order to maintain control of the globe’s economy by the 0.001%. Never mind the airports, that’s on the Carny Banker’s agenda for privatization. Krusty the Korrupt Klown of Kiev has sold off the lion’s share of the Ukraine’s agricultural lands to Blackrock. It’s a pretty good demonstration of what is in store for the rest of us. Never mind what the Techbros have cooked up for you! Elbows up!
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/commander-suggests-us-war-on-martians-as-likely-as-an-invasion-of-canada-12738005
A reporter asked a question: Would the admiral follow an order from the US president to invade Canada?
Admiral Samuel J. Paparo called the question “utterly preposterous” and “needlessly emotional”. Then he asked the reporter a question: “Would you ask me please, also, what my attack plans are for the Martians?” He broke into nervous laughter but turned serious when the reporter stated that he belittled a serious question and did not answer it. The reporter was cut off by the moderator. Video coverage of this press conference is revealing.
Also concerning was that Jennie Carignan, Chief of the Defence Staff for Canada, started chuckling, too.
The question remains.
Blocking, diverting and trivializing are classic gaslighting techniques used by narcissists.
I would like to point out that Danielle Smith has also used “emotional” to describe Canadians regarding counter-tariffs on Canadian oil. Who gives these people their talking points?
Perhaps Keith Wilson would like to explain if this is how Alberta will leave Canada within a year. I’ll be listening for the word “emotional” or “Martians”.
Are Martians the same as “little green men”? Should Albertans be watching for “little green men”?
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/watch-out-for-little-green-men/
But buried under the avalanche of Alberta separatism and referendum stories are conversations about the dire state of the province’s health care system, Sam Mraiche, addiction centres mired in legal cases, Sam Mraiche, Turkish Tylenol, Sam Mraiche, cutbacks to municipal government funding, dehumanizing attacks on the LBQT+ community and trans kids, the dismantling of AISH and introduction of ADAP. I could go on and on for another thousand words. But here’s just two more. Athana Mentzelopolous.
Of course the whole thing is farcical, and I’m pretty sure a clear majority of Albertans will turn it down. What is more dangerous in my opinion is the other nine questions on the ballot which represent the UCP’s real secessionist agenda.
If they show up to vote…that’s the problem. Brexit was not supposed to pass, Trump was not supposed to win (a first or second term) but those things happened. I hope that the ‘remain’ side in Alberta has a loud voice.
As I’ve said many many times, the RCMP is a military (Calvary) police, in structure and application and they were designed way on purpose. They are an occupying force and they answer to OTTAWA, the idea these folks, who I believe swear an oath to CANADA are going to hang it up to be low level quisling separatist “alberta sheriffs” Is hilarious in its stupidity.
They’re FEDERAL police and they are one of the elite policing institutions in the country. Whether a fan of them or not, police take prestige, rank and importance rather seriously. It’s connected to their pay.
In the event of any unlawful activity by the seppies they would be first in line to be dispatched, and I’m guessing whoever makes up their tactical units are capable of a level of rock and roll they just don’t have in dinosaur country.
Thank you for saving me the joy of reading this screed. And here I thought that the men and women of the independent streak were honourable, clear thinking folks. Sigh.
There are several small enclaves and exclaves in the world. Some of them are well known (Andorra, Monaco, Point Roberts, etc.) and they all have different origin stories. Turning to Alberta post-separation….
Assuming that everyone agrees – all other provinces, the courts, First Nations, international institutions like the EU and UN – the separation should go splendidly.
But, who provides the armed forces, the medical personnel, border control for people and goods? And from where does the money come? Free loans from the Feds or the Yanks? Russians? MAGAs?
So, while the manuscript is all sunshine and daisies, the money trail is more ticks and sores.
Remember, say “No” to the nine and use a pen for the ten!
I’ve been perusing my local Postmedia excuse for a newspaper and the Toronto Star and CBC websites. Perhaps my research skills are lacking but nowhere can I find the depth of criticism and analysis David has produced. We know where American owned Postmedia is coming from but what about the other two? Waiting.
Those papers are owned by Americans, and I’m guessing more than a few of them would love to see alberta become America. Not going to happen.
I do not find it reassuring that the separatists have a “plan”, if it can be called that. I feel a better word would be an agenda and would add that some important parts of it are hidden.
A landlocked independent state will obviously have a lot less leverage to move its energy east or west, so the logical alternative then will be to integrate more with the US and likely become a part of it. At least some of the separatists are comfortable with that, because they ideologically they are more in line with the extreme MAGA regime currently in power there. An obvious problem with all of this is of course governments can and do change. Lest we forget it was the previous US government that cancelled the Keystone XL government and a Canadian one that later went ahead with our Trans Mountain pipeline.
So yes, they have a “plan”, just not a very well thought out one.
Ok, let me get this straight. Some 40 plus people met in a darkened internet room. They wrote a laughable constitution and assumed Canada would want to pass over assets and supply services for nothing but lucky charms, and . . . Unserious drivel.
Exactly. I find it outrageous that separatists have been legitimized and given mainstream airtime. Utterly outrageous.
Mr. Climenhaga you deserve praise for being able to wade through the document’s simplistic drivel. One wonders if the stupidity of these malcontents and of those that believe their nonsense is acquired or congenital.
Well, this separation “plan” just takes the whole mooty-patooty cake! Whilst the premiere tries to play political games with referenda the Alberta Trans-47 Council wants to shoehorn itself in there too—except that the kind of game Danielle Smith is playing is what she’s doing instead of the politics of getting policy done for the public good.
There is no metric that shows the majority of Albertans thinks separation is acceptable or good, not even if those who didn’t vote for the UCP are discounted as if their elected MLAs don’t exist. The UCP’s definition of “losers” is cavalier as we’ve seen when it proposed to convene a “council” of UCP candidates who were losers—or at any rate didn’t defeat incumbent NDP candidates in the numerous, longstanding Dipper ridings enclaved around the Capital—in the last provincial election, 2023, and have this council advise cabinet of what constituents in these ridings should, in its obsequiously partisan opinion, expect from their government instead of their elected representatives holding the government to account in open parliament.
Recall that Smith also promised her schizophrenic party membership that she would undo every piece of Dipper policy and legislation from the mandate before the previous one when UCP founder and first premier, Jason Kenney, was ousted by (as we may now call it) Smith’s Take-Back-Alberta faction before he could fulfil a similar promise he made before defeating the NDP’s 2015-19 upset majority: ‘Crazy collectivist’ policy would be erased as if it were just a bad dream and Alberta would revert to virtual one-party rule and ignore a few token opposition MLAs as the partisan-right had done for almost all of eight decades until rudely woken up.
Of course the shock wave of 2015 reverberated right past K-Boy’s wishful assurances, the NDP did not revert back to its pre-2015 parliamentary fringe status but instead won several times as many seats as it held back then to become the largest Alberta Opposition in living memory. Don’t even have to get into the equally shocking reverberations from the defeat of the Alberta-dominated federal HarperCons in the same year to make an a fortiori case that when Smith won the first mandate of her own in 2023 the Dipper Opposition won even more seats to become the largest Opposition in Alberta history, and thus, to whatever extent post-HarperCon disappointments produced waves in 2019, 2021, and especially in 2025, they have merely amplified the standing sine of NDP popularity which now ominously breaks over UCP decks during what mariners fearfully call “depressed-bulb,”or stormy seas, into which Captain Smith has navigated on numerous occasions. Despite the histrionics, it’s a stronger case that the right fears losing power and becoming irrelevant more than any cocked-up, bogus threat from the ROC+Q.
Any sane passenger should question why Smith has set a course straight into the separation maelstrom while wasting ballast against gathering seas abeam by uselessly firing it at the federalist HMS Sasquatch (which even her more-experienced tars suspect is a ghost-ship)—or at least ask, “Hey!—Skipper!—what’s your cap-size?”
But no, she’s nailed a US silver dollar to the mast, struck a Melvillian bargain with her crew so obsessive as to forgo better prospects, a myth bespoken-in-tongues that her quaking chief mate should find an abomination for at all costs she seeks the whale which jeopardizes HMS Alberta and threatens to drop upon them from one of its breaches like a giant Moby Dick. It’s a myth so stridently wrought that flying sparks ignite paroxysms of “analyses,” “assessments,” and “plans” to follow up what ain’t gonna happen anyway. There is no legal or constitutional way for any province to secede from Canada.
Given the maudlin psychodrama of alleged victimization by Canada and the lame spinoffs (like Richard Basehart found fame on the small screen after winning his Best-Supporting-Actor role as Ishmael, the UCP’s justification for seceding from Canada is a voyage to the bottom of the sea) and the fact that Smith charts along rhum-lines running wildly from a compass-rose with its left half erased, apparently as heedless of inclemency as she must be of incumbency, one has to wonder if what’s really worrying her staff, probably all of her cabinet too, at least half of UCP members, and a considerable number of UCP voters is that disaffection with the partisan-right has only grown the official opposition to its left (which, in the UCP’s case, includes a not insignificant amount of centre-right territory it has abandoned), not the utterly refutable notion that, in terms Danielle reminds are nauseatingly recognizable, “Canada is ripping us off.”
Naturally the plight of the partisan-right in the nations of Greater Anglo-Saxony is wearing the sheets off the ghost-ship of Alberta secession: Smith might also be seeking revenge for losing limbs in 2012 and in 2015—because of, not in spite of crossing the Assembly’s poop-deck. But considering the shock waves of 2015 (Alberta NDP and federal Liberals whip Conservative governments), 2016 (tRump elected), 2017 (NDP-Greens terminate right-wing BC “Liberals”), 2018 (Dems win midterms, impeach tRump twice); 2019 (CPC wins more popular vote than incumbent Liberals, but remains opposition), 2020 (Jan6 copycat Freedom Convoy besieges Ottawa, then dispersed under Emergencies Act; defeated tRump incites violent Jan6 Insurrection; BC Liberals lose their last election to NDP majority); 2021 (CPC fails to defeat incumbent Liberal minority); 2023 (NDP wins largest Alberta Opposition ever; NDP defeats Manitoba Conservatives); 2024 (BC Cons surf MAGA wave but fail to defeat incumbent NDP; tRump squeezes a win when Dem incumbent drops out of race partway through campaign; NDP Opposition pulls even closer to Sask party); 2025 (CPC blows 25-point lead, loses to Liberal minority; leader loses own seat, wins by-election in the safest CPC riding in the country; enough of his MPs cross the floor to give Liberals a majority; Guthrie leaves UCP to form ProgTory party), and 2026 (Liberals sweep by-elections to replace retiring MPs and maintain majority; nine MLAs leave BCC caucus), and the facts that BCC’s Kerry-Lynne Findlay handcuffed herself, just like Smith and PP did, to the narcoleptic Orange Julius Seizure (and he to his own reptilian ego) and one has to suspect the right’s enemy is not really “crazy socialism” or transgender “wokism” or abortion or any of that stuff but the fact that most citizens dislike its radical positions—really, distractions from the fact it can’t win without playing dirty pool, character assassination, inciting hatred, and cheating—and everybody knows it.
Oh, well, at least they’re predictable. I’d sure like to see le ‘tit gars de Shawinigan give a palsy-wink while paraphrasing himself: ‘If Canada is divisible, Alberta is divisible,’ then watch the seppies lose their shit! (Recall that Chrétien was referring to First Nations’ disapproval of Quebec’s 1995 Referendum because they preferred to stay in Canada with which they had settled the massive James Bay Treaty.) So I’ll just say it myself: verily, if Quebec is divisible, Alberta is divisible!
But this is all nonsense to distract from the throes of a discredited neo-right. BC “landlocked by the Rockies”? Whoa, man!—get a map! But, anyway, so what if it’s five-times more distant to go around Alberta on the north than through it at its narrowest point along the US border: the route handily goes right through Fort Smith, NWT—birthplace of the “leader of the free world” and vantage point for an offer the feds will one day make that Alberta can’t refuse, mark my words.
And unilaterally decade independence without your own currency? I can just hear these seppies rationalizing that the USA had no currency of its own either, not until 1861. Well, yeah, sure: the Greenback was invented because of the USA’s little secession problem of its own—the one that resulted in nearly a million Civil War deaths and probably a million more casualties during the famines and epidemics that thrived during post-war Reconstruction.
You just can’t buy better bullshit than Alberta separation, not with Canadian or American money—nor that silver coin nailed to a submarine sailing mast somewhere neath the depths Danielle Smith’s trolling.
OT: Anybody heard from wee Davey Parker lately? His highly amusing emails have stopped.
Maybe that class action lawsuit has occupied his attention these days…
Cool: He seems to still be busily tweeting on X but under a slightly edited handle. DJC
Last I heard, he was in the Excited States. Unable to confirm.
I can’t imagine why anyone would think that Canada will be favorably disposed towards. a separate Alberta in negotiations. The feds will be getting the best deal for Canada and hold most of the leverage. Surely they will want to make an example of Alberta to warn any other province that may be contemplating leaving.
My expectation is we will have another referendum no matter how the province votes in October. We are thinking of selling and leaving before house prices plummet.
Remind that, legally and constitutionally, there is only one negotiation currently available with regard secession of any province from the Canadian federation—and that is the one recommended in 2000 by the Supreme Court of Canada when it ruled that there is no mechanism by which a province could secede, but there is a way to insert one into the Constitution by way of its Amending Formula.
Exercise of the formula does of course involve negotiations between the provinces and the federal government because, in order to amend, seven of the ten provincial legislatures which together represent at least half the national population, plus the federal parliament, must ratify the amendment. Since the principle of federalism is that all federates are treated equally in law, regardless geographical size or population, the amendment negotiations would involve the proponent (of the amendment, presumably in this case the province of Alberta, but could be any federate) pitching the proposed amendment to the provinces to first discover which if any of them would be willing to meet the amending criteria. The provinces would naturally want to know how the proposed amendment would affect them, what if any quid pro quo is in it for them in return for their ratifications and, of course, the feds would have to be apprised as well since the HoC ratification is one of the criteria. Obviously such explorations, even preliminary to detailed negotiations that might be required (depending on what the exact amendment would say), would take a considerable amount of time and involve complex issues to be negotiated. At present no such exploration nor negotiation have been formally initiated.
The Amending Formula has been criticized for being very difficult to achieve, not impossible, but virtually so. The wants and needs of different provinces federated across the second-largest nation in the world are naturally quite specific and diverse, and the difficulty in amending the Constitution is that some might demand a benefit or enhanced jurisdictional authority (in return for their ratifications) that wouldn’t extend to all federates equally; or it’s possible that all provinces agree that certain federal authority be transferred to them but the federal parliament disagrees; et cetera. In any case, because of the huge variety of the provinces’ size and population, there are far fewer possible combinations that would meet the amending criteria than one might expect at first glance ( the tiny federate of Prince Edward Island has less than 1% of the national population; Quebec and Ontario combined have almost 40%; &c; I have researched the possible permutations but encourage every Canadian to do the exercise themselves in order to familiarize with what might become a very important issue).
“Virtually impossible,” yes, maybe, but IMHO the amendment recommended by the SCoC —that would say all ten provincial legislatures plus the federal parliament must agree to a secession for it to proceed—is probably one exception because of its ambiguity: some provinces could see it as a way to discourage secession, others as a way to allow it. In any case, without such an amendment, no measure of support for secession in any particular province is sufficient to allow it, not even a referendum which unanimously approves that province’s secession. It remains today that there is no legal or constitutional way for a province to unilaterally secede. It simply may not.
While it’s okay to speculate what the provinces might or mightn’t do, what they may and may not do with regard Alberta’s threat to separate, the facts ultimately make such speculations moot. Unfortunately they also risk misinforming of the facts—and we see that many separatists have been duped into subscribing to supposed ‘legal opinions’ that are factually incorrect. Indeed, some of the hypotheses proffered by certain ‘legal experts’ verge on sedition or treason (for example, the implied fifth-column of Albertans cooperating with a foreign power –the USA–to help them illegally secede, or be summarily annexed by the USA). The premier herself does little to disabuse this faction’s fanciful—and potentially illegal—propaganda. Indeed, she continually posits that secession is possible if enough Albertans approve of it, and that there is a legal way to do it—but only if the SCoC reverses a number of its own rulings and the Constitution be re-interpreted, apparently so’s to remove existing obstacles to secession (she assured the first ministers’ meeting that her government would work through all constitutional requirements for secession when in fact there are no such things, and then suggested a route by way of continual court appeals— which either betrays her ignorance of how appellate courts work or her willful intent to deceive Albertans and Canadians).
Still, her government has convinced many Albertans that threatening if not actually doing secession is an acceptable way to wring concessions out of Ottawa, probably knowing (at least she should know) that some of these demands are outside the rule of federate equality. There is a case to be made that such threats have achieved benefit for Alberta—the TMX pipeline to the West Coast and the MoU for yet another one, for examples—but flirting with illegality (all the way up to sedition and treason?) and fomenting division among fellow citizens is as dangerous as it is unconstitutional.
Finally, by every measure today there is no majority of Albertans which approves of secession—not even close—, as will either be proved at referendum or interference with the vote be evident. Instead of fearing how far down the dark ladder the UCP is willing do descend, the best thing for Albertans to do is to vote “no” to the upcoming referenda questions this October and to defeat the wannabe separatist UCP at the next opportunity in a little over a year from now.
All the best.
This kind of thing is all moot, IMO, because the Alberta separatist plan is essential to foment a coup, not a legal move to separation, and to rely on the Trump Administration to come to their aid if things go, as it were, south. They know perfectly well that whatever the outcome of the vote is, a majority of Albertans do not want to separate from Canada. DJC
A big concern is whether citizens of the new nation of Alberta get to maintain Canadian citizenship and vote in Canadian elections. As an Ontarian, I wouldn’t be too happy about foreigners having a say in Canada’s politics while Canadians have no say in theirs. Ottawa would have to change expat voting laws so that you can only vote in Canada. Besides, who would Albertan-Canadians vote for, since they have no riding and no MP representing them?
If any one in Alberta thinks they could vote in Canadian elections they’re crazier than trump. If Alberta seperates from Canada they are no longer citizens of Canada and therefore would not be eligible to vote in Canadian elections. They might also want to realize they won’t have any M.P.s so what would they be voting for.
Don’t see a whole lot of RCMP staying in Alberta. They are a national police force. Its not an agency which rents out cops. If Alberta wanted to take over the RCMP and rename it????would RCMP officers want to work for the Alberta gov/t. Their pensions and health care plans are with Ottawa. What benefits would they have with Alberta.
I for one am not keen on leaving our National Parks with the Alberta gov/t. I’d be in favour of them continuing to belong to the Canadian government. Guess the military basis would also close and service members leave and take the equipment with them. That would leave a number of civilians without jobs. The little group of dreamers are out of touch with reality. They can write all they want but its just hot air, well more like they’ve been smoking too much weed.
Thanks for the post. And that bunch thinks they can run a country even if it is small.
e.a.f.: The Alberta civil service lacks the capacity to run a country, by design. The UCP knows this. What do you think that says about their long game? DJC
So I applied for an Elections Alberta job, just had my training day.
1) EA is forecasting 80 – 85 % turnout
2) EA is recommending apply & use mail in ballot
3) > 300 K mail in ballots have been requested
This article is misleading. The writer is making a lot of assumption without context. Has he even asked a supporter of independence what they think? This is fear mongering from the other side and proves that the movement is stronger than hw wants to admit.
Why does he attack the separatist movement instead of respecting those Albertans that are concerned for the future of Albertans. No suggestions as to how to address the issues of a divided nation. Just keep falling inline as sheep.