The secessionist movement has been growing since I lived in Calgary in the 80’s.3 of my adult children are Alberta born. The danger with Alberta is most of its media is owned by American Post Media and Albertans are fed a steady diet of unrest . Alberta is our soft underbelly that MAGA Interests are steadily and surgically radicalizing . Taking a look at the right wing march in America its taken decades ( since Falwell / Moral Majority ) to bring rural America to a boil.The same method is being employed in Alberta and Saskatchewan.Carney should move quickly to address the pipeline issue and give clear signals to thwart the talk of secessionist referendums .
Why is every dissent with Liberal ideology labelled as “MAGA”? Is that your view that anyone who disagrees is “MAGA”? Not helpful to moving the country forward. 🇨🇦
Not necessarily no , but then a lot of what passes for a conservative party ( once mildly right of center in my youth) has shifted further right starting with Harper. I am open to dialogue provided its not aping MAGA talking points , which many do not realize are the foundation of Polievre’s policies.
Looking at your stack its sure replete with the typical catch phrases and character assassination buzz words used against Liberals generally and Carney specifically .
I talk to a lot of people right of center but seldom get past what they are spoonfed .
The secessionist movement has been growing since I lived in Calgary in the 80’s. Three of my adult children are Alberta born. The danger with Alberta is most of its media is owned by American Post Media and Albertans are fed a steady diet of unrest . Alberta is our soft underbelly that MAGA Interests are steadily and surgically radicalizing . Taking a look at the right wing march in America its taken decades ( since Falwell / Moral Majority ) to bring rural America to a boil.The same method is being employed in Alberta , and Saskatchewan. Carney should move quickly to address the pipeline issue and give clear signals to thwart the talk of secessionist referendums .
If you want a clear picture of Alberta’s oil industry out look, follow Markham Hislop (a post of the outlook for oil in China is below).
Alberta has torqued its provincial agencies to service Oil and Gas extraction which is now the least productive thing it can do. The last big gift given to the O&G industry in Alberta (by Jason Kenny) was in the form of a massive tax break, worth about $1 billion to SunCor alone. What did SunCor do with that money? They invested in “labour saving” technology to enable it to employ fewer Albertans and reduced its cost per barrel. What a deal for the province!
Markham has talked about all of the OTHER things the province could be doing… using tar sands as a feedstock for carbon fibre production, asphalt and a range of other uses, all with a higher value added for Alberta than extracting the oil.
The problem in Alberta is the oil and gas lobby (majority foreign owned it must be said) is so powerful that is well nigh impossible to have a reasoned discussion about alternatives to “business as usual”.
All this is to say—Alberta’s problems are “made in Alberta”, not Ottawa.
At the time Suncor got a nearly $1 billion tax break from Alberta (which it used to eliminate Albertan jobs), I changed the words to a Tom Paxton song to mark the occasion... (Mark Little was the CEO of Suncor at the time.). Alberta oil was briefly worth "about a head of lettuce". If you don't know the original Tom Paxton song, it was about Chrysler.
I am Changing my Name to “Suncor”
(apologies to Tom Paxton).
Oh, the price of oil is sliding out of sight
And Alberta is in sorry shape tonight.
What a barrel used to get us now won't get a head of lettuce,
No, the economic forecast isn't bright.
But amidst the clouds I spot a shiny ray.
I begin to glimpse a new and better way.
I've devised a plan of action, worked it down to the last fraction,
And I'm going into action here today.
Chorus:
I am changing my name to "Suncor".
I am going down to Edmonton, A.B.
To Kenney I will whistle, “what you did for Mr. Little
Will be perfectly acceptable to me."
I am changing my name to "Suncor".
I getting in that great receiving line,
When they hand a million grand out I'll be standing with my hand out.
Yes sir, I'll get mine.
When my creditors come screaming for their dough,
I'll be proud to tell them all where they can go.
They won't have to scream and holler; they'll be paid to the last dollar,
Where the endless streams of money seem to flow.
I'll be glad to tell them all what they must do.
It's a matter of a simple form or two.
It's not just remuneration, it's UCP tradition
Aren't you kind of glad that I'm in debt to you?
[Chorus]
Since the first amphibian crawled out of the slime,
We've been struggling in an unrelenting climb.
We were hardly up and walking before money started talking,
And it said that failure is an awful crime.
It's been that way a millennium or two.
Now it seems there is a different point of view.
If you're an oil corporation and you’re looking for salvation
If Alberta can separate, can the Indigenous First Nations of Alberta remain in Canada? How constitutionally perilous would this become? The separation movement is a farce, fueled by childish nonsense and a lack of serious people. It's revolting. I wish Carney would call Smith and Manning out by name. I know that is unlikely to happen, but I have no tolerance.
I think you’re drastically misreading the intended audience of Smith and Manning’s rhetoric. It’s entirely for local consumption. Smith in particular cares only about maintaining her own power base, which is entirely on the rural areas of the province believing in a particular grievance narrative.
As long as she keeps them angry and aimed at external antagonists, her personal position is rock solid secure, and fully insulated from anything pesky like consequences.
You mention whether or not Alberta has any store of goodwill in the rest of Canada. It doesn’t matter. I doubt that the concept crosses either Smith or Manning’s mind, any more than how much goodwill Quebec might have in BC plays any part when the Bloc or CAQ makes announcements to shore up their base
Smith? Who knows, but Manning wanted very much to bend Canada to Alberta’s wheel. Harper took up that torch (“you won’t recognize Canada when I’m done…”), and Poilievre is the last of the three Harper apostles to try to finish the job. It has to be making the vengeful old man crazy to know they were SO CLOSE last December to getting back to power and watching it all turn to dust!
It is intended to up the stakes. The Feds need revenue, particularly if they use the tariff excuse to engage in expensive industrial politices. Oil and gas revenue is an obvious target. The Feds need to know that Alberta is prepared to tear apart the country if the Feds make a move such as an export tax.
I've always found the rhetoric from Alberta elites to be confusing. You need to have a very narrow idea of how economics works, and not bother concerning yourself with any responsibilities, in order to believe what they do.
I know Albertans have been told that it was hard-working individuals who created the province, and this rugged individualism is what allowed them to become prosperous.
The fact is that the Alberta and Saskatchewan governments were created in 1905 to govern land which the Canadian Government didn't legitimately "own", and it was big-government (paramilitary, etc,etc) that cleared the land of competition (clearing out existing inhabitants, using genocidal policies, etc) so those alleged "individuals" (European foreign workers) could do what the central government created those provincial governments for them to do.
They were as independent individuals as any employee of a large corporation.
The problem is Canada is never honest in discussing its history, and thus it is easy for special interest groups (Alberta elites is only one example) to misinform people.
The Federal Government hasn't done enough to fix the problems it created. You can have departments named "Western Economic Diversification Canada" (or similar) as long as you want, but if special interests groups are never corrected, and the exceptionalist culture remains, people's minds will remain stuck in the distant past and have historical grievances tied back to 1905, 1867, or earlier.
Who told you that “this country” (however you are using that term) is robbing “Alberta” blind? Do you have actual documentation that you have checked the references on, or only the angry statements from special interest groups?
I understand there has been a manufactured grievance based on specific words in the UK’s Canada Act 1982 (passed during P.E. Trudeau’s era) which gave provinces control over natural resources.
(Section 50 adds section 92A to the Canadian constitution)
I notice how people rely on P.E. Trudeau’s Liberal government era policy to claim that Alberta alone “owns” the fruits of resource extraction, with much of that resource extraction happening within the District of Athabaska which was granted as jurisdiction to the Government of Alberta during the Wilfrid Laurier era (another Federal Liberal government).
Even though all of that was gifted to the Government of Alberta during the time of Federal Liberal governments, special interest groups in Alberta have confused Albertans into opposing Federal Liberal governments.
These special interest groups then claim the National Energy Program (NEP), which would have already created a National Energy Corridor (something “Conservatives” are now calling for), is somehow bad.
It is a misrepresentation of the truth by special interest groups wanting more political leverage and more handouts, nothing more.
Note: I don’t agree with either of these Liberal government policies, so don’t confuse this with an endorsement of Liberal governments or those policies. It is, however, Federal Liberal government policy that granted you the alleged entitlements you are using as the basis of your grievances against Federal Liberals..
But, I know how some people feel “entitled to their entitlements”.
The NEP didn't create anything. It was a revenue grab during the period when world oil prices were above the made in Ottawa price. When world prices dropped below the technocrat modeled fair Canadian price, it was conveniently dropped. It did benefit the US energy industry by sending talent and capital south.
PetroCan was also a disaster. Rather than being a window into the industry, under the visionary leadership of Trudeau loyalists/energy visionaries like Maurice Strong and author John Raulston Saul, it acquired assets at high valuations and drove them into the ground.
In the early section of "The Problems", the section on "Towards Canadian Energy Independence" is essentially discussing in the 1980's what is now being called a National Energy Corridor.
Had special interests not generated Western alienation and blocked every aspect of this policy, Canada would have had the energy corridores for a few decades already. Pricing was not the entirety of that policy, and as energy prices fell that aspect of the policy would have changed anyway.
Other problems, such as the fact that Canada still imports oil even though Canada is a net-exporter still existed. Regional divides have been manufactured and fanned my entire life by special interest groups, which has made Canada vulnerable in so many ways.
To me, "Elbows Up!" should include up against these allegedly "Canadian" special interest groups keeping Canada vulnerable and weak.
No, I’m not interested in getting into a document war with you. If we are successful in having a vote on secession, I will leave the litigation to the attorneys. It is the worst kept secret in confederation that Alberta pays the “bribe” money that keeps Quebec a part of Canada.
If a “yes” vote on secession is successful, then Albertans will not pay Excise taxes, GST, Carbon taxes, or equalization.
Your historic references that suggest that Alberta isn’t entitled to ownership of its resources or references that suggest Pierre Trudeau’s NEP was somehow good, are just that - history.
Canada is evolving rapidly. The opinions on how we should proceed are becoming ever divergent. The polarization is going through the roof.
How do we solve this problem?
My preference is for us to go our separate ways & work together when it is in our mutual best interests.
We agree that polarization is going through the roof.
The fact you believe the "Liberal Party of Canada" has something to do with that is part of the polarization manufactured by Alberta elites. I'm not a fan of the LPC either, but I have reasons that aren't based on raw anger harnessed by special interest groups to spread misinformation.
I don’t represent the LPC in any way, and yet you seem to want to keep mentioning them as if they are relevant to this conversation.
At the end of the day you can believe whatever you want, and you can believe it is possible for Alberta to become a separate country. You can even believe that a majority of Albertans would vote in favor of that option based on a clear question related to a real option.
The only real option that the Alberta Government has would be to convince the USA to use military force to take over the territory to become part of the United States (most likely as a territory and not a state). Then the remaining inhabitants can see how much political influence those living in that territory will have over their own lives.
I'm not sure the USA is quite that stupid, as that would likely initiate WW3, but who knows at this point.
“Alberta elites”… I’ve never heard anybody before you, use this term. Although I don’t know who these people are, it’s probably fair-game. After all, we have referred to “Laurentian Elites” for quite some time.
The difference between Alberta Elites & Laurentian elites?
I don’t believe that the USA would ever use military force to take Alberta. I also believe that Alberta would vote “No” in a referendum, but it will be closer than you think.
I don’t believe that a single transferable vote would help Albertans in the slightest. A Triple-E Senate would.
Most of all, I believe that splitting this country up is the best way forward. I’ve given up on the sacred cow named Canada.
My answer for the difference between Alberta elites & Laurentian Elites?
Alberta Elites aren’t trying to impose their will on others, they are trying to escape the Laurentian Elites imposing their will upon them.
I'm being honest when I say I have never heard that term. I wasn't trying to riff off of it or anything.
Thanks for continuing to engage, rather than just declaring this as another “us vs them” with no possibility of ideas exchange.
—
There are elites in pretty much every area of political thought that then try to (ab)use regular folks as part of their campaigns. They have some goal (usually personal gain or ideology of some sort) and then generate some "them" to use to build an "us" around their goal.
I don’t subscribe to the Marxist concept of “class”, but I do recognize political, economic and other elites that try to indoctrinate other people to do things which aren’t actually in their own interests. Cults of personality, etc, etc.
I grew up in Sudbury, Ontario. I grew up with people talking about “Toronto this” and “Toronto that” in much the same way as I currently see people talking about “Ottawa”. There were constant discussions of the elites, of how Toronto was “taking” all the tax money and getting all the services, with nothing left for the North (Sudbury is south of the 49’th, so whatever).
This was the top “them” in any conversations about politics, with “Quebec” (sometimes the government, sometimes the entire province, sometimes referring to “French people”) being the second group we were all indoctrinated to hate.
When I was 11 I remember watching Joe Clark on TV talking about the need to raise gas prices, and I thought it was amazing to see such an open and honest politician. I just thought P.E. Trudeau and his Trudeau Salute was funny and something to laugh at.
In the 1980’s I chose Carleton University (in Ottawa), and ended up never returning to my place of birth. I started to get engaged in politics:. In the 1990’s I joined the Green Party and Progressive Conservative at various points.
—-
I assume you know about “Khmer Blue”, and the ongoing rift between different branches of conservatism within the Conservative Coalition Party. I know the “Coalition” part is kept silent to pretend to the outside world that it isn’t a pre-election coalition, given there are some within the conservative movement that want to suggest that coalition governments are “bad”.
While I responded to this article about Alberta, one of my main interests relating to politics is actually Democratic Reform. I don’t like these pan-Canada political parties, and recognize that a conservative in the southern prairies is entirely different from a conservative in southern Ontario. The antique electoral system caused mergers that should never have happened, and the dorky NDP/Greens want to allow central parties to appoint parliamentarians based on party lists.
The obvious solution is Single Transferrable Vote (STV) which maintains the regional ties so we can reduce rather than inflame regional alienation (and prairie/ Western alienation is by far not the only region that feels alienated by pan-Canadian parties and politics).
Unfortunately the NDP/Greens and other self-claimed pan-Canadian groups (so-called “Fair Vote Canada”) have been misinforming Canadians and claiming that “ranked ballots” are bad and STV is a form of “Proportional Representation” equivalent in some way to party lists. The reality is that STV is ranked ballots, and while you can elect more than one parliamentarian at the same time through multi-member districts, it has nothing in common with party lists. It is simply an abuse of a mathematical formula by people who have a misunderstanding of politics and parliaments.
I note that these interest groups want to talk about Electoral Reform outside of the context of Democratic Reform. They pretend to have so much knowledge of electoral systems (really, misunderstanding mathematical formulae) and yet haven’t even heard of the Reform Act, 2014.
"So who owns the Ring of Fire and Hydro Quebec assets located on regions of ON the and QC that were *gifted* from the federal government?"
My main point is to try to get people to recognize that these were *gifted* from the Canadian Federal Government, out of land which the dominion government was calling the North-West Territories. (There are ongoing debates about the land claims Canada has made in relation to NWT, which included Rupert's Land, etc).
I was born 50+ years ago in what is currently called Sudbury, Ontario. I was told growing up there that I lived in "Northern Ontario". While it might have been Northern Ontario in 1867, it has been Southern Ontario my entire life. It is even south of the 49th parallel, so in the most southern part of Canada.
I do not believe the Ontario Government located in Toronto should have any say in what happens with resource extraction projects in the True North. I believe the 1876, 1880, 1889 and 1912 territorial expansions should be rescinded, and the land restored to a governance system by and for Northerners (Such as we see with what remains of the North West Territories and Nunavut).
I also disagree with the 1898 and 1912 territorial expansions of Quebec. See "Sovereign injustice: Forcible inclusion of the James Bay Crees and Cree territory into a sovereign Quebec", which may be in your local library, for more details on the legal problems those territorial expansions created.
I am disgusted by Canada-wide parties (Liberals, Conservatives, NDP, Green Party), and the general myth that party-nominated candidates in all regions are somehow equivalent (A Calgary Conservative and a Toronto Conservative aren't remotely the same type of conservative).
I am disgusted by political parties adopting US-style leadership conventions that make sense under the US presidential system, but are a form of corruption when used within the Westminster System that Canada uses.
I am disgusted with how "Canadian" media reports federal elections as if they are US presidential elections when Canada uses an entirely different system -- media misinformation is why you believe elections are decided east-to-west. Media misinformation needs to be regulated.
I am disgusted with an electoral system (Single Member Plurality) that manufacturs the concep t of "vote splitting" which causes extremely dissimilar regional parties to merge (The Reform Party and the Progressive Conservative party should both still exist, and appropriately serve their regions). Canada clearly needs STV (Single Transferrable Vote) to solve that problem, and stop these harmful mergers.
I am disgusted with Canada-wide parties that believe in the concept of "Party Popular Vote" and that these Canada-wide parties should be assigned seats for party-hacks that don't represent ANY region of Canada (creating even more alienation - the NDP and GPC need to stop talking about party-centric "Proportional Represention").
–
However, I am also disgusted by special interest groups that have spread the myth of secession of Canadian "provinces", which has no basis in domestic or international law.
Myths spread about the Seven Years' War (the end of which was France ceding all already-false land claims in the mainland of this continent) were abused to claim that the Government of Quebec had the ability to separate from the Government of Canada and retain any land base. This would be a violation of many treaties, and would require a violent revolutionary war to carry out. I have no clue why Quebeccers believed they could separate, but know that myth spawned other separatist myths.
I am not a supporter of the Dominion of Canada government, but I do read the relevant domestic and international law. I wish the "Clarity Act" required actual clarity on the legal status of different governments and land claims. Unfortunately, the Canadian government does quite a bit of its own lying.
You asked, “Can you tell me why Alberta should remain a part of Canada? Can you do so without resorting to empty patriotic platitudes, or attempts to bully, shame or guilt us into compliance?”
Your patriotism seems to be tied to the Government of Alberta. I don't have patriotism for the governments of Ontario or Canada, even if when I was born in what some call Sudbury I was claimed as a citizen by those governments.
I can't try to represent the views of those entities you have been told to think of as opposition. Given my complex views on the settler-colonial institutions of Canada, I'm finding it interesting that you are presuming I'm a Canadian or British North American loyalist, or have some love for any Canadian federal political party. I'm not a loyalist to any of the entities which you have been told is your enemy, and am not on the "other side" of some False Binary conversation.
When I point "East" with disgust at ongoing problematic policies carried out by Canadian governments, it is all the way to England that created those institutions, and not the (to me odd) focus towards the more populous southern/central parts of Canada which Albertans have been told to point toward.
To help me understand what you are trying to ask, can you tell me why the Alberta Government should exist, "without resorting to empty patriotic platitudes, or attempts to bully, shame or guilt us into compliance?"
----
If you were talking about #LandBack and helping to restore pre-colonial domestic governance structures, then that would be an entirely different discussion. It appears to me (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you are saying that the Canadian imposed and protected descendents of a Canadian foreign-worker program should be able to separate from Canada and retain the land-based resources?
Any resident of the region the Canadian government called Alberta in 1905 can move to anywhere else at any time. We aren't talking about people, we are talking about land which Canada doesn't even own (and relies on the existence of treaties with other Nations in order to comply with Canada's own laws).
Alberta elites? This is the first time I’ve heard this phrase. You make it easier for Albertans to support secession from the corrupt eastern Liberal pigs.
There are groups of elites within Alberta and Quebec societies that have manufactured historical grievances in order to set them up against the Canadian Government. This is entirely a negotiation tactic to try to gain or continue advantages against the rest of Canada. There are elites manipulating governance within other regions claimed by the Government of Canada that also have manufactured grievances.
As much as you might have been told it has something to do with a specific branded political party (Liberal Party of Canada corporation), the grievance has actually always been against Canada as a concept. The current Conservative party isn't painted the same way because it was taken over by the Reform party, and the NDP was created with a merger with the CCF (two prairie parties), but the target of the hatred has pretty much always been Canada.
There is a book called "Sovereign injustice : forcible inclusion of the James Bay Crees and Cree territory into a sovereign Québec" I invite you to check out if you actually believe succession from Canada and retaining a land base (or the same land base) is actually possible. Boundary extension granted by the Federal Government can always be rescinded. Myths people are told about how Canada was formed, and how it exists today, block people from understanding what is actually possible and what are merely loud expressions of emotions and political posturing.
You may also want to check out “Don’t Tell The Newfoundlanders” if you want to know some of the background behind “British North America Act 1949” (Not even the most recent in that series of acts of UK parliament managing its Dominion of Canada subsidiary).
BTW: Please notice the language that a variety of federal politicians use to try to game those blindly following regional elites.
There can’t be a “National Energy Corridor” without it being a “National Energy Policy”. The Conservative party is trying to be dishonest in claiming that policy under one of these terms is subjectively claimed “good” while the other is subjectively claimed “bad”, even though in order for the policy to actually move forward they are effectively the same thing.
Why must transportation of energy be linked with federal ownership of energy? A country is a geography within which people, goods, services and capital can move freely. A government claiming sovereignty only has legitimacy if it can provide that freedom.
"Why must transportation of energy be linked with federal ownership of energy? "
I have no idea what you are asking. What "federal ownership" are you talking about?
The costs and risks of transporting beef from Alberta to Eastern Quebec (through many provinces) is entirely different from moving energy such as oil or natural gas.
Why should a province, municipality and/or First Nation allow a pipeline or other infrastructure through their region without getting something in return -- something that not only pays for any risks taken (spills, destruction in putting down the pipeline, etc), but revenue sharing?
Why should the government granted jurisdiction over land claims where the oil is pulled out of the ground be allowed to extract all of the benefits and everyone else only gets risks and costs?
I know that "exclusivity without responsibility" is one of the more odd aspects of Western (meaning Western Asia, Western Europe, Mediterranean) worldviews, but you seem to have taken that to an extreme.
----
"A country is a geography within which people, goods, services and capital can move freely. "
That is so distant from what I have ever been told a country is.
Canada (Dominion of Canada until 1982) is a set of institutions. It is not a geography. The peoples around where I live call this continent Turtle Island, and various regions have a variety of different names that different peoples call it.
What you describe is not a legally recognized "freedom", but an articulation of a very narrow political ideology that you happen to hold.
Given Canada is not a "country" in your mind, I guess you should move to a "country".
I don't know if any of that type of "country" exists anywhere on this planet.
Maybe you need to jump aboard one of Elon’s trips to another planet where those colonies might be formed under that ideology.
Note: When you move to this "country", you won't be able to take the land currently governed by the Government of Alberta with you.
When we visited the Maritimes, I was struck by how proud they were of themselves and their province, a pride that had nothing to do with money, rich or poor.
Having spent my life in Saskatchewan, where we always felt we were in a losing competition with Alberta because they were richer, and didn't they always let us know it too, it was a revelation to me that we shouldn't have to weigh our worth by which province was wealtier.
But far too many Albertans still seem to think this way. It wasn't an accident that the Convoy started in Alberta, which deeply resented Harper's 2015 defeat and then waged holy war on the few remaining Prairie Liberals like Ralph Goodale. So the sense of grievance is deep-seated, and Trudeau was never given credit for things like pipelines completed and oil wells cleaned up - these were regarded as only what Alberta deserved so why should they be grateful.
Evan, Alberta’s political leadership are certainly acting like boors. I get the “don’t let the door hit you on the way out” sentiment but it isn’t helpful. This kind of talk - and conflating the current Alberta government with Albertans generally - is the wet dream of every Alberta secessionist. It feeds them and their narrative of a country that exploits the province’s oil wealth but otherwise holds it in contempt.
Doesn’t Alberta need Canada? Yes, most certainly. However, the converse is also true. The Canadian federation needs Alberta’s oil and gas, and they need provinces between Manitoba and BC. In my view, the secessionist movement is not about succession - this is grossly impractical- but rather accession to the USA.
That would be a problem for Canada. Alberta successionists don’t have anywhere near the political support necessary for that now. However, a few years of loose-lipped central Canadians equating Albertans and the policies of Danielle Smith would be like early Christmas, early Easter plus 14 birthdays for these guys. As an Albertan and passionate Canadian nationalist, I would ask you not to feed them any more than necessary.
I was raised in Alberta so I'm very familiar with the feelings of alienation many feel in that province. But I have no patience for a province with a booming and rapidly growing economy feeling hard done by by Canada. Alberta definitely has legitimate complaints with the feds but threatening Canadians with seperation unless they elect Conservatives sounds like the demands of an entitled child. Who I vote for in this election will definitely not be determined by threats from Daniel Smith or Preston Manning.
I remember in the early 80’s, most people from Alberta didn’t want to work in Fort McMurray, which is why so many from Eastern Canada came to work there. They changed their minds though when the dollars started rolling in.
As an Albertan, I think you raise some fair points. Unfortunately, though, I feel like this kind of rhetoric mostly fuels the small (but loud) minority who are pushing for separation — and I really do believe it’s a minority. That said, I suppose you could take the opposite view: even though I don’t support separation, I do find myself feeling increasingly disengaged from the rest of Canada — especially B.C., which relies heavily on our oil and our wine purchases, yet seems to do everything it can to block our access to tidewater. Ironically, this happens while B.C. continues questionable environmental practices, like clear-cutting vast areas of forest to send wood pellets to the UK for power generation.
Appreciate the article.
P.S. I didn’t vote for our premier.
P.P.S. Do you feel the same way about Quebec’s frequent talk of separation?
I’m resident of BC. We are not trying to harm Alberta at all. We are trying to keep our tidewater safe and clean to preserve our resources primarily fishing and whales. We are trying to maintain our timber, rivers, creeks, and mountains pristine for future generations. We want to respect our indigenous peoples living on lands without treaties (unceded) and their rights and wishes for their lands. So please understand we are not trying to stop Alberta from realizing their resource wealth we are trying to keep ours healthy.
The secessionist movement has been growing since I lived in Calgary in the 80’s.3 of my adult children are Alberta born. The danger with Alberta is most of its media is owned by American Post Media and Albertans are fed a steady diet of unrest . Alberta is our soft underbelly that MAGA Interests are steadily and surgically radicalizing . Taking a look at the right wing march in America its taken decades ( since Falwell / Moral Majority ) to bring rural America to a boil.The same method is being employed in Alberta and Saskatchewan.Carney should move quickly to address the pipeline issue and give clear signals to thwart the talk of secessionist referendums .
Why is every dissent with Liberal ideology labelled as “MAGA”? Is that your view that anyone who disagrees is “MAGA”? Not helpful to moving the country forward. 🇨🇦
Not necessarily no , but then a lot of what passes for a conservative party ( once mildly right of center in my youth) has shifted further right starting with Harper. I am open to dialogue provided its not aping MAGA talking points , which many do not realize are the foundation of Polievre’s policies.
Golly Mike are you the Canary in the proverbial coal mine ? Its okay . We don’t burn coal.We do roast trolls though.
Looking at your stack its sure replete with the typical catch phrases and character assassination buzz words used against Liberals generally and Carney specifically .
I talk to a lot of people right of center but seldom get past what they are spoonfed .
Okay. How do you want to be labelled?
Backward and ignorant
Corporate welfare state
What happens in the farm yard stays in the farmyard
Inbreeding
Hill Billy’s
Hillbilly’s
Sheep are nervous, men are afraid
OR
How about you are labelled by the leadership you vote for…. Putin loving, Trump grovelling, Canadian hating reprobates.
Does that move things forward for you? Show some respect for yourself. Bonus response. Take your license plates off when you leave AB
Well said .
Yes, extremely well said.... especially #4.
It's really hard for me to read profanity laced, personal attack riddled comments and grant the author any credibility. It's just so......petty.
The secessionist movement has been growing since I lived in Calgary in the 80’s. Three of my adult children are Alberta born. The danger with Alberta is most of its media is owned by American Post Media and Albertans are fed a steady diet of unrest . Alberta is our soft underbelly that MAGA Interests are steadily and surgically radicalizing . Taking a look at the right wing march in America its taken decades ( since Falwell / Moral Majority ) to bring rural America to a boil.The same method is being employed in Alberta , and Saskatchewan. Carney should move quickly to address the pipeline issue and give clear signals to thwart the talk of secessionist referendums .
If you want a clear picture of Alberta’s oil industry out look, follow Markham Hislop (a post of the outlook for oil in China is below).
Alberta has torqued its provincial agencies to service Oil and Gas extraction which is now the least productive thing it can do. The last big gift given to the O&G industry in Alberta (by Jason Kenny) was in the form of a massive tax break, worth about $1 billion to SunCor alone. What did SunCor do with that money? They invested in “labour saving” technology to enable it to employ fewer Albertans and reduced its cost per barrel. What a deal for the province!
Markham has talked about all of the OTHER things the province could be doing… using tar sands as a feedstock for carbon fibre production, asphalt and a range of other uses, all with a higher value added for Alberta than extracting the oil.
The problem in Alberta is the oil and gas lobby (majority foreign owned it must be said) is so powerful that is well nigh impossible to have a reasoned discussion about alternatives to “business as usual”.
All this is to say—Alberta’s problems are “made in Alberta”, not Ottawa.
https://energymixweekender.substack.com/p/chinas-peak-oil-demand-bombshell
At the time Suncor got a nearly $1 billion tax break from Alberta (which it used to eliminate Albertan jobs), I changed the words to a Tom Paxton song to mark the occasion... (Mark Little was the CEO of Suncor at the time.). Alberta oil was briefly worth "about a head of lettuce". If you don't know the original Tom Paxton song, it was about Chrysler.
I am Changing my Name to “Suncor”
(apologies to Tom Paxton).
Oh, the price of oil is sliding out of sight
And Alberta is in sorry shape tonight.
What a barrel used to get us now won't get a head of lettuce,
No, the economic forecast isn't bright.
But amidst the clouds I spot a shiny ray.
I begin to glimpse a new and better way.
I've devised a plan of action, worked it down to the last fraction,
And I'm going into action here today.
Chorus:
I am changing my name to "Suncor".
I am going down to Edmonton, A.B.
To Kenney I will whistle, “what you did for Mr. Little
Will be perfectly acceptable to me."
I am changing my name to "Suncor".
I getting in that great receiving line,
When they hand a million grand out I'll be standing with my hand out.
Yes sir, I'll get mine.
When my creditors come screaming for their dough,
I'll be proud to tell them all where they can go.
They won't have to scream and holler; they'll be paid to the last dollar,
Where the endless streams of money seem to flow.
I'll be glad to tell them all what they must do.
It's a matter of a simple form or two.
It's not just remuneration, it's UCP tradition
Aren't you kind of glad that I'm in debt to you?
[Chorus]
Since the first amphibian crawled out of the slime,
We've been struggling in an unrelenting climb.
We were hardly up and walking before money started talking,
And it said that failure is an awful crime.
It's been that way a millennium or two.
Now it seems there is a different point of view.
If you're an oil corporation and you’re looking for salvation
Alberta has a safety net for you.
[Chorus]
If Alberta can separate, can the Indigenous First Nations of Alberta remain in Canada? How constitutionally perilous would this become? The separation movement is a farce, fueled by childish nonsense and a lack of serious people. It's revolting. I wish Carney would call Smith and Manning out by name. I know that is unlikely to happen, but I have no tolerance.
I think you’re drastically misreading the intended audience of Smith and Manning’s rhetoric. It’s entirely for local consumption. Smith in particular cares only about maintaining her own power base, which is entirely on the rural areas of the province believing in a particular grievance narrative.
As long as she keeps them angry and aimed at external antagonists, her personal position is rock solid secure, and fully insulated from anything pesky like consequences.
You mention whether or not Alberta has any store of goodwill in the rest of Canada. It doesn’t matter. I doubt that the concept crosses either Smith or Manning’s mind, any more than how much goodwill Quebec might have in BC plays any part when the Bloc or CAQ makes announcements to shore up their base
Smith? Who knows, but Manning wanted very much to bend Canada to Alberta’s wheel. Harper took up that torch (“you won’t recognize Canada when I’m done…”), and Poilievre is the last of the three Harper apostles to try to finish the job. It has to be making the vengeful old man crazy to know they were SO CLOSE last December to getting back to power and watching it all turn to dust!
Bingo!
It is intended to up the stakes. The Feds need revenue, particularly if they use the tariff excuse to engage in expensive industrial politices. Oil and gas revenue is an obvious target. The Feds need to know that Alberta is prepared to tear apart the country if the Feds make a move such as an export tax.
I've always found the rhetoric from Alberta elites to be confusing. You need to have a very narrow idea of how economics works, and not bother concerning yourself with any responsibilities, in order to believe what they do.
I know Albertans have been told that it was hard-working individuals who created the province, and this rugged individualism is what allowed them to become prosperous.
The fact is that the Alberta and Saskatchewan governments were created in 1905 to govern land which the Canadian Government didn't legitimately "own", and it was big-government (paramilitary, etc,etc) that cleared the land of competition (clearing out existing inhabitants, using genocidal policies, etc) so those alleged "individuals" (European foreign workers) could do what the central government created those provincial governments for them to do.
They were as independent individuals as any employee of a large corporation.
https://r.flora.ca/p/alberta
The problem is Canada is never honest in discussing its history, and thus it is easy for special interest groups (Alberta elites is only one example) to misinform people.
The Federal Government hasn't done enough to fix the problems it created. You can have departments named "Western Economic Diversification Canada" (or similar) as long as you want, but if special interests groups are never corrected, and the exceptionalist culture remains, people's minds will remain stuck in the distant past and have historical grievances tied back to 1905, 1867, or earlier.
Well said.
A lot of talk without saying very much…
Patriotism for the government of Alberta?
No. Absolutely not. Disgust with the government of Canada? Disgust with Liberals? Yes. Disgust with Conservatives? Yes.
Disgust with fact that the next election will be decided after the polls close in Ontario?
This country robs us blind, & the only escape is secession. We don’t want idle threats to gain “concessions”.
We want OUT.
Who told you that “this country” (however you are using that term) is robbing “Alberta” blind? Do you have actual documentation that you have checked the references on, or only the angry statements from special interest groups?
I understand there has been a manufactured grievance based on specific words in the UK’s Canada Act 1982 (passed during P.E. Trudeau’s era) which gave provinces control over natural resources.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/11/schedule/B
(Section 50 adds section 92A to the Canadian constitution)
I notice how people rely on P.E. Trudeau’s Liberal government era policy to claim that Alberta alone “owns” the fruits of resource extraction, with much of that resource extraction happening within the District of Athabaska which was granted as jurisdiction to the Government of Alberta during the Wilfrid Laurier era (another Federal Liberal government).
Even though all of that was gifted to the Government of Alberta during the time of Federal Liberal governments, special interest groups in Alberta have confused Albertans into opposing Federal Liberal governments.
These special interest groups then claim the National Energy Program (NEP), which would have already created a National Energy Corridor (something “Conservatives” are now calling for), is somehow bad.
It is a misrepresentation of the truth by special interest groups wanting more political leverage and more handouts, nothing more.
Note: I don’t agree with either of these Liberal government policies, so don’t confuse this with an endorsement of Liberal governments or those policies. It is, however, Federal Liberal government policy that granted you the alleged entitlements you are using as the basis of your grievances against Federal Liberals..
But, I know how some people feel “entitled to their entitlements”.
The NEP didn't create anything. It was a revenue grab during the period when world oil prices were above the made in Ottawa price. When world prices dropped below the technocrat modeled fair Canadian price, it was conveniently dropped. It did benefit the US energy industry by sending talent and capital south.
PetroCan was also a disaster. Rather than being a window into the industry, under the visionary leadership of Trudeau loyalists/energy visionaries like Maurice Strong and author John Raulston Saul, it acquired assets at high valuations and drove them into the ground.
I am aware only a subset of the policy has been highlighted in some regions for political purposes.
The actual policy (which I have entirely different problems with) is available online for anyone to read.
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2016/rncan-nrcan/M23-12-80-4-eng.pdf
In the early section of "The Problems", the section on "Towards Canadian Energy Independence" is essentially discussing in the 1980's what is now being called a National Energy Corridor.
Had special interests not generated Western alienation and blocked every aspect of this policy, Canada would have had the energy corridores for a few decades already. Pricing was not the entirety of that policy, and as energy prices fell that aspect of the policy would have changed anyway.
Other problems, such as the fact that Canada still imports oil even though Canada is a net-exporter still existed. Regional divides have been manufactured and fanned my entire life by special interest groups, which has made Canada vulnerable in so many ways.
To me, "Elbows Up!" should include up against these allegedly "Canadian" special interest groups keeping Canada vulnerable and weak.
No, I’m not interested in getting into a document war with you. If we are successful in having a vote on secession, I will leave the litigation to the attorneys. It is the worst kept secret in confederation that Alberta pays the “bribe” money that keeps Quebec a part of Canada.
If a “yes” vote on secession is successful, then Albertans will not pay Excise taxes, GST, Carbon taxes, or equalization.
Your historic references that suggest that Alberta isn’t entitled to ownership of its resources or references that suggest Pierre Trudeau’s NEP was somehow good, are just that - history.
Canada is evolving rapidly. The opinions on how we should proceed are becoming ever divergent. The polarization is going through the roof.
How do we solve this problem?
My preference is for us to go our separate ways & work together when it is in our mutual best interests.
The Liberal solution?
Suppress all dissent.
https://open.substack.com/pub/phillipmillar/p/what-elon-might-be-alluding-to-when?r=17jzu2&utm_medium=ios
We agree that polarization is going through the roof.
The fact you believe the "Liberal Party of Canada" has something to do with that is part of the polarization manufactured by Alberta elites. I'm not a fan of the LPC either, but I have reasons that aren't based on raw anger harnessed by special interest groups to spread misinformation.
I don’t represent the LPC in any way, and yet you seem to want to keep mentioning them as if they are relevant to this conversation.
At the end of the day you can believe whatever you want, and you can believe it is possible for Alberta to become a separate country. You can even believe that a majority of Albertans would vote in favor of that option based on a clear question related to a real option.
The only real option that the Alberta Government has would be to convince the USA to use military force to take over the territory to become part of the United States (most likely as a territory and not a state). Then the remaining inhabitants can see how much political influence those living in that territory will have over their own lives.
I'm not sure the USA is quite that stupid, as that would likely initiate WW3, but who knows at this point.
Seems we have "Elbows Up!" vs "MAGA up!"....
“Alberta elites”… I’ve never heard anybody before you, use this term. Although I don’t know who these people are, it’s probably fair-game. After all, we have referred to “Laurentian Elites” for quite some time.
The difference between Alberta Elites & Laurentian elites?
I don’t believe that the USA would ever use military force to take Alberta. I also believe that Alberta would vote “No” in a referendum, but it will be closer than you think.
I don’t believe that a single transferable vote would help Albertans in the slightest. A Triple-E Senate would.
Most of all, I believe that splitting this country up is the best way forward. I’ve given up on the sacred cow named Canada.
My answer for the difference between Alberta elites & Laurentian Elites?
Alberta Elites aren’t trying to impose their will on others, they are trying to escape the Laurentian Elites imposing their will upon them.
Thanks for referencing that term "Laurentian elites". Someone even created a Wikipedia page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurentian_elite
I'm being honest when I say I have never heard that term. I wasn't trying to riff off of it or anything.
Thanks for continuing to engage, rather than just declaring this as another “us vs them” with no possibility of ideas exchange.
—
There are elites in pretty much every area of political thought that then try to (ab)use regular folks as part of their campaigns. They have some goal (usually personal gain or ideology of some sort) and then generate some "them" to use to build an "us" around their goal.
I don’t subscribe to the Marxist concept of “class”, but I do recognize political, economic and other elites that try to indoctrinate other people to do things which aren’t actually in their own interests. Cults of personality, etc, etc.
I grew up in Sudbury, Ontario. I grew up with people talking about “Toronto this” and “Toronto that” in much the same way as I currently see people talking about “Ottawa”. There were constant discussions of the elites, of how Toronto was “taking” all the tax money and getting all the services, with nothing left for the North (Sudbury is south of the 49’th, so whatever).
This was the top “them” in any conversations about politics, with “Quebec” (sometimes the government, sometimes the entire province, sometimes referring to “French people”) being the second group we were all indoctrinated to hate.
When I was 11 I remember watching Joe Clark on TV talking about the need to raise gas prices, and I thought it was amazing to see such an open and honest politician. I just thought P.E. Trudeau and his Trudeau Salute was funny and something to laugh at.
In the 1980’s I chose Carleton University (in Ottawa), and ended up never returning to my place of birth. I started to get engaged in politics:. In the 1990’s I joined the Green Party and Progressive Conservative at various points.
—-
I assume you know about “Khmer Blue”, and the ongoing rift between different branches of conservatism within the Conservative Coalition Party. I know the “Coalition” part is kept silent to pretend to the outside world that it isn’t a pre-election coalition, given there are some within the conservative movement that want to suggest that coalition governments are “bad”.
While I responded to this article about Alberta, one of my main interests relating to politics is actually Democratic Reform. I don’t like these pan-Canada political parties, and recognize that a conservative in the southern prairies is entirely different from a conservative in southern Ontario. The antique electoral system caused mergers that should never have happened, and the dorky NDP/Greens want to allow central parties to appoint parliamentarians based on party lists.
The obvious solution is Single Transferrable Vote (STV) which maintains the regional ties so we can reduce rather than inflame regional alienation (and prairie/ Western alienation is by far not the only region that feels alienated by pan-Canadian parties and politics).
Unfortunately the NDP/Greens and other self-claimed pan-Canadian groups (so-called “Fair Vote Canada”) have been misinforming Canadians and claiming that “ranked ballots” are bad and STV is a form of “Proportional Representation” equivalent in some way to party lists. The reality is that STV is ranked ballots, and while you can elect more than one parliamentarian at the same time through multi-member districts, it has nothing in common with party lists. It is simply an abuse of a mathematical formula by people who have a misunderstanding of politics and parliaments.
I note that these interest groups want to talk about Electoral Reform outside of the context of Democratic Reform. They pretend to have so much knowledge of electoral systems (really, misunderstanding mathematical formulae) and yet haven’t even heard of the Reform Act, 2014.
So who owns the Ring of Fire and Hydro Quebec assets located on regions of ON the and QC that were *gifted* from the federal government?
"So who owns the Ring of Fire and Hydro Quebec assets located on regions of ON the and QC that were *gifted* from the federal government?"
My main point is to try to get people to recognize that these were *gifted* from the Canadian Federal Government, out of land which the dominion government was calling the North-West Territories. (There are ongoing debates about the land claims Canada has made in relation to NWT, which included Rupert's Land, etc).
I was born 50+ years ago in what is currently called Sudbury, Ontario. I was told growing up there that I lived in "Northern Ontario". While it might have been Northern Ontario in 1867, it has been Southern Ontario my entire life. It is even south of the 49th parallel, so in the most southern part of Canada.
https://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/maps/ontario-boundaries.aspx
I do not believe the Ontario Government located in Toronto should have any say in what happens with resource extraction projects in the True North. I believe the 1876, 1880, 1889 and 1912 territorial expansions should be rescinded, and the land restored to a governance system by and for Northerners (Such as we see with what remains of the North West Territories and Nunavut).
I also disagree with the 1898 and 1912 territorial expansions of Quebec. See "Sovereign injustice: Forcible inclusion of the James Bay Crees and Cree territory into a sovereign Quebec", which may be in your local library, for more details on the legal problems those territorial expansions created.
https://archive.org/details/sovereigninjusti0000gran
(I know there is some Alberta vs Ontario/Quebec that is part of the grievance, but I'm not part of that discussion).
I share some of your disgust.
I am disgusted by Canada-wide parties (Liberals, Conservatives, NDP, Green Party), and the general myth that party-nominated candidates in all regions are somehow equivalent (A Calgary Conservative and a Toronto Conservative aren't remotely the same type of conservative).
I am disgusted by political parties adopting US-style leadership conventions that make sense under the US presidential system, but are a form of corruption when used within the Westminster System that Canada uses.
I am disgusted with how "Canadian" media reports federal elections as if they are US presidential elections when Canada uses an entirely different system -- media misinformation is why you believe elections are decided east-to-west. Media misinformation needs to be regulated.
I am disgusted with an electoral system (Single Member Plurality) that manufacturs the concep t of "vote splitting" which causes extremely dissimilar regional parties to merge (The Reform Party and the Progressive Conservative party should both still exist, and appropriately serve their regions). Canada clearly needs STV (Single Transferrable Vote) to solve that problem, and stop these harmful mergers.
I am disgusted with Canada-wide parties that believe in the concept of "Party Popular Vote" and that these Canada-wide parties should be assigned seats for party-hacks that don't represent ANY region of Canada (creating even more alienation - the NDP and GPC need to stop talking about party-centric "Proportional Represention").
–
However, I am also disgusted by special interest groups that have spread the myth of secession of Canadian "provinces", which has no basis in domestic or international law.
Myths spread about the Seven Years' War (the end of which was France ceding all already-false land claims in the mainland of this continent) were abused to claim that the Government of Quebec had the ability to separate from the Government of Canada and retain any land base. This would be a violation of many treaties, and would require a violent revolutionary war to carry out. I have no clue why Quebeccers believed they could separate, but know that myth spawned other separatist myths.
I am not a supporter of the Dominion of Canada government, but I do read the relevant domestic and international law. I wish the "Clarity Act" required actual clarity on the legal status of different governments and land claims. Unfortunately, the Canadian government does quite a bit of its own lying.
Sorry, but all I am hearing from you, is “sit down, shut up & be a good little colony”.
Can you tell me why Alberta should remain a part of Canada?
Can you do so without resorting to empty patriotic platitudes, or attempts to bully, shame or guilt us into compliance?
You asked, “Can you tell me why Alberta should remain a part of Canada? Can you do so without resorting to empty patriotic platitudes, or attempts to bully, shame or guilt us into compliance?”
Your patriotism seems to be tied to the Government of Alberta. I don't have patriotism for the governments of Ontario or Canada, even if when I was born in what some call Sudbury I was claimed as a citizen by those governments.
I can't try to represent the views of those entities you have been told to think of as opposition. Given my complex views on the settler-colonial institutions of Canada, I'm finding it interesting that you are presuming I'm a Canadian or British North American loyalist, or have some love for any Canadian federal political party. I'm not a loyalist to any of the entities which you have been told is your enemy, and am not on the "other side" of some False Binary conversation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
When I point "East" with disgust at ongoing problematic policies carried out by Canadian governments, it is all the way to England that created those institutions, and not the (to me odd) focus towards the more populous southern/central parts of Canada which Albertans have been told to point toward.
To help me understand what you are trying to ask, can you tell me why the Alberta Government should exist, "without resorting to empty patriotic platitudes, or attempts to bully, shame or guilt us into compliance?"
----
If you were talking about #LandBack and helping to restore pre-colonial domestic governance structures, then that would be an entirely different discussion. It appears to me (and correct me if I'm wrong) that you are saying that the Canadian imposed and protected descendents of a Canadian foreign-worker program should be able to separate from Canada and retain the land-based resources?
Any resident of the region the Canadian government called Alberta in 1905 can move to anywhere else at any time. We aren't talking about people, we are talking about land which Canada doesn't even own (and relies on the existence of treaties with other Nations in order to comply with Canada's own laws).
Alberta elites? This is the first time I’ve heard this phrase. You make it easier for Albertans to support secession from the corrupt eastern Liberal pigs.
There are groups of elites within Alberta and Quebec societies that have manufactured historical grievances in order to set them up against the Canadian Government. This is entirely a negotiation tactic to try to gain or continue advantages against the rest of Canada. There are elites manipulating governance within other regions claimed by the Government of Canada that also have manufactured grievances.
As much as you might have been told it has something to do with a specific branded political party (Liberal Party of Canada corporation), the grievance has actually always been against Canada as a concept. The current Conservative party isn't painted the same way because it was taken over by the Reform party, and the NDP was created with a merger with the CCF (two prairie parties), but the target of the hatred has pretty much always been Canada.
There is a book called "Sovereign injustice : forcible inclusion of the James Bay Crees and Cree territory into a sovereign Québec" I invite you to check out if you actually believe succession from Canada and retaining a land base (or the same land base) is actually possible. Boundary extension granted by the Federal Government can always be rescinded. Myths people are told about how Canada was formed, and how it exists today, block people from understanding what is actually possible and what are merely loud expressions of emotions and political posturing.
You may also want to check out “Don’t Tell The Newfoundlanders” if you want to know some of the background behind “British North America Act 1949” (Not even the most recent in that series of acts of UK parliament managing its Dominion of Canada subsidiary).
https://r.flora.ca/p/reviewing-dont-tell-newfoundlanders
BTW: Please notice the language that a variety of federal politicians use to try to game those blindly following regional elites.
There can’t be a “National Energy Corridor” without it being a “National Energy Policy”. The Conservative party is trying to be dishonest in claiming that policy under one of these terms is subjectively claimed “good” while the other is subjectively claimed “bad”, even though in order for the policy to actually move forward they are effectively the same thing.
Why must transportation of energy be linked with federal ownership of energy? A country is a geography within which people, goods, services and capital can move freely. A government claiming sovereignty only has legitimacy if it can provide that freedom.
"Why must transportation of energy be linked with federal ownership of energy? "
I have no idea what you are asking. What "federal ownership" are you talking about?
The costs and risks of transporting beef from Alberta to Eastern Quebec (through many provinces) is entirely different from moving energy such as oil or natural gas.
Why should a province, municipality and/or First Nation allow a pipeline or other infrastructure through their region without getting something in return -- something that not only pays for any risks taken (spills, destruction in putting down the pipeline, etc), but revenue sharing?
Why should the government granted jurisdiction over land claims where the oil is pulled out of the ground be allowed to extract all of the benefits and everyone else only gets risks and costs?
I know that "exclusivity without responsibility" is one of the more odd aspects of Western (meaning Western Asia, Western Europe, Mediterranean) worldviews, but you seem to have taken that to an extreme.
----
"A country is a geography within which people, goods, services and capital can move freely. "
That is so distant from what I have ever been told a country is.
Canada (Dominion of Canada until 1982) is a set of institutions. It is not a geography. The peoples around where I live call this continent Turtle Island, and various regions have a variety of different names that different peoples call it.
What you describe is not a legally recognized "freedom", but an articulation of a very narrow political ideology that you happen to hold.
Given Canada is not a "country" in your mind, I guess you should move to a "country".
I don't know if any of that type of "country" exists anywhere on this planet.
Maybe you need to jump aboard one of Elon’s trips to another planet where those colonies might be formed under that ideology.
Note: When you move to this "country", you won't be able to take the land currently governed by the Government of Alberta with you.
When we visited the Maritimes, I was struck by how proud they were of themselves and their province, a pride that had nothing to do with money, rich or poor.
Having spent my life in Saskatchewan, where we always felt we were in a losing competition with Alberta because they were richer, and didn't they always let us know it too, it was a revelation to me that we shouldn't have to weigh our worth by which province was wealtier.
But far too many Albertans still seem to think this way. It wasn't an accident that the Convoy started in Alberta, which deeply resented Harper's 2015 defeat and then waged holy war on the few remaining Prairie Liberals like Ralph Goodale. So the sense of grievance is deep-seated, and Trudeau was never given credit for things like pipelines completed and oil wells cleaned up - these were regarded as only what Alberta deserved so why should they be grateful.
Evan, Alberta’s political leadership are certainly acting like boors. I get the “don’t let the door hit you on the way out” sentiment but it isn’t helpful. This kind of talk - and conflating the current Alberta government with Albertans generally - is the wet dream of every Alberta secessionist. It feeds them and their narrative of a country that exploits the province’s oil wealth but otherwise holds it in contempt.
Doesn’t Alberta need Canada? Yes, most certainly. However, the converse is also true. The Canadian federation needs Alberta’s oil and gas, and they need provinces between Manitoba and BC. In my view, the secessionist movement is not about succession - this is grossly impractical- but rather accession to the USA.
That would be a problem for Canada. Alberta successionists don’t have anywhere near the political support necessary for that now. However, a few years of loose-lipped central Canadians equating Albertans and the policies of Danielle Smith would be like early Christmas, early Easter plus 14 birthdays for these guys. As an Albertan and passionate Canadian nationalist, I would ask you not to feed them any more than necessary.
A significant portion of Canadians outside Albert think that if Quebec leaves confederation, they should have to take Alberta with them.
I was raised in Alberta so I'm very familiar with the feelings of alienation many feel in that province. But I have no patience for a province with a booming and rapidly growing economy feeling hard done by by Canada. Alberta definitely has legitimate complaints with the feds but threatening Canadians with seperation unless they elect Conservatives sounds like the demands of an entitled child. Who I vote for in this election will definitely not be determined by threats from Daniel Smith or Preston Manning.
The Angus Reid poll re. Alberta Separatist Sentiment, April 6th.
"Three-in-10 . . .."
https://angusreid.org/smith-shapiro-sovereignty/
I remember in the early 80’s, most people from Alberta didn’t want to work in Fort McMurray, which is why so many from Eastern Canada came to work there. They changed their minds though when the dollars started rolling in.
This is an excellent article and captures my feelings about Alberta perfectly. Thank you.
Albertans are the worse on the planet for name calling and public shaming.
I dont think Carney Slapped STORMY DANIELLE hard enough!
What’s “conservative” about these idiots?
Well said. AB identity and grievance politics is a dead end. If Queb-exit couldn't happen, Abert-exit hasn't got a hope in hell.
As an Albertan, I think you raise some fair points. Unfortunately, though, I feel like this kind of rhetoric mostly fuels the small (but loud) minority who are pushing for separation — and I really do believe it’s a minority. That said, I suppose you could take the opposite view: even though I don’t support separation, I do find myself feeling increasingly disengaged from the rest of Canada — especially B.C., which relies heavily on our oil and our wine purchases, yet seems to do everything it can to block our access to tidewater. Ironically, this happens while B.C. continues questionable environmental practices, like clear-cutting vast areas of forest to send wood pellets to the UK for power generation.
Appreciate the article.
P.S. I didn’t vote for our premier.
P.P.S. Do you feel the same way about Quebec’s frequent talk of separation?
I’m resident of BC. We are not trying to harm Alberta at all. We are trying to keep our tidewater safe and clean to preserve our resources primarily fishing and whales. We are trying to maintain our timber, rivers, creeks, and mountains pristine for future generations. We want to respect our indigenous peoples living on lands without treaties (unceded) and their rights and wishes for their lands. So please understand we are not trying to stop Alberta from realizing their resource wealth we are trying to keep ours healthy.