Danielle Smith is creating the maximum distraction possible.
Distraction from what? The Alberta Health Services scandal. This scandal has to potential to bring down the government, end several political careers and possibly lead to criminal convictions. In other words, premier Smith is motivated to distract to the maximum extent possible.
Ethics Violation: Interference in Judicial Proceedings
Incident: In January 2025, Premier Smith engaged in a phone conversation with Calgary pastor Artur Pawlowski, who was facing criminal charges related to a COVID-19 border blockade. During the call, Smith expressed sympathy and indicated she was in regular contact with Crown prosecutors about such cases.
Ethics Commissioner’s Findings: Alberta Ethics Commissioner Marguerite Trussler concluded that Smith violated the Conflict of Interest Act by attempting to influence the administration of justice. Specifically, Smith’s call to then-Justice Minister Tyler Shandro was deemed an attempt to sway prosecutorial decisions. Trussler emphasized that such actions undermine judicial independence, a cornerstone of democracy.
Outcome: No immediate sanctions were recommended, but the commissioner reserved the right to do so once the legislature reconvenes.
2.
Alleged Corruption in Health Services Contracts
Allegations: Former Alberta Health Services (AHS) CEO Athana Mentzelopoulos alleged she was terminated for investigating questionable procurement practices. She claimed she faced pressure from government officials to approve contracts with private surgical facilities, despite concerns over costs and ownership. Her dismissal occurred shortly before a scheduled meeting with the Auditor General to discuss these issues.
Government Response: Premier Smith denied involvement, labeling the allegations as “false, baseless, and defamatory.” She has requested an expedited internal review by AHS and pledged full cooperation with the Auditor General.
Opposition’s Stance: The Alberta NDP has called for comprehensive investigations by the RCMP, the Auditor General, the Ethics Commissioner, and a judicial-led public inquiry. They also demand that individuals implicated, including Premier Smith and Health Minister Adriana LaGrange, step aside during the investigations.
3.
Controversial Coal Policy Reversal
Policy Change: In January 2025, the Alberta government lifted a moratorium on coal exploration in sensitive regions of the Rocky Mountains, reversing a 2022 ministerial order. This decision opened approximately 190,000 hectares to potential coal development.
Rationale: Premier Smith defended the move by citing the need to protect taxpayers from over $15 billion in potential damages sought by coal companies due to previous policy changes.
Public and Environmental Concerns: The policy reversal faced significant backlash from environmental groups, First Nations, and the public, who raised concerns about water contamination, habitat destruction, and lack of clean water.
Petition:
Demand a Full Independent Public Inquiry into Premier Danielle Smith’s Conduct and Her Government’s Alleged Corruption
To the Lieutenant Governor of Alberta, the Legislative Assembly, and the Office of the Ethics Commissioner:
We, the undersigned concerned citizens of Canada, call for an immediate and independent public inquiry into the actions and conduct of Premier Danielle Smith and her government.
In a healthy democracy, elected officials must be held to the highest standards of transparency, ethics, and accountability. The recent and serious allegations against Premier Smith and her administration demand urgent public scrutiny:
Interference in the Justice System
Premier Smith was found to have violated the Alberta Conflict of Interest Act by the province’s Ethics Commissioner after attempting to influence ongoing criminal proceedings. This behavior represents a grave threat to the independence of the justice system and public trust in governance.
Alleged Political Corruption in Health Care Contracting
Whistleblower claims suggest senior officials were pressured to approve private health contracts under suspicious circumstances. The firing of former Alberta Health Services CEO Athana Mentzelopoulos days before she was scheduled to meet with the Auditor General raises serious concerns about political interference and suppression of accountability.
Environmental Rollbacks Without Consultation
The reversal of protective coal policies affecting sensitive areas of the Rockies—without public or Indigenous consultation—has sparked widespread alarm over backroom deals and disregard for public interest.
We believe these actions may represent a pattern of misconduct and demand a full, transparent, and independent public inquiry, led by a judge or external legal body, to investigate the Premier’s role and any systemic failures that enabled these events.
We also call on the Alberta government to:
Cooperate fully with the Ethics Commissioner, Auditor General, and any law enforcement investigations;
Suspend any public officials under investigation from their roles until inquiries are complete;
Restore public faith by demonstrating that no leader is above the law.
Democracy only works when citizens speak up. We urge our fellow Canadian Albertans, our elected officials, and all defenders of public integrity to support this call for accountability.
We demand answers. We demand integrity. We demand action.
I agree. Like her hero Trump, she knows that in order to distract her base from the mess she is making, she needs to get them emotionally riled up. The name "Trudeau" used to do it (it doesn't take much).
Smith wanted The Felon to tone down anti CDN rhetoric leading up to the election, and look where that got PP. Out of government and out of a seat. I hope she keeps doing him favours, because I like the results when she does.
Last time I checked, Smith and her separatist pals live on UNCEDED First Nations land, held in trust by the Crown. They can separate all they want, but they ain't getting any part of Alberta...
I wish more Canadians recognized that this applies to most of what the Canadian Crown (the Canadian Government) and its provincial and territorial governments have weak title claims to.
There are odd separatist movements within provinces that incorrectly believe that international legal precident would allow them to separate. They have their referendums on vague questions, with little disclosure of the legal reality.
A good book to understand the reality was written in the context of the Quebec 1995 referendum called: "Sovereign injustice: Forcible inclusion of the James Bay Crees and Cree territory into a sovereign Quebec".
Thank you Russell, we need History like this out in the open, along with fact-based journalism to keep Democracies and The People alive and well and informed. 🇨🇦
I gave a big-think about the grievance politics coming from Alberta elites some thought a while back. What I realized is that the grievances were created in 1905 when the Alberta government itself was created. This government was created by the Dominion of Canada in order to replace the existing inhabitants, hire a foreign workforce, and extract resources from a specific carve-out of the North West Territories. That government was never able to move past the 1905 mandate to become a real provincial government. In the 1930’s additional special rights were granted to this resource extraction corporation in the form of the British North America Act 1930 which is more often called the “Natural Resources Transfer Acts”.
Alberta is merely a resource extraction company that has created dependents in a set of almost entirely foreign workers and their descendants.
Don't kid yourself, most Alberta "sovreigntists" don't want Alberta to be independent. They view independence as a way station on the way to becoming the 51st State. And no they do not want to share their two senators with the rest of Canada. It's kind of like Texas. Texas was part of Mexico, then it was independent, then it was part of the States.
Thank you for your clarification on your position.
I do understand your comment. Whether I agree or disagree I am grateful to understand how you consider the issue. The reason that I asked was that I have run across folks who argue that it is a valid thing for Quebec to contemplate separation but that it is invalid for other provinces. You, obviously, do not have that inconsistency.
Of course, I know that you are aware that the Supremes acknowledge the right of a province to leave Confederation. Further, the Clarity Act specifically recognizes that right and sets out a process whereby it can be accomplished. Clearly, the Supremes opined on the Clarity Act and it's processes.
I have argued that some instances of the Supremes' judgements, particularly in some Charter cases involving what I consider specious, made up, non-existent rights, are absurd. I have been attacked (verbally and in writing only, thankfully) for my position with comments to the effect of "if the Supremes say it, it must be so" and so forth.
To know that you disagree with some (one?) of the Supremes' decisions is interesting to me as it puts us in the same boat, just at different positions in that boat (silly metaphor, no?).
Even the first "Whereas" provides clarity that is missing from this discussion, in that it makes clear that a province cannot separate from Canada without the agreement of the rest of Canada.
"WHEREAS the Supreme Court of Canada has confirmed that there is no right, under international law or under the Constitution of Canada, for the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally;"
I believe it is possible for the Governments of Quebec and Alberta to unilaterally fold, but not to have a land base which does not "belong" to them in any sense (European/Canadian or domestic/Indigenous law).
But, but, but ... the point is that the Clarity Act DOES allow separation. Albeit under conditions.
Any, any I say, such separation will entail negotiations. Even if the negotiations are bitter, they are still negotiations.
So, the point is that the Clarity Act does accept that a province can separate. As for conditions, well, that is something that would come if any province ever got that far.
Best of all, of course, is that negotiations occur and conclude successfully before it gets to that stage but, again, negotiations need occur. Not unilateral diktat.
I understand some elites as part of grievance politics wish to claim that the Clarity Act provides a path for a “province” to become a separate “country”, but that isn’t what it says. It actually only clarifies the beginnings of the impossible hoops that would need to be crossed.
Say for the sake of argument that a province was able to get agreement from all the other provinces and the federal government, something that most people agree is near impossible. That is not the end of the process.
During the P.E. Trudeau era, the government tried to make unilateral decisions that weren’t allowed. The 1969 white paper was formally called the Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy. Trudeau and his equally racist Minister of Indian Affairs, Jean Chrétien , wanted to do a final “forced assimilation” of Indigenous peoples into Canada, and wipe out all the treaties with Indigenous Nations. That was not allowed, as that was a violation of the Honour of the Crown, and treaties signed with the crown. Trudeau tried to do that again with the process that led towards the passage of Canada Act 1982, but also failed. Indigenous Nations went to the UN and to Britain (Look up The Constitution Express), and Britain didn’t allow Trudeau to do that and instead Canada ended up with Section 35 which affirmed the treaties and Section 25 which confirmed yet again that the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763 formed the basis of Canadian law and relations with pre-existing Nations.
There was quite a bit of myth making about what powers P.E. Trudeau and the provincial Premiers had in that process, pretending that it was only up to those Canadian politicians what would be in the Constitution. The fact is, that the Dominion of Canada is built upon relationships that go beyond those politicians, and even if the near impossible hurdle of changing the Canadian Constitution could happen, it is unlikely this “separate government” would have the land base that it believes it has today.
Given this legal status, what do provincial governments and the elites that are backing them actually have as “leverage” in a negotiation? What cards do they hold? It would actualy be considerably easier for the rest of Canada to recind Alberta Act 1905 and rescind all territorial expansions of Quebec since 1867 than it would be for those "provinces" to become separate countries. It would be an extremely dangerous "negotiation" as I'm unaware of what these provincial governments are negotiating with.
Is Alberta or Quebec really going to claim to the Canadian government that it has negotiated with the USA, Russia, or China, etc to take over the entirety of “Canada” if they aren’t allowed to separate? Other than violent rebellion and war, what exactly do you believe is the path to "separation"?
Russell, I do not say that the Clarity Act provides a path but what it does do is to recognize that there CAN be a path. Put differently, it allows one to try to develop and follow such a path.
To my mind that is simply an acknowledgement that some folks may wish to separate and the Act then discusses how such a path could be developed. That being the case, it seems to me that calling someone a traitor for wanting to follow the law is foolish. One can certainly think that person or group to be misguided but that doesn't make them traitors if they are seeking to follow the law.
As for your question about what leverage would various folks have in a negotiation, I suppose that the ultimate leverage is a UDI or outright rebellion, both of which are to be avoided. There are precedents for a UDI, just as there are precedents for rebellion (see July 4, 1776 as an example of precedent for each of UDI and rebellion). Having said that, both a UDI and a rebellion are weapons to be avoided but you asked.
Simply put, any separation, UDI or rebellion is not only distasteful but is something to be avoided. Successful negotiation to appropriately modify the current circumstance is much to be hoped for.
Well... All of the land the Alberta Government has been allowed to have dominion over, and the majority of land (the northern part) the Quebec and Ontario Governments have been allowed dominion over, was carved out of what the Dominion of Canada government unilaterally labelled the North West Territories.
While the history isn't identical, false land (and resouces) claims and territorial expansion to allow foreign control over natural resources is quite similar.
Loyalists to the southern governments of Quebec and Ontario also needs to read some history. This isn't only an Alberta issue. The territorial expansions to grant southerners control over the north were always an offensive (and regularly violent) form of gerrymandering.
BTW: Hudson's Bay had an exclusive patent from the British Crown to do business in a region. They did not "own" land, and obviously couldn't sell land. The legal basis for land sharing and treaty making in those regions is the Royal Proclamation of 1763.
So many weird myths have been told to try to justify ongoing illegal acts.
Your comment doesn't explain the transaction by which in 1870 the HBC sold the Rupert's Land and North West Territories to the government of Canada. You can attempt to argue that it was an illegal transaction but the truth is that under Canadian law title did change hands.
Therefore, Canada owned the lands and when Alberta and Saskatchewan were created in 1905 and when Manitoba joined Canada in 1870 and then Manitoba was increased in size in 1912 the titles to the respective areas were transferred under Canadian law to the provinces.
So, again, you can argue that aboriginal title was not extinguished but under Canadian law and under the treaties with the Indians in Western Canada that title was and is recognized.
As for Ontario and Quebec, well, I cannot say. I live in Alberta and have knowledge of events here. O & Q residents will have to ensure that their title is solid or not, as the case may be.
What you are expressing is knowledge of what a government told you, and was taught in government run schools. I grew up in Ontario, and taught the same myths by state run schools.
A government recognizing itself and its own special interests doesn't make what that government claims into international law.
The fact is that governments sometimes lie -- not only when you disagree with them do they lie (IE: the grievances Alberta loyalists have about governments that aren't Alberta), but some of the things you agree with are also government lies.
HBC did not own land, and the Royal Proclamation of 1763 actually confirmed that.
Smith’s threats to Canada are 100% oil and gas lobbyist dictates pure and simple. It actually has nothing to do with Albertan’s. Separation will not get them access to tide water or the ability to ignore indigenous rights or environmental laws or the ability to bulldoze through other provinces. They also would not have the revenue or financing to finance oil and gas projects on their own. They would lose 50% of their tax base re the corporations and citizens leaving the province. They alread carry a heft deficit that UCP keep adding to. They would need to create and finance their own currency, banking, trade deals, military/defense spending, management of airports, borders, social security system, etc. The list is long. They would have a poor credit rating so financing would be more costly. The real estate market will tank as thousands of homes hit the market at once. Small businesses will go out of business as the demand just won’t be there when a large portion of citizens take their money and leave. Quebec was told all this in 1995. The province sank into a deep economic collapse for the decade that followed the financial impacts re business closures and no investment internationally or domestically. Smith is damaging Alberta’s economy for at least the next decade. Separatist chatter is not forgotten. Once businesses leave they do not return. Once investment stops, it takes a long time for them to trust again.
I'm aware there are some Alberta elites that are trying to generate support for their grievances as part of an abuse of the politics of resentment, but that doesn't make what these elites are claiming to be true.
I lived in Quebec my whole life before my company along with many other corporations left Quebec after the 1995 referendum. My company transferred thousands of us out of Quebec as did other companies. I lost my family and friends moving here. So honestly, as a Quebecer I do consider the separatists traitors. The thing is a large percentage of Quebecers are not separatists. The separatists are still at it and that is why Quebec will never have a robust economy. Investors and business like stability. They do not want to be anywhere where there is separatist rhetoric. They will invest in provinces with stable Governments. What Smith did this week and dragging this out for a year or longer knowing full well they are on indigenous land so it is not theirs to take is just further tainting Alberta in the world stage. Quebec was told the same thing in 1995. Those of us who voted No to separation in the referendum respected Canada and the indigenous. Quebec cannot separate any more than Alberta can. At this critical time when other provinces are working together setting up trade agreements amongst themselves and Smith isn't. The IEA world energy outlook sees based in the recent speeding up of electrification globally that there is going to be a steep decline in oil and gas demand. That is 5 years from now. What has the UCP been doing to diversify this province re new industries, etc.? Absolutely nothing. With future demand dropping significantly there is going a be a surplus sitting in pipelines. What is the use having a product that is being phased out globally. Why are Albertan’s pushing the UCP re diversification of the economy vs attacking Ottawa. Canadians bought and paid for a 35 billion dollar pipeline that is operational and Alberta is raking in the revenue from that. Yet she attacks vs looking at her huge failings running this province. I mentioned the pipeline today to a middle aged adult here in Calgary with two teenage children and they were going on saying well if Ottawa gives us what we want and then I said well Canadians bought and paid for a 34 billion dollar pipeline that is operational and Alberta is raking in revenue from it and their response to me was “what pipeline”. I am sorry people who do not even know a pipeline was built under Trudeau should not be voting on anything as they are very obviously very ill informed as to what is even happening in their own province let alone federally or globally.
I knew many Quebecers who chose to leave and go to Toronto (ever so many) and other locales; I knew one fellow who the morning after the first PQ election flew in to Calgary and set up a new business here then went back to Montreal to close his business there and move his family here. So, yes, I am aware that many people moved. Looking back I recall the night that Sun Life sent the armored cars full of records and other valuables from Montreal to Toronto. Again, yes, I know this has consequences.
A large number of Albertans are not separatists but they, like me, have just had it with Central and Eastern Canadians sneering at us as country bumpkins and then stealing out money with no acknowledgement that we were funding the whole damned country.
Further, a large part of our industry is deliberately disadvantaged in the income tax system, something that PET did in (as I recall) 1973 that is still in the damned Income Tax Act and still harms us greatly.
Many people in Central and Eastern Canada ask why we object to the NEP to this day. Well, it cost many people their homes and shut down a who swath of industry here. Why did PET attack Alberta in the 1970s (see above) and then in the 1980s with the NEP? PET stated publicly that Alberta was becoming too powerful and too much money was coming here and that was bad for Central Canada (note that I did not mention Eastern Canada - PET didn't either).
Oh, so Smith isn't trying to break down interprovincial trade barriers? Alberta and western provinces have been lowering trade barriers for years. Please catch up!
You say, "Quebec cannot separate any more than Alberta can." Hmmm .... The Clarity Act and the Supreme Court disagree with you.
Oh, electric this and that ... yup, it is coming. Is it to be feared? Not particularly.
What has the UCP been doing to diversify? I suggest that they have been doing more than you think but, remember, we are a long way from many markets and we cannot do a whole lot of manufacturing here due to distances. Interestingly, we are getting more in the way of knowledge industries, etc. so it is happening.
You mention the Trans-Mountain purchase. Please don't mention it as it is simply proof that Central Canada is so stupid. TMX had held so many hearings, all according to the law, and was supported by the majority of native groups, etc. but then T2 and the BC government and various environmental groups a) changed the laws; b) created new rules that caused the cost to increase unreasonably. The proponent, Kinder Morgan simply stopped and said, "Nope; not gonna do it." and T2 panicked and realized that he had overplayed his hand. He well overpaid to buy the pipeline and then incompetently constructed it and paid far more than any reasonable person would, paying off pretty much every group with their hands out. Result: massive cost over-runs; total incompetence. That is why people here are oblivious about that pipeline.
And finally. I was in Montreal on business many times in the 1980s and I brought back souvenirs: two "Oui" buttons from the first Quebec referendum. If we ever do have our own referendum I will proudly wear them.
In my mind, traitors is too light of a word for the ideology being spewed by some parliamentarians and political elites.
But... that is part of the False Binary logical fallacy I find confusing in these conversations: It isn't a question of whether Alberta separatists are traitors or Quebec separatists are traitors, when the actual answer is "both".
That suggests to me that you must have read Pierre Vallieres' book, "White Niggers of America" published in 1968 which purports to explain/justify the terrorism of Quebec FLQ and similar nationalists in the 1960s and 1970s.
Now, you call folks who want to separate traitors but what then do you call the Government of Canada that introduced and passed the Clarity Act passed by Parliament in 2000 and upheld by the SCC, which Act sets forth the process under which a province can leave Confederation?
Quebecers did not choose to leave. Thousands of us had to leave as the companies we all worked for left the province. People move where the jobs are. You leave your family, friends and province behind not because you want to but you have to to feed your family. Separatist chatter changes the fabric of the province. It weakens it financially. Tax base is affected greatly as the corporations leave taking their money with them. Their employees leave which as well affects the tax base, real estate market as it tanks re housing value when thousands of homes hit the market at the same time. Picture walking down your street here and seeing every second or third home for sale. All these people contribute to the provincial and municipal economy. There goes those tax and consumer dollars. Small businesses go out of business because the demand drops and their expenses exceed their profits. Unemployment rises. Investment stops. Taxes need to rise both provincially and municipally to try to account for the severely depleted tax losses at the base. Services are cut to try to cut costs. Do you know his hard it is to live in a financially depressed economy? Boarded up businesses. Empty office towers. Citizens then leave as it becomes too costly to remain. Despite the huge cost to relocate re moving etc. Staying in a stagnant dying province is not feasible. Quebec’s economy was hit very hard. It took over ten years of severe financial decline. They have not recovered and never will fully as long as separatists keep negatively impacting international and domestic investment, it is pure math.
Feelings do not pay the bills. Investment dies not like instability. They do not like chaos. The world us big. They can go elsewhere. Once businesses leave they do not return, once investment dries up there is no growth. Separatist Albertan’s are hurting themselves and the province and the rest of us who recognize the financial impacts. They will have no one to Blane but themselves for what comes their way.
Albertan’s keep saying Alberta sends money to Ottawa. The rhetoric is framed inaccurately. All Canadians and corporations send money to Ottawa. It is their federal income tax filings. That is the only truth in what ill informed Albertan’s falsely believe because they have been lied to by Alberta Governments for so long.
The income tax is collected by the Federal Government same as income tax is collected by the Provincial Government to pay for infrastructure and services. The falsehoods that have been spewed in Alberta re the equalization payments is pure falsehoods. Re the equalization payments paid out by thé Federal Government, those funds are disburse utilizing a percentage of the income taxes received from every province. Alberta does not send money to Ottawa specifically for equalization. That is a lie by UCP to rage bait Albertan’s who do not bother to do their own research to understand better.
The amount collected in the form of income tax varies by province as population size and income levels are the two variables. Ontario and Quebec have far larger populations than Alberta so my bet is they pay higher Federal taxes to Ottawa. The Equalization formula used was actually implemented by Harper and Kenney when Harper was PM. Now do you honestly believe Harper and Kenney would create a formula that would not favour Alberta?
Alberta has received equalization payments very recently for two consecutive years when oil dropped to $5 a barrel. Because the provincial Government has done nothing re diversification. In fact they have fine everything in their power to halt diversification and they intentionally ignore other industries in Alberta to focus all their attention on oil and gas only. So why are you trusting a provincial Government who is intentionally not working in your best interests?
The oil and gas industry is heavily subsidized by both the Federal Government and Provincial Government. Canadians just paid 34 billion for the TMX pipeline under Trudeau. You know why Canadians had to buy the pipeline? Because no Investor’s were interested in investing in it. That is fact. You know why Investor’s are not interested in investing in oil and gas infrastructure? There is a long list available on line of oil and gas and LNG projects that the corporations and Investor’s decided to cancel as the cost to build far exceeded the rate of return. Ottawa did not cancel these projects. The Investor’s did.
Investor’s do not care about a province’s feelings. They are business people. If they will make lots of money long into the future (30 year focus) they will invest in it. If the rate of return is not high enough after considering the cost to build, they will not invest.
It takes at least 5 years to build a pipeline. TMX was supposed to cost $4 billion and it ballooned to $34 billion by the time it was completed. The IEA predicts a steep decline in oil and gas demand by 2030. That is 5 years away. The time it takes to build a pipeline.
The UCP have done nothing to date to diversify the Alberta economy. They are choosing to ignore the IEA predictions which puts Alberta and Albertans at risk. So again I ask why are you trusting the UCP who are not working in your best interests? They work for oil and gas.
In five years Alberta may become very well become a have not province directly due to the failure of the UCP to focus on diversification investment. Since Trump took office there has been increased activity globally to really push forward with electrification in Europe and Asia.
Due to Trump’s erratic threats/behaviour re withholding and tariffs these countries want to reduce their dependency on oil and gas. They see electrification as their way to escape oil and gas dependency and have free agency over their futures.
China is a big player in all this. They have the products to make this happen globally and Investor’s and countries are deep into making this happen. China is assisting with every level of the process to assist countries move through each process of electrification including modifications to their electrical grids.
It is well documented the billions that the Federal government has transferred over to Alberta in the last while re the various supports and investment and that does not even include the subsidies to oil and gas industries.
I have met Calgarans who do not even know a new pipeline was completed recently. Albertan’s make statements that are factually untrue to serve their agenda which is not supported by factual evidence. When you base critical economical decisions on lies you have been fed intentionally by the UCP you are just being manipulated. Do your research. Fact check as everything UCP says is lies or half truths as they neglect to ever mention the down sides.
As a previous Quebec resident prior to corporations moving out of the province, I can tell you the direct impact separatist chatter will have to your life and none of it is a win. Smith and the separatists have already had an impact you may not have noticed. There will be no international or domestic Investor’s investing in Alberta now. They will be investing in Canada and investment friendly stable provinces.
The UCP and separatists who think they know it all have already done great harm to Alberta’s economy. Not Ottawa. It might make you feel good to rant and rave about falsehoods related to injustices but remember the world is watching and they will want no part of it. Alberta is tainted now which impacts everyone in this province. Tainted by the Premier and her media attention that she so clearly seeks daily. Tainted by her ranting that if you actually fact checked are false.
As was the case in Quebec there will already be boardroom chatter behind closed doors re no future development here and maybe even planning departure out of the province. The UK mistakenly voted for Brexit based on « feelings » and they have done grave harm to their country and economy vs if they had remained in the EU. Business, Investor’s and trade partnerships are based on rate of return and profit. They do not make economical decisions based on « feelings » or lies. They focus on cold hard facts and detailed cost/benefit analysis.
Anyone writing about Alberta Independence needs to do it in the context of the current UCP health contracts scandal, which is up there for the single largest piece of government malfeasance in Canadian history.
That’s what the entire recent “separatism” push is about. It’s nothing more than a distraction. It didn’t exist in any meaningful form six months ago, and only exists today because Smith and her supporters looked around and grabbed the biggest, loudest, issue they could drum up. It will continue to be a thing for as long as Smith needs some major issue to consume the limited press questions she allows and push out the sort of tricky issues that risk breaking through even to her base
If the CorruptCare investigations all disappeared next week, a month from now the Alberta Independence talk will have disappeared completely into the invisible fringe that it came from
Ask yourself if Alberta was an independent republic and Canada wanted Alberta to join under the existing unfair conditions of equalization payments and unequal democratic representation and unelected senate would you want to join?
After her trips to see Diaper Donna in Mar-a-lago and Ben Shapiro at Prager U, I fully believe the referendum is just a tool in the 51st state strategy of the US govt, which is why she lowered the bar required to get one by 75%. If a referendum shows that the majority of Albertans want to separate, the great Guardians of Democracy will have justification to engage on "Albertans' behalf". Considering the US wants that oil and water, and most of the largely American-owned and operated oil and gas companies would much prefer to work under the now non-existent US environmental regs than Canada's, I expect the zone to be flooded by inflammatory false narratives and disinformation to increase the likelihood of a yes vote.
I kind of understand their grievance , they like a kid in a family who thinks they are deprived and wants to be treated like the 'special" child , Quebec has been treated for years with concessions and kid gloves not because of their cultural survival unless they are playing their Texas cultural want to be pretendism. This is not to say they don't deserve 'some' specialism and thankfulness that they a great contributor to the Great Canadian Nation.
Danielle Smith is creating the maximum distraction possible.
Distraction from what? The Alberta Health Services scandal. This scandal has to potential to bring down the government, end several political careers and possibly lead to criminal convictions. In other words, premier Smith is motivated to distract to the maximum extent possible.
1.
Ethics Violation: Interference in Judicial Proceedings
Incident: In January 2025, Premier Smith engaged in a phone conversation with Calgary pastor Artur Pawlowski, who was facing criminal charges related to a COVID-19 border blockade. During the call, Smith expressed sympathy and indicated she was in regular contact with Crown prosecutors about such cases.
Ethics Commissioner’s Findings: Alberta Ethics Commissioner Marguerite Trussler concluded that Smith violated the Conflict of Interest Act by attempting to influence the administration of justice. Specifically, Smith’s call to then-Justice Minister Tyler Shandro was deemed an attempt to sway prosecutorial decisions. Trussler emphasized that such actions undermine judicial independence, a cornerstone of democracy.
Outcome: No immediate sanctions were recommended, but the commissioner reserved the right to do so once the legislature reconvenes.
2.
Alleged Corruption in Health Services Contracts
Allegations: Former Alberta Health Services (AHS) CEO Athana Mentzelopoulos alleged she was terminated for investigating questionable procurement practices. She claimed she faced pressure from government officials to approve contracts with private surgical facilities, despite concerns over costs and ownership. Her dismissal occurred shortly before a scheduled meeting with the Auditor General to discuss these issues.
Government Response: Premier Smith denied involvement, labeling the allegations as “false, baseless, and defamatory.” She has requested an expedited internal review by AHS and pledged full cooperation with the Auditor General.
Opposition’s Stance: The Alberta NDP has called for comprehensive investigations by the RCMP, the Auditor General, the Ethics Commissioner, and a judicial-led public inquiry. They also demand that individuals implicated, including Premier Smith and Health Minister Adriana LaGrange, step aside during the investigations.
3.
Controversial Coal Policy Reversal
Policy Change: In January 2025, the Alberta government lifted a moratorium on coal exploration in sensitive regions of the Rocky Mountains, reversing a 2022 ministerial order. This decision opened approximately 190,000 hectares to potential coal development.
Rationale: Premier Smith defended the move by citing the need to protect taxpayers from over $15 billion in potential damages sought by coal companies due to previous policy changes.
Public and Environmental Concerns: The policy reversal faced significant backlash from environmental groups, First Nations, and the public, who raised concerns about water contamination, habitat destruction, and lack of clean water.
Petition:
Demand a Full Independent Public Inquiry into Premier Danielle Smith’s Conduct and Her Government’s Alleged Corruption
To the Lieutenant Governor of Alberta, the Legislative Assembly, and the Office of the Ethics Commissioner:
We, the undersigned concerned citizens of Canada, call for an immediate and independent public inquiry into the actions and conduct of Premier Danielle Smith and her government.
In a healthy democracy, elected officials must be held to the highest standards of transparency, ethics, and accountability. The recent and serious allegations against Premier Smith and her administration demand urgent public scrutiny:
Interference in the Justice System
Premier Smith was found to have violated the Alberta Conflict of Interest Act by the province’s Ethics Commissioner after attempting to influence ongoing criminal proceedings. This behavior represents a grave threat to the independence of the justice system and public trust in governance.
Alleged Political Corruption in Health Care Contracting
Whistleblower claims suggest senior officials were pressured to approve private health contracts under suspicious circumstances. The firing of former Alberta Health Services CEO Athana Mentzelopoulos days before she was scheduled to meet with the Auditor General raises serious concerns about political interference and suppression of accountability.
Environmental Rollbacks Without Consultation
The reversal of protective coal policies affecting sensitive areas of the Rockies—without public or Indigenous consultation—has sparked widespread alarm over backroom deals and disregard for public interest.
We believe these actions may represent a pattern of misconduct and demand a full, transparent, and independent public inquiry, led by a judge or external legal body, to investigate the Premier’s role and any systemic failures that enabled these events.
We also call on the Alberta government to:
Cooperate fully with the Ethics Commissioner, Auditor General, and any law enforcement investigations;
Suspend any public officials under investigation from their roles until inquiries are complete;
Restore public faith by demonstrating that no leader is above the law.
Democracy only works when citizens speak up. We urge our fellow Canadian Albertans, our elected officials, and all defenders of public integrity to support this call for accountability.
We demand answers. We demand integrity. We demand action.
Signed us 🇨🇦
Using a fight with the feds to distract from provincial policy failures is just how Alberta operates. It has been like this for decades.
In other words, she learned a lot from those trips to marde-a-lago, how to be t***p
Trumper in training.
I agree. Like her hero Trump, she knows that in order to distract her base from the mess she is making, she needs to get them emotionally riled up. The name "Trudeau" used to do it (it doesn't take much).
One benefit of Skippy The Loser having to run again is that he's picked Alberta separatist central to do it.
If he chooses to kiss up to the base there, the rest of the country will sour on him even more.
If he takes a stand against them, who knows, he could lose yet again. And hopefully that would be the end of him.
Smith wanted The Felon to tone down anti CDN rhetoric leading up to the election, and look where that got PP. Out of government and out of a seat. I hope she keeps doing him favours, because I like the results when she does.
Last time I checked, Smith and her separatist pals live on UNCEDED First Nations land, held in trust by the Crown. They can separate all they want, but they ain't getting any part of Alberta...
I wish more Canadians recognized that this applies to most of what the Canadian Crown (the Canadian Government) and its provincial and territorial governments have weak title claims to.
There are odd separatist movements within provinces that incorrectly believe that international legal precident would allow them to separate. They have their referendums on vague questions, with little disclosure of the legal reality.
A good book to understand the reality was written in the context of the Quebec 1995 referendum called: "Sovereign injustice: Forcible inclusion of the James Bay Crees and Cree territory into a sovereign Quebec".
Book cover and some notes are in:
https://r.flora.ca/p/why-not-immediately-formally-denounce
Thank you Russell, we need History like this out in the open, along with fact-based journalism to keep Democracies and The People alive and well and informed. 🇨🇦
I gave a big-think about the grievance politics coming from Alberta elites some thought a while back. What I realized is that the grievances were created in 1905 when the Alberta government itself was created. This government was created by the Dominion of Canada in order to replace the existing inhabitants, hire a foreign workforce, and extract resources from a specific carve-out of the North West Territories. That government was never able to move past the 1905 mandate to become a real provincial government. In the 1930’s additional special rights were granted to this resource extraction corporation in the form of the British North America Act 1930 which is more often called the “Natural Resources Transfer Acts”.
Alberta is merely a resource extraction company that has created dependents in a set of almost entirely foreign workers and their descendants.
https://r.flora.ca/p/alberta
Don't kid yourself, most Alberta "sovreigntists" don't want Alberta to be independent. They view independence as a way station on the way to becoming the 51st State. And no they do not want to share their two senators with the rest of Canada. It's kind of like Texas. Texas was part of Mexico, then it was independent, then it was part of the States.
They don’t want independence. They want to join the US.
More of the hidden agenda rises from a traitorous Danielle Smith! The sooner we can turf her the better it'll be!
Okay, Evan, I get that Danielle Smith annoys you [perhaps a bit of an understatement?].
My question is not about Danielle but is about you. Have you gone on record as describing Quebec separatists as traitors?
Just asking. I am not trying to make a statement on anything but I am, as I say, simply asking. I hope to receive your response; thanks.
They are obviously traitors, and to the extent I’m not sure I’ve ever said so explicitly (if I haven’t), it’s because it’s self evident to me
Thank you for your clarification on your position.
I do understand your comment. Whether I agree or disagree I am grateful to understand how you consider the issue. The reason that I asked was that I have run across folks who argue that it is a valid thing for Quebec to contemplate separation but that it is invalid for other provinces. You, obviously, do not have that inconsistency.
Of course, I know that you are aware that the Supremes acknowledge the right of a province to leave Confederation. Further, the Clarity Act specifically recognizes that right and sets out a process whereby it can be accomplished. Clearly, the Supremes opined on the Clarity Act and it's processes.
I have argued that some instances of the Supremes' judgements, particularly in some Charter cases involving what I consider specious, made up, non-existent rights, are absurd. I have been attacked (verbally and in writing only, thankfully) for my position with comments to the effect of "if the Supremes say it, it must be so" and so forth.
To know that you disagree with some (one?) of the Supremes' decisions is interesting to me as it puts us in the same boat, just at different positions in that boat (silly metaphor, no?).
For reference, here is the Clarity Act.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-31.8/page-1.html
Even the first "Whereas" provides clarity that is missing from this discussion, in that it makes clear that a province cannot separate from Canada without the agreement of the rest of Canada.
"WHEREAS the Supreme Court of Canada has confirmed that there is no right, under international law or under the Constitution of Canada, for the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally;"
I believe it is possible for the Governments of Quebec and Alberta to unilaterally fold, but not to have a land base which does not "belong" to them in any sense (European/Canadian or domestic/Indigenous law).
But, but, but ... the point is that the Clarity Act DOES allow separation. Albeit under conditions.
Any, any I say, such separation will entail negotiations. Even if the negotiations are bitter, they are still negotiations.
So, the point is that the Clarity Act does accept that a province can separate. As for conditions, well, that is something that would come if any province ever got that far.
Best of all, of course, is that negotiations occur and conclude successfully before it gets to that stage but, again, negotiations need occur. Not unilateral diktat.
I understand some elites as part of grievance politics wish to claim that the Clarity Act provides a path for a “province” to become a separate “country”, but that isn’t what it says. It actually only clarifies the beginnings of the impossible hoops that would need to be crossed.
Say for the sake of argument that a province was able to get agreement from all the other provinces and the federal government, something that most people agree is near impossible. That is not the end of the process.
During the P.E. Trudeau era, the government tried to make unilateral decisions that weren’t allowed. The 1969 white paper was formally called the Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy. Trudeau and his equally racist Minister of Indian Affairs, Jean Chrétien , wanted to do a final “forced assimilation” of Indigenous peoples into Canada, and wipe out all the treaties with Indigenous Nations. That was not allowed, as that was a violation of the Honour of the Crown, and treaties signed with the crown. Trudeau tried to do that again with the process that led towards the passage of Canada Act 1982, but also failed. Indigenous Nations went to the UN and to Britain (Look up The Constitution Express), and Britain didn’t allow Trudeau to do that and instead Canada ended up with Section 35 which affirmed the treaties and Section 25 which confirmed yet again that the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763 formed the basis of Canadian law and relations with pre-existing Nations.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1982/11/contents
There was quite a bit of myth making about what powers P.E. Trudeau and the provincial Premiers had in that process, pretending that it was only up to those Canadian politicians what would be in the Constitution. The fact is, that the Dominion of Canada is built upon relationships that go beyond those politicians, and even if the near impossible hurdle of changing the Canadian Constitution could happen, it is unlikely this “separate government” would have the land base that it believes it has today.
Given this legal status, what do provincial governments and the elites that are backing them actually have as “leverage” in a negotiation? What cards do they hold? It would actualy be considerably easier for the rest of Canada to recind Alberta Act 1905 and rescind all territorial expansions of Quebec since 1867 than it would be for those "provinces" to become separate countries. It would be an extremely dangerous "negotiation" as I'm unaware of what these provincial governments are negotiating with.
Is Alberta or Quebec really going to claim to the Canadian government that it has negotiated with the USA, Russia, or China, etc to take over the entirety of “Canada” if they aren’t allowed to separate? Other than violent rebellion and war, what exactly do you believe is the path to "separation"?
Russell, I do not say that the Clarity Act provides a path but what it does do is to recognize that there CAN be a path. Put differently, it allows one to try to develop and follow such a path.
To my mind that is simply an acknowledgement that some folks may wish to separate and the Act then discusses how such a path could be developed. That being the case, it seems to me that calling someone a traitor for wanting to follow the law is foolish. One can certainly think that person or group to be misguided but that doesn't make them traitors if they are seeking to follow the law.
As for your question about what leverage would various folks have in a negotiation, I suppose that the ultimate leverage is a UDI or outright rebellion, both of which are to be avoided. There are precedents for a UDI, just as there are precedents for rebellion (see July 4, 1776 as an example of precedent for each of UDI and rebellion). Having said that, both a UDI and a rebellion are weapons to be avoided but you asked.
Simply put, any separation, UDI or rebellion is not only distasteful but is something to be avoided. Successful negotiation to appropriately modify the current circumstance is much to be hoped for.
Quebec history is not Alberta history. Duh. Go read a book.
Well... All of the land the Alberta Government has been allowed to have dominion over, and the majority of land (the northern part) the Quebec and Ontario Governments have been allowed dominion over, was carved out of what the Dominion of Canada government unilaterally labelled the North West Territories.
While the history isn't identical, false land (and resouces) claims and territorial expansion to allow foreign control over natural resources is quite similar.
Loyalists to the southern governments of Quebec and Ontario also needs to read some history. This isn't only an Alberta issue. The territorial expansions to grant southerners control over the north were always an offensive (and regularly violent) form of gerrymandering.
https://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/maps/ontario-boundaries.aspx
BTW: Hudson's Bay had an exclusive patent from the British Crown to do business in a region. They did not "own" land, and obviously couldn't sell land. The legal basis for land sharing and treaty making in those regions is the Royal Proclamation of 1763.
So many weird myths have been told to try to justify ongoing illegal acts.
Hmmmm .....
Your comment doesn't explain the transaction by which in 1870 the HBC sold the Rupert's Land and North West Territories to the government of Canada. You can attempt to argue that it was an illegal transaction but the truth is that under Canadian law title did change hands.
Therefore, Canada owned the lands and when Alberta and Saskatchewan were created in 1905 and when Manitoba joined Canada in 1870 and then Manitoba was increased in size in 1912 the titles to the respective areas were transferred under Canadian law to the provinces.
So, again, you can argue that aboriginal title was not extinguished but under Canadian law and under the treaties with the Indians in Western Canada that title was and is recognized.
As for Ontario and Quebec, well, I cannot say. I live in Alberta and have knowledge of events here. O & Q residents will have to ensure that their title is solid or not, as the case may be.
What you are expressing is knowledge of what a government told you, and was taught in government run schools. I grew up in Ontario, and taught the same myths by state run schools.
A government recognizing itself and its own special interests doesn't make what that government claims into international law.
The fact is that governments sometimes lie -- not only when you disagree with them do they lie (IE: the grievances Alberta loyalists have about governments that aren't Alberta), but some of the things you agree with are also government lies.
HBC did not own land, and the Royal Proclamation of 1763 actually confirmed that.
https://r.flora.ca/p/why-not-immediately-formally-denounce
Smith’s threats to Canada are 100% oil and gas lobbyist dictates pure and simple. It actually has nothing to do with Albertan’s. Separation will not get them access to tide water or the ability to ignore indigenous rights or environmental laws or the ability to bulldoze through other provinces. They also would not have the revenue or financing to finance oil and gas projects on their own. They would lose 50% of their tax base re the corporations and citizens leaving the province. They alread carry a heft deficit that UCP keep adding to. They would need to create and finance their own currency, banking, trade deals, military/defense spending, management of airports, borders, social security system, etc. The list is long. They would have a poor credit rating so financing would be more costly. The real estate market will tank as thousands of homes hit the market at once. Small businesses will go out of business as the demand just won’t be there when a large portion of citizens take their money and leave. Quebec was told all this in 1995. The province sank into a deep economic collapse for the decade that followed the financial impacts re business closures and no investment internationally or domestically. Smith is damaging Alberta’s economy for at least the next decade. Separatist chatter is not forgotten. Once businesses leave they do not return. Once investment stops, it takes a long time for them to trust again.
And, you are correct that the two histories are different but the issue that I was raising was how Evan was regarding them.
In any event, if separation is a valid issue in Quebec - and the Supremes say that it is - then it is a valid issue in Alberta.
Except, as discussed, it isn't a valid issue for the Government of Quebec.
The Supreme Court, and the Claritiy Act, don't say what you appear to believe they say.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-31.8/page-1.html
I'm aware there are some Alberta elites that are trying to generate support for their grievances as part of an abuse of the politics of resentment, but that doesn't make what these elites are claiming to be true.
I lived in Quebec my whole life before my company along with many other corporations left Quebec after the 1995 referendum. My company transferred thousands of us out of Quebec as did other companies. I lost my family and friends moving here. So honestly, as a Quebecer I do consider the separatists traitors. The thing is a large percentage of Quebecers are not separatists. The separatists are still at it and that is why Quebec will never have a robust economy. Investors and business like stability. They do not want to be anywhere where there is separatist rhetoric. They will invest in provinces with stable Governments. What Smith did this week and dragging this out for a year or longer knowing full well they are on indigenous land so it is not theirs to take is just further tainting Alberta in the world stage. Quebec was told the same thing in 1995. Those of us who voted No to separation in the referendum respected Canada and the indigenous. Quebec cannot separate any more than Alberta can. At this critical time when other provinces are working together setting up trade agreements amongst themselves and Smith isn't. The IEA world energy outlook sees based in the recent speeding up of electrification globally that there is going to be a steep decline in oil and gas demand. That is 5 years from now. What has the UCP been doing to diversify this province re new industries, etc.? Absolutely nothing. With future demand dropping significantly there is going a be a surplus sitting in pipelines. What is the use having a product that is being phased out globally. Why are Albertan’s pushing the UCP re diversification of the economy vs attacking Ottawa. Canadians bought and paid for a 35 billion dollar pipeline that is operational and Alberta is raking in the revenue from that. Yet she attacks vs looking at her huge failings running this province. I mentioned the pipeline today to a middle aged adult here in Calgary with two teenage children and they were going on saying well if Ottawa gives us what we want and then I said well Canadians bought and paid for a 34 billion dollar pipeline that is operational and Alberta is raking in revenue from it and their response to me was “what pipeline”. I am sorry people who do not even know a pipeline was built under Trudeau should not be voting on anything as they are very obviously very ill informed as to what is even happening in their own province let alone federally or globally.
Hmmm ... where to begin ....
I knew many Quebecers who chose to leave and go to Toronto (ever so many) and other locales; I knew one fellow who the morning after the first PQ election flew in to Calgary and set up a new business here then went back to Montreal to close his business there and move his family here. So, yes, I am aware that many people moved. Looking back I recall the night that Sun Life sent the armored cars full of records and other valuables from Montreal to Toronto. Again, yes, I know this has consequences.
A large number of Albertans are not separatists but they, like me, have just had it with Central and Eastern Canadians sneering at us as country bumpkins and then stealing out money with no acknowledgement that we were funding the whole damned country.
Further, a large part of our industry is deliberately disadvantaged in the income tax system, something that PET did in (as I recall) 1973 that is still in the damned Income Tax Act and still harms us greatly.
Many people in Central and Eastern Canada ask why we object to the NEP to this day. Well, it cost many people their homes and shut down a who swath of industry here. Why did PET attack Alberta in the 1970s (see above) and then in the 1980s with the NEP? PET stated publicly that Alberta was becoming too powerful and too much money was coming here and that was bad for Central Canada (note that I did not mention Eastern Canada - PET didn't either).
Oh, so Smith isn't trying to break down interprovincial trade barriers? Alberta and western provinces have been lowering trade barriers for years. Please catch up!
You say, "Quebec cannot separate any more than Alberta can." Hmmm .... The Clarity Act and the Supreme Court disagree with you.
Oh, electric this and that ... yup, it is coming. Is it to be feared? Not particularly.
What has the UCP been doing to diversify? I suggest that they have been doing more than you think but, remember, we are a long way from many markets and we cannot do a whole lot of manufacturing here due to distances. Interestingly, we are getting more in the way of knowledge industries, etc. so it is happening.
You mention the Trans-Mountain purchase. Please don't mention it as it is simply proof that Central Canada is so stupid. TMX had held so many hearings, all according to the law, and was supported by the majority of native groups, etc. but then T2 and the BC government and various environmental groups a) changed the laws; b) created new rules that caused the cost to increase unreasonably. The proponent, Kinder Morgan simply stopped and said, "Nope; not gonna do it." and T2 panicked and realized that he had overplayed his hand. He well overpaid to buy the pipeline and then incompetently constructed it and paid far more than any reasonable person would, paying off pretty much every group with their hands out. Result: massive cost over-runs; total incompetence. That is why people here are oblivious about that pipeline.
And finally. I was in Montreal on business many times in the 1980s and I brought back souvenirs: two "Oui" buttons from the first Quebec referendum. If we ever do have our own referendum I will proudly wear them.
I've personally been even more direct and calling the Bloc "White Nationalists".
https://r.flora.ca/p/farewell-from-nunavut
In my mind, traitors is too light of a word for the ideology being spewed by some parliamentarians and political elites.
But... that is part of the False Binary logical fallacy I find confusing in these conversations: It isn't a question of whether Alberta separatists are traitors or Quebec separatists are traitors, when the actual answer is "both".
That suggests to me that you must have read Pierre Vallieres' book, "White Niggers of America" published in 1968 which purports to explain/justify the terrorism of Quebec FLQ and similar nationalists in the 1960s and 1970s.
Now, you call folks who want to separate traitors but what then do you call the Government of Canada that introduced and passed the Clarity Act passed by Parliament in 2000 and upheld by the SCC, which Act sets forth the process under which a province can leave Confederation?
Why would it suggest I read that book? I am aware of the book, but have not read it nor have any interest in reading it.
I have read many books that suggest something else entirely.
A call to action for fellow French descendants in "North America"
https://r.flora.ca/p/french-descendents
I am not sure Evan was born during the last Quebec referendum. But I am sure if he were, he would have written about it.
Quebecers did not choose to leave. Thousands of us had to leave as the companies we all worked for left the province. People move where the jobs are. You leave your family, friends and province behind not because you want to but you have to to feed your family. Separatist chatter changes the fabric of the province. It weakens it financially. Tax base is affected greatly as the corporations leave taking their money with them. Their employees leave which as well affects the tax base, real estate market as it tanks re housing value when thousands of homes hit the market at the same time. Picture walking down your street here and seeing every second or third home for sale. All these people contribute to the provincial and municipal economy. There goes those tax and consumer dollars. Small businesses go out of business because the demand drops and their expenses exceed their profits. Unemployment rises. Investment stops. Taxes need to rise both provincially and municipally to try to account for the severely depleted tax losses at the base. Services are cut to try to cut costs. Do you know his hard it is to live in a financially depressed economy? Boarded up businesses. Empty office towers. Citizens then leave as it becomes too costly to remain. Despite the huge cost to relocate re moving etc. Staying in a stagnant dying province is not feasible. Quebec’s economy was hit very hard. It took over ten years of severe financial decline. They have not recovered and never will fully as long as separatists keep negatively impacting international and domestic investment, it is pure math.
Feelings do not pay the bills. Investment dies not like instability. They do not like chaos. The world us big. They can go elsewhere. Once businesses leave they do not return, once investment dries up there is no growth. Separatist Albertan’s are hurting themselves and the province and the rest of us who recognize the financial impacts. They will have no one to Blane but themselves for what comes their way.
Albertan’s keep saying Alberta sends money to Ottawa. The rhetoric is framed inaccurately. All Canadians and corporations send money to Ottawa. It is their federal income tax filings. That is the only truth in what ill informed Albertan’s falsely believe because they have been lied to by Alberta Governments for so long.
The income tax is collected by the Federal Government same as income tax is collected by the Provincial Government to pay for infrastructure and services. The falsehoods that have been spewed in Alberta re the equalization payments is pure falsehoods. Re the equalization payments paid out by thé Federal Government, those funds are disburse utilizing a percentage of the income taxes received from every province. Alberta does not send money to Ottawa specifically for equalization. That is a lie by UCP to rage bait Albertan’s who do not bother to do their own research to understand better.
The amount collected in the form of income tax varies by province as population size and income levels are the two variables. Ontario and Quebec have far larger populations than Alberta so my bet is they pay higher Federal taxes to Ottawa. The Equalization formula used was actually implemented by Harper and Kenney when Harper was PM. Now do you honestly believe Harper and Kenney would create a formula that would not favour Alberta?
Alberta has received equalization payments very recently for two consecutive years when oil dropped to $5 a barrel. Because the provincial Government has done nothing re diversification. In fact they have fine everything in their power to halt diversification and they intentionally ignore other industries in Alberta to focus all their attention on oil and gas only. So why are you trusting a provincial Government who is intentionally not working in your best interests?
The oil and gas industry is heavily subsidized by both the Federal Government and Provincial Government. Canadians just paid 34 billion for the TMX pipeline under Trudeau. You know why Canadians had to buy the pipeline? Because no Investor’s were interested in investing in it. That is fact. You know why Investor’s are not interested in investing in oil and gas infrastructure? There is a long list available on line of oil and gas and LNG projects that the corporations and Investor’s decided to cancel as the cost to build far exceeded the rate of return. Ottawa did not cancel these projects. The Investor’s did.
Investor’s do not care about a province’s feelings. They are business people. If they will make lots of money long into the future (30 year focus) they will invest in it. If the rate of return is not high enough after considering the cost to build, they will not invest.
It takes at least 5 years to build a pipeline. TMX was supposed to cost $4 billion and it ballooned to $34 billion by the time it was completed. The IEA predicts a steep decline in oil and gas demand by 2030. That is 5 years away. The time it takes to build a pipeline.
The UCP have done nothing to date to diversify the Alberta economy. They are choosing to ignore the IEA predictions which puts Alberta and Albertans at risk. So again I ask why are you trusting the UCP who are not working in your best interests? They work for oil and gas.
In five years Alberta may become very well become a have not province directly due to the failure of the UCP to focus on diversification investment. Since Trump took office there has been increased activity globally to really push forward with electrification in Europe and Asia.
Due to Trump’s erratic threats/behaviour re withholding and tariffs these countries want to reduce their dependency on oil and gas. They see electrification as their way to escape oil and gas dependency and have free agency over their futures.
China is a big player in all this. They have the products to make this happen globally and Investor’s and countries are deep into making this happen. China is assisting with every level of the process to assist countries move through each process of electrification including modifications to their electrical grids.
It is well documented the billions that the Federal government has transferred over to Alberta in the last while re the various supports and investment and that does not even include the subsidies to oil and gas industries.
I have met Calgarans who do not even know a new pipeline was completed recently. Albertan’s make statements that are factually untrue to serve their agenda which is not supported by factual evidence. When you base critical economical decisions on lies you have been fed intentionally by the UCP you are just being manipulated. Do your research. Fact check as everything UCP says is lies or half truths as they neglect to ever mention the down sides.
As a previous Quebec resident prior to corporations moving out of the province, I can tell you the direct impact separatist chatter will have to your life and none of it is a win. Smith and the separatists have already had an impact you may not have noticed. There will be no international or domestic Investor’s investing in Alberta now. They will be investing in Canada and investment friendly stable provinces.
The UCP and separatists who think they know it all have already done great harm to Alberta’s economy. Not Ottawa. It might make you feel good to rant and rave about falsehoods related to injustices but remember the world is watching and they will want no part of it. Alberta is tainted now which impacts everyone in this province. Tainted by the Premier and her media attention that she so clearly seeks daily. Tainted by her ranting that if you actually fact checked are false.
As was the case in Quebec there will already be boardroom chatter behind closed doors re no future development here and maybe even planning departure out of the province. The UK mistakenly voted for Brexit based on « feelings » and they have done grave harm to their country and economy vs if they had remained in the EU. Business, Investor’s and trade partnerships are based on rate of return and profit. They do not make economical decisions based on « feelings » or lies. They focus on cold hard facts and detailed cost/benefit analysis.
Anyone writing about Alberta Independence needs to do it in the context of the current UCP health contracts scandal, which is up there for the single largest piece of government malfeasance in Canadian history.
That’s what the entire recent “separatism” push is about. It’s nothing more than a distraction. It didn’t exist in any meaningful form six months ago, and only exists today because Smith and her supporters looked around and grabbed the biggest, loudest, issue they could drum up. It will continue to be a thing for as long as Smith needs some major issue to consume the limited press questions she allows and push out the sort of tricky issues that risk breaking through even to her base
If the CorruptCare investigations all disappeared next week, a month from now the Alberta Independence talk will have disappeared completely into the invisible fringe that it came from
Outstanding research - thanks!
This is good IMHO. A different take and pretty difficult to argue with.
Ask yourself if Alberta was an independent republic and Canada wanted Alberta to join under the existing unfair conditions of equalization payments and unequal democratic representation and unelected senate would you want to join?
After her trips to see Diaper Donna in Mar-a-lago and Ben Shapiro at Prager U, I fully believe the referendum is just a tool in the 51st state strategy of the US govt, which is why she lowered the bar required to get one by 75%. If a referendum shows that the majority of Albertans want to separate, the great Guardians of Democracy will have justification to engage on "Albertans' behalf". Considering the US wants that oil and water, and most of the largely American-owned and operated oil and gas companies would much prefer to work under the now non-existent US environmental regs than Canada's, I expect the zone to be flooded by inflammatory false narratives and disinformation to increase the likelihood of a yes vote.
I kind of understand their grievance , they like a kid in a family who thinks they are deprived and wants to be treated like the 'special" child , Quebec has been treated for years with concessions and kid gloves not because of their cultural survival unless they are playing their Texas cultural want to be pretendism. This is not to say they don't deserve 'some' specialism and thankfulness that they a great contributor to the Great Canadian Nation.
Smith needs to go!!! And yes we don’t have to give them shit! We bought them a pipeline