The reality is that our very own Liberal governments have done far more harm to Canada than Donald Trump has. The Liberals have also betrayed the Canadian people with mass immigration. They no longer get to demand silent obedience. If the Liberals can't keep the country united, that is a measure of their incompetence, not of Smith's (or other Canadians') misbehaviour.
Your use of the word "betrayed" implies that there was a special kind of cynicism with the mass immigration policy and/or that the policy was divisive for a lengthy period of time before it was reversed. What is the evidence for either being the case?
Are you saying it took 10 years for the Liberals to realize it was a mistake? They still haven't fixed it, either: we are still bringing in a large number without criminal background or economic checks. We also don't check if those ordered to leave actually leave. The problem is far from solved.
The question is not whether the problem is "solved"; the question is what the Conservatives who are supported by Alberta would, or would not, have done differently. There's no "betrayal" when the policies apparently had the support of a virtual consensus of the political class.
"Betrayed the Canadian people". Under Justin, the Liberals denied that there is such a thing as a Canadian people. They weren't misguidedly thinking that mass immigration would be best for the nation - they flatly denied the existence of the nation. That's what makes it a betrayal.
I must say I can only sit back in awe & chuckle at the reaction from the ROC towards a possible Alberta separation movement.
For decades you have pretty much done everything you can to suppress our opportunity to help ourselves & Canada as a whole flourish & prosper. Rules, regulations & bad policies aimed directly at impeding our prosperity.
And now you express disdain and surprise that a large portion of Albertans have said enough is enough. To lecture us by stating what fools we'd be by even considering such a thought shows a clear misunderstanding of how many Albertans feel about how we have been treated.
As we get closer to Canada Day maybe we can honestly assess whether the current structure of this country may be part of the problem. Central Canada has & will continue to drive the bus and the current structure ensures that. I personally think there is still hope & would prefer Alberta be part of Canada, put a restructured Canada. Canada is too large & too different to be governed as one entity. Canada would be better suited to accept this diversity & create a more regional approach & establish three blocks; the West, Central Canada & the Maritimes under a streamlined federal body.
If we want the Canada project to work we must honestly assess its shortcomings and modernize by being inclusive to ALL of Canada not just Ontario & Quebec.
Kidding, right? No one can provide a graph showing Alberta's prosperity had NEP not happened, a bunch of pipeline projects had happened and the transfers payments were applied fairly.
Well that much is obvious. I think the realization that they played into the hands of their most hated villain would be the harder hitting one for these voters, if they ever arrive there.
This analysis underlies the issues that have forced us into this problematic referendum. For people like Jacks, Alberta's economy is understood to be a bargaining chip needed to obtain concessions to protect the Parliamentarily guaranteed dairy cartel and the Liberal government's regulatory and subsidy damaged auto industry. They don't ask what type of trade deal would best benefit Alberta's economy. They ask how Alberta's resources can be leveraged to support uncompetitive industries. And for at least a few of those industries, the problem is government interference in business planning. I can't think of a bigger economic disaster for this country than the federal government's obsession with batteries.
Secondly, we have never had a unified economy acting together. You can't sell BC wine in Ontario. We can't sell Alberta energy in Quebec because we lack national transportation corridors. Provincial labour regulations and professional licensing often prevents cross-border economic projects.
Danielle Smith is as much a federalist as any of the federal Liberal politicians. They think Canada extends only to the suburbs of Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver.
Why would any sane person trust this US administration on anything? Hate Ottawa all you want, there is still no comparison. The grass definitely isn't greener......it's spray-painted.
There is some irony that the thing that supposedly 10% of Albertan strongly want would be then subject to US government control. It wasn’t a specific state that stopped keystone XL, it was Biden.
I think many of the keratosis are ill informed or just uneducated on what life in the US is actually like. They ought to go spend a month living in an area that they could afford if their Canadian dollars were converted to USD.
The whole grass is greener argument is easy to apply when you haven’t spent time down there. But the US has elections too. Democrats win there too. And I can just imagine the bellyaching involved with Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom is the next US president
I feel like the separatists can’t see the first for the trees and make impulsive decisions because of that.
I’m not sure that export taxes or even export caps were ever really on the table for oil from Alberta to the United States. A lot of that oil gets refined in the United States and then exported again to Laurentian Canada.
If there's anything that could provoke aggressive US action, it's threats of sudden shut-offs in energy supply. Alberta's bolshiness may just be protecting us from our own hubris.
This is kind of like arguing that Ford's ad featuring Ronald Reagan blew up the trade talks. Maybe it DID act as the proximate cause, but the real story was the Trump administration looking for an excuse to break things off.
And likewise in this case, if the Trump administration wants an excuse to scuttle the negotiations, they will find one.
Separatism is a bad idea for all kinds of reasons, but “it gives ammunition to bad faith actors” is a weak argument when those actors can, and will, turn literally anything into ammunition.
Carney is trying to compare Albertan seperatism with "Brexit", which he describes as a dangerous bluff. As with most things, he is completely wrong. The UK was part of a large common market (the EU) but chose to leave and "go it alone", because it hated the Brussels bureaucracy so much. Alberta, on the other hand, is only part of a disfunctional confederation (Provincial trade barriers anyone?) and will not have to go it alone if it leaves. As this article describes, from the viewpoint that it is bad for the ROC, across Alberta's southern border is the largest common market in the world and the US would welcome Alberta with open arms - either as a new State or as a special free trade partner. What maybe bad for the ROC is a huge opportunity for Alberta. While the UK may have screwed up the perceived economic benefits of Brexit, Albertans will be hard pressed not to score big once they escape from Ottawa and the Liberal's death grip and are free to negotiate their future directly with the US.
"Holds a knife to Canada's throat" with the threat of separation is an attempt to simplify a complex issue. Quebec was granted political and economic favours as an incentive to enter the Canadian confederation and Quebec has a guaranteed proportion of votes that forces all political parties to pander to Quebec if they seek power in Ottawa. The reality is that Quebec will continue to be the tail that wags the dog in Canadian politics. Alberta will never enjoy Quebec's advantages in Canada's confederation but a modicum of respect for its economic contributions to Canada would be welcome.
Reading all these comments, we are light years apart. This does not bode well for the country. If we are to move forward together, we have to address what has been done and how it will be repaired.
If Ottawa offered Alberta the exact same asymmetric federalist model it gave Quebec, for me, the grievances driving the current October 2026 referendum would vanish overnight.
A "Same Deal as Quebec" would dismantle Western alienation because it directly addresses all of their very legitimate complaints, IMHO.
For me, this is not going away and it will crystalize at the speed of social media and smart phones. This fight will continue and continue and continue, I suspect, now at the speed of AI.
We need to fix this country before we screw ourselves forever. It will not be accomplished unless there are constitutional talks - which come with risks of a national unity crisis and Quebec separatism catching fire once more. A terrible fear for certain, but there is a hell of a blaze currently burning out of control in Alberta, so we are in one right now.
Doing nothing to repair Ottawa's relationship with Alberta and the west is the only way forward and, yup, it's going to tick off Quebec. Quebec gets riled up when Ottawa makes the smallest move that weakens their control over Ottawa.
Canada has two separatist movements, fueled by cultural differences, language, economic matters and so much more. Is Quebec a nation? You know, because they truly believe they are and they have pretty much all the administrative and legislative tools to be one. Is Alberta a nation?
Again, federalists are going to have to address past wrongs. Like the National Energy Program. That terrible policy is the firmament upon which today's separatism movement has grown over the past four decades. It is living memory I suspect for most Albertans and Albertans in other provinces. It will be living memory for many more years to come.
If this can't be done, then confederation will fail. Not today, maybe not tomorrow. But it will fail. Canada needs to change or Canada will be changed.
Both sides need to be asked, I think, what would have to exist for Alberta to remain in Canada?
Well thank you Mr. Jack for penning one of the scariest articles on the upcoming negotiations and referendum. It's scary because its backed by facts and knowledge, sometimes difficult elements to find in such an emotionally hot topic.
I take the author's overall point. But I feel I have to point out the fact that for the most part oil is already "off the table" as a bargaining chip because the Americans already know that they have us over a barrel on that count. We need pipelines ... plural ... and to every coast. This is the only practical way to give us real options in terms of selling our oil to customers other than the US. Canada's failure to do this when we had the chance has done more damage to our bargaining position than any Alberta separatist drama will.
Years ago some of us were pointing out to anyone that would listen that pipelines are not just about making money, but are in our national interest. Canada didn't "need" a transcontinental railroad in 1881 either. There was already one transcontinental railroad (and something like 3 more on the way) that we could have hooked up to by simply building some lines south into the US. Canada built railroads largely because it served our national interest to do so. The fact that so many Canadians failed to see the importance of doing this in regards to pipelines is not on Alberta. And the subsequent weak bargaining position we now hold in terms of energy policy is also mostly on the feds, BC, Quebec, environmental activists, and all others who railed against pipelines and other energy infrastructure to tidewater.
I am not a separatist. But I certainly understand why so many of them find this so absolutely galling. As much as I wish we were not having this referendum, to pin Canada's poor bargaining position in terms of energy on Alberta is simply not fair or accurate.
To the rest of Canada: We. Warned. You. And you sneered, laughed, and said there was no business case. And so here we are. Bent over the very barrel that some of us tried to warn the rest of Canada about. The rest of Canada needs to own their part in this awful position in which we find ourselves.
The article seems to be a pretty strong argument for the notion that, in this narrow area, a referendum is in Alberta’s interest. Not a comment on the merits in aggregate
The reality is that our very own Liberal governments have done far more harm to Canada than Donald Trump has. The Liberals have also betrayed the Canadian people with mass immigration. They no longer get to demand silent obedience. If the Liberals can't keep the country united, that is a measure of their incompetence, not of Smith's (or other Canadians') misbehaviour.
Your use of the word "betrayed" implies that there was a special kind of cynicism with the mass immigration policy and/or that the policy was divisive for a lengthy period of time before it was reversed. What is the evidence for either being the case?
Are you saying it took 10 years for the Liberals to realize it was a mistake? They still haven't fixed it, either: we are still bringing in a large number without criminal background or economic checks. We also don't check if those ordered to leave actually leave. The problem is far from solved.
The question is not whether the problem is "solved"; the question is what the Conservatives who are supported by Alberta would, or would not, have done differently. There's no "betrayal" when the policies apparently had the support of a virtual consensus of the political class.
"Betrayed the Canadian people". Under Justin, the Liberals denied that there is such a thing as a Canadian people. They weren't misguidedly thinking that mass immigration would be best for the nation - they flatly denied the existence of the nation. That's what makes it a betrayal.
I must say I can only sit back in awe & chuckle at the reaction from the ROC towards a possible Alberta separation movement.
For decades you have pretty much done everything you can to suppress our opportunity to help ourselves & Canada as a whole flourish & prosper. Rules, regulations & bad policies aimed directly at impeding our prosperity.
And now you express disdain and surprise that a large portion of Albertans have said enough is enough. To lecture us by stating what fools we'd be by even considering such a thought shows a clear misunderstanding of how many Albertans feel about how we have been treated.
As we get closer to Canada Day maybe we can honestly assess whether the current structure of this country may be part of the problem. Central Canada has & will continue to drive the bus and the current structure ensures that. I personally think there is still hope & would prefer Alberta be part of Canada, put a restructured Canada. Canada is too large & too different to be governed as one entity. Canada would be better suited to accept this diversity & create a more regional approach & establish three blocks; the West, Central Canada & the Maritimes under a streamlined federal body.
If we want the Canada project to work we must honestly assess its shortcomings and modernize by being inclusive to ALL of Canada not just Ontario & Quebec.
By what objective economic or quality-of-life measure has the ROC tangible reduced Alberta's prosperity?
Kidding, right? No one can provide a graph showing Alberta's prosperity had NEP not happened, a bunch of pipeline projects had happened and the transfers payments were applied fairly.
Voting has consequences, fellow Eastern Canadians. Trump played you all like morons.
Carney did too
Well that much is obvious. I think the realization that they played into the hands of their most hated villain would be the harder hitting one for these voters, if they ever arrive there.
This analysis underlies the issues that have forced us into this problematic referendum. For people like Jacks, Alberta's economy is understood to be a bargaining chip needed to obtain concessions to protect the Parliamentarily guaranteed dairy cartel and the Liberal government's regulatory and subsidy damaged auto industry. They don't ask what type of trade deal would best benefit Alberta's economy. They ask how Alberta's resources can be leveraged to support uncompetitive industries. And for at least a few of those industries, the problem is government interference in business planning. I can't think of a bigger economic disaster for this country than the federal government's obsession with batteries.
Secondly, we have never had a unified economy acting together. You can't sell BC wine in Ontario. We can't sell Alberta energy in Quebec because we lack national transportation corridors. Provincial labour regulations and professional licensing often prevents cross-border economic projects.
Danielle Smith is as much a federalist as any of the federal Liberal politicians. They think Canada extends only to the suburbs of Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver.
Why won't Canada address our grievances gregory?
They won't even drop the absurd gun buy-back, which would be easy and cheap. Nothing else is getting fixed.
Or better yet even acknowledge them.
Why would any sane person trust this US administration on anything? Hate Ottawa all you want, there is still no comparison. The grass definitely isn't greener......it's spray-painted.
There can be comparison: SNC, WE, STDC and $80B in housing programs that don't seem to have built any houses.
There is some irony that the thing that supposedly 10% of Albertan strongly want would be then subject to US government control. It wasn’t a specific state that stopped keystone XL, it was Biden.
I think many of the keratosis are ill informed or just uneducated on what life in the US is actually like. They ought to go spend a month living in an area that they could afford if their Canadian dollars were converted to USD.
The whole grass is greener argument is easy to apply when you haven’t spent time down there. But the US has elections too. Democrats win there too. And I can just imagine the bellyaching involved with Kamala Harris or Gavin Newsom is the next US president
I feel like the separatists can’t see the first for the trees and make impulsive decisions because of that.
I’m not sure that export taxes or even export caps were ever really on the table for oil from Alberta to the United States. A lot of that oil gets refined in the United States and then exported again to Laurentian Canada.
If there's anything that could provoke aggressive US action, it's threats of sudden shut-offs in energy supply. Alberta's bolshiness may just be protecting us from our own hubris.
This is kind of like arguing that Ford's ad featuring Ronald Reagan blew up the trade talks. Maybe it DID act as the proximate cause, but the real story was the Trump administration looking for an excuse to break things off.
And likewise in this case, if the Trump administration wants an excuse to scuttle the negotiations, they will find one.
Separatism is a bad idea for all kinds of reasons, but “it gives ammunition to bad faith actors” is a weak argument when those actors can, and will, turn literally anything into ammunition.
Carney is trying to compare Albertan seperatism with "Brexit", which he describes as a dangerous bluff. As with most things, he is completely wrong. The UK was part of a large common market (the EU) but chose to leave and "go it alone", because it hated the Brussels bureaucracy so much. Alberta, on the other hand, is only part of a disfunctional confederation (Provincial trade barriers anyone?) and will not have to go it alone if it leaves. As this article describes, from the viewpoint that it is bad for the ROC, across Alberta's southern border is the largest common market in the world and the US would welcome Alberta with open arms - either as a new State or as a special free trade partner. What maybe bad for the ROC is a huge opportunity for Alberta. While the UK may have screwed up the perceived economic benefits of Brexit, Albertans will be hard pressed not to score big once they escape from Ottawa and the Liberal's death grip and are free to negotiate their future directly with the US.
How come this is never an issue when Quebec threatens to separate?
"Holds a knife to Canada's throat" with the threat of separation is an attempt to simplify a complex issue. Quebec was granted political and economic favours as an incentive to enter the Canadian confederation and Quebec has a guaranteed proportion of votes that forces all political parties to pander to Quebec if they seek power in Ottawa. The reality is that Quebec will continue to be the tail that wags the dog in Canadian politics. Alberta will never enjoy Quebec's advantages in Canada's confederation but a modicum of respect for its economic contributions to Canada would be welcome.
Reading all these comments, we are light years apart. This does not bode well for the country. If we are to move forward together, we have to address what has been done and how it will be repaired.
If Ottawa offered Alberta the exact same asymmetric federalist model it gave Quebec, for me, the grievances driving the current October 2026 referendum would vanish overnight.
A "Same Deal as Quebec" would dismantle Western alienation because it directly addresses all of their very legitimate complaints, IMHO.
For me, this is not going away and it will crystalize at the speed of social media and smart phones. This fight will continue and continue and continue, I suspect, now at the speed of AI.
We need to fix this country before we screw ourselves forever. It will not be accomplished unless there are constitutional talks - which come with risks of a national unity crisis and Quebec separatism catching fire once more. A terrible fear for certain, but there is a hell of a blaze currently burning out of control in Alberta, so we are in one right now.
Doing nothing to repair Ottawa's relationship with Alberta and the west is the only way forward and, yup, it's going to tick off Quebec. Quebec gets riled up when Ottawa makes the smallest move that weakens their control over Ottawa.
Canada has two separatist movements, fueled by cultural differences, language, economic matters and so much more. Is Quebec a nation? You know, because they truly believe they are and they have pretty much all the administrative and legislative tools to be one. Is Alberta a nation?
Again, federalists are going to have to address past wrongs. Like the National Energy Program. That terrible policy is the firmament upon which today's separatism movement has grown over the past four decades. It is living memory I suspect for most Albertans and Albertans in other provinces. It will be living memory for many more years to come.
If this can't be done, then confederation will fail. Not today, maybe not tomorrow. But it will fail. Canada needs to change or Canada will be changed.
Both sides need to be asked, I think, what would have to exist for Alberta to remain in Canada?
Well thank you Mr. Jack for penning one of the scariest articles on the upcoming negotiations and referendum. It's scary because its backed by facts and knowledge, sometimes difficult elements to find in such an emotionally hot topic.
I take the author's overall point. But I feel I have to point out the fact that for the most part oil is already "off the table" as a bargaining chip because the Americans already know that they have us over a barrel on that count. We need pipelines ... plural ... and to every coast. This is the only practical way to give us real options in terms of selling our oil to customers other than the US. Canada's failure to do this when we had the chance has done more damage to our bargaining position than any Alberta separatist drama will.
Years ago some of us were pointing out to anyone that would listen that pipelines are not just about making money, but are in our national interest. Canada didn't "need" a transcontinental railroad in 1881 either. There was already one transcontinental railroad (and something like 3 more on the way) that we could have hooked up to by simply building some lines south into the US. Canada built railroads largely because it served our national interest to do so. The fact that so many Canadians failed to see the importance of doing this in regards to pipelines is not on Alberta. And the subsequent weak bargaining position we now hold in terms of energy policy is also mostly on the feds, BC, Quebec, environmental activists, and all others who railed against pipelines and other energy infrastructure to tidewater.
I am not a separatist. But I certainly understand why so many of them find this so absolutely galling. As much as I wish we were not having this referendum, to pin Canada's poor bargaining position in terms of energy on Alberta is simply not fair or accurate.
To the rest of Canada: We. Warned. You. And you sneered, laughed, and said there was no business case. And so here we are. Bent over the very barrel that some of us tried to warn the rest of Canada about. The rest of Canada needs to own their part in this awful position in which we find ourselves.
The article seems to be a pretty strong argument for the notion that, in this narrow area, a referendum is in Alberta’s interest. Not a comment on the merits in aggregate