All Things AB Separatism (split fm Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???)

[RangerRay]

Ab government intervenes on the side of the separation side

Government lawyer will be in court today to intervene on the side of Alberta separatists

The province argues a separatist’s proposed referendum question should be allowed to be on a petition without a court review

albertapolitics.substack.com

Of course they did…

 

[PuckChaser]

Ab government intervenes on the side of the separation side

Government lawyer will be in court today to intervene on the side of Alberta separatists

The province argues a separatist’s proposed referendum question should be allowed to be on a petition without a court review

albertapolitics.substack.com

Not at all. If you actually read the article the lawyer is arguing the question followed the relevant acts for citizens to bring forward referendum questions and should be allowed as there is no grounds to stop it. Welcome to democracy, where everyone gets to participate, not just the people you agree with.

 

[brihard]

Much better to hammer out the constitutionality of the question now before any petition is put to voters, rather than have all that work done and then it’s found to have not hit the necessary legal standards later. Part and parcel of this is letting appropriate intervenors - particularly in this case First Nations - make their legal representations.

Get the question right and then put it forth for petition.

 

[Altair]

Much better to hammer out the constitutionality of the question now before any petition is put to voters, rather than have all that work done and then it’s found to have not hit the necessary legal standards later. Part and parcel of this is letting appropriate intervenors - particularly in this case First Nations - make their legal representations.

Get the question right and then put it forth for petition.

As an added bonus, giving the pro Canada referendum side a head start.

 

[brihard]

As an added bonus, giving the pro Canada referendum side a head start.

Which is good too. However the question reads, give the Alberta voters the chance to express their will so they and businesses have greater certainty and stability. Either question moves that goal forward.

 

[McG]

Ab government intervenes on the side of the separation side

Government lawyer will be in court today to intervene on the side of Alberta separatists

The province argues a separatist’s proposed referendum question should be allowed to be on a petition without a court review

albertapolitics.substack.com

Yes, it is Separatist Smith’s government.

 

[PuckChaser]

If you'd like to actually hear from Danielle Smith on her views for separation, this interview with Steve Paikin clearly outlines her position.

 

[Altair]

If you'd like to actually hear from Danielle Smith on her views for separation, this interview with Steve Paikin clearly outlines her position.

I feel like actions speak louder than words.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Perhaps they should just use the same approved question Quebec used?

Do you agree that Quebec Alberta should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership, within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec Alberta and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995 January 2026

 

[PuckChaser]

I feel like actions speak louder than words.

So maybe outline some. Her words tell me she doesn't see the need to separate but understands why people are angry. She also supports their democratic right to hold a referendum under the laws (just like Quebec did) but outlines the very real challenges that most people wouldn't understand. @Fishbone Jones makes a great point, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Ultimately Alberta wants the same rights as Quebec and is willing to push the same threats that Quebec has been doing for 40 years to get their way.

I think the "actions" are being seen by people with a predetermined opinion and cannot see past partisan hate for her.

 

[RangerRay]

So maybe outline some. Her words tell me she doesn't see the need to separate but understands why people are angry. She also supports their democratic right to hold a referendum under the laws (just like Quebec did) but outlines the very real challenges that most people wouldn't understand. @Fishbone Jones makes a great point, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Ultimately Alberta wants the same rights as Quebec and is willing to push the same threats that Quebec has been doing for 40 years to get their way.

I think the "actions" are being seen by people with a predetermined opinion and cannot see past partisan hate for her.

Her actions were to change the laws to make it easier for the separatists to get a referendum, while talking out of both sides of her mouth, basically saying “Hey, let’s see what happens”. Not exactly the actions of a federalist government.

 

[PuckChaser]

Her actions were to change the laws to make it easier for the separatists to get a referendum, while talking out of both sides of her mouth, basically saying “Hey, let’s see what happens”. Not exactly the actions of a federalist government.

Were those laws specific to separatist referendums, or any referendums? You're saying you're upset that she's allowed the people of Alberta to have more of a democratic say in their affairs than every 4 years for each provincial election?

Democracy is allowing people who have opposing or even terrible views from you have a voice, but trusting in the vast majority to be centrists and vote them down.

 

[brihard]

The wording of the 1995 Quebec Referendum predated the 1999 Clarity Act. The matter was passed specifically because of the ambiguity in the 1995 referendum question in Quebec. Simply aping the 1995 Quebec wording wouldn’t work.

 

[Remius]

Perhaps they should just use the same approved question Quebec used?

Do you agree that Quebec Alberta should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership, within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec Alberta and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995 January 2026

No. That question resulted in the Clarity Act. Exactly because it was ambiguous and done so purposefully.

Keep it clear and to the point.

What’s good for the goose was never good for the goose to start with.

 

[RangerRay]

Were those laws specific to separatist referendums, or any referendums? You're saying you're upset that she's allowed the people of Alberta to have more of a democratic say in their affairs than every 4 years for each provincial election?

Democracy is allowing people who have opposing or even terrible views from you have a voice, but trusting in the vast majority to be centrists and vote them down.

Saying that the government made referenda in general easier had nothing to do with separatism at the same time some people started agitating for a separation referendum is disingenuous or naive. Again, a disinterested government would just tell the proponents good luck under the current rules without putting their thumb on the scale.

There’s a reason why referenda laws traditionally have a high bar. Otherwise, you become like California that keep creating and rescinding laws every four years by referenda, or passing silly laws that make no sense.