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

[Good2Golf]

Alberta is about to table a proposal on a new pipeline and hopes and needs to attract private capital. A lot of it. This signals that Alberta presents greater political and economic risk than it did before

This…not to be under appreciated.

 

[brihard]

This…not to be under appreciated.

Narrator voice “It was, in fact, under appreciated.”

 

[Good2Golf]

Morgan Freeman would totally narrate that…

 

[brihard]

Morgan Freeman would totally narrate that…

Nine times out of ten that’s my internal narrator voice. The remaining ten percent is Samuel L Jackson.

 

[Good2Golf]

Sammy L is 40-50% for me…

 

[Altair]

In a nutshell, they will hold a provincial referendum to determine if the UCP government is democratically mandated to adopt a policy to move forward towards an actual separation referendum.

A win on this what I’ll call ‘mandate referendum’ by the separatists would cause the government to begin the consultations needed to develop a legal separation referendum question. In effect, rather than forcing the separatists to do the legwork and satisfy all the relevant legal criteria to advance their cause, Smith has decided the UCP will blow with the wind on this and will allow their policy on sovereignty to be externally imposed. “You show us the numbers, we’ll take this on”.

This is feckless on the part of Smith and the UCP. They’ve shown that as a party they are open and willing to advance the separatist cause. They’re unwilling to say “nope, you bring your issue through the courts and hammer out a legal path there”.

The one good thing is that the population will still have the chance to repudiate this in five months and consent the mandate. Problem though is that, because this first mandate referendum will simply open the door to separation without committing anyone to walking through, there’s a greater chance of ‘protest votes’ in favour to send some sort of message.

Big picture, Alberta is about to table a proposal on a new pipeline and hopes and needs to attract private capital. A lot of it. This signals that Alberta presents greater political and economic risk than it did before. The government will play footsies with separatists. Anyone considering a pipeline investment needs to consider the potential political and legal tumult of this mandate referendum returns a ‘yes’ to the mandate, kicking off a government-sponsored endeavour to move separation forward. That’s no bueno.

It also almost certainly means that if there’s a vote ‘yes’ this October for the referendum mandate, that matter will drag on to and through and will dominate the 2027 provincial election.

Smith has attempted to split the baby here. I don’t think her move is quite as politically adroit as some of you do. It’s a decision that lacks character or courage of convictions. She’s still completely pissed off the separatists while offering no real reassurance to the pro-Canada side.

I think we’re about to see some major internal drama within the UCP and the overlapping separatist movement.

Given the situation she got herself in by getting into bed with the separatists, and the collapse of the validity of the separatist initiative in the courts, she was faced with two choices.

She could fight to get the separatist question on the ballot and lose due to the courts. She at that point had to surrender or go total constitutional war against the courts and Canada, dragging confederation and her own legitimacy as a leader into question.

Or she could just go with the forever Canada petition and be out of a job before the Montreal Canadiens are out of the playoffs.

This allows her to split the difference, get herself out of the corner she backed herself in and claim that she is listening to the people while doing anything but.

She's saving her skin, and considering the other two choices she was presented with I think, and this is with the caveat that the leopards don't still find a way to eat her face, I think this was an astute move on her part.

Nobody will confuse me with a Danielle Smith fanboy but I am willing to give credit where credit is due. Now I just need the people of alberta to smash this to the ground and put it to bed for good. I say....75 percent pro Canada should do it, but I'm hoping for closer to 80.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Just for the record, here's the text of "the speech" (also archived here):

Premier's Address to the Province

Premier Danielle Smith discusses the province's plan to give Albertans a say in the path forward for Alberta and Canada.

www.alberta.ca

 

[MilEME09]

Just for the record, here's the text of "the speech" (also archived here):

Premier's Address to the Province

Premier Danielle Smith discusses the province's plan to give Albertans a say in the path forward for Alberta and Canada.

www.alberta.ca

Interesting to note, based on her public appearances. Its been determined the premieres speech was prerecorded on wednesday. Which further added fuel to the fire that the committee etc was all just for show and this was all a pre planned outcome.

 

[Lumber]

In a nutshell, they will hold a provincial referendum to determine if the UCP government is democratically mandated to adopt a policy to move forward towards an actual separation referendum.

A win on this what I’ll call ‘mandate referendum’ by the separatists would cause the government to begin the consultations needed to develop a legal separation referendum question. In effect, rather than forcing the separatists to do the legwork and satisfy all the relevant legal criteria to advance their cause, Smith has decided the UCP will blow with the wind on this and will allow their policy on sovereignty to be externally imposed. “You show us the numbers, we’ll take this on”.

This is feckless on the part of Smith and the UCP. They’ve shown that as a party they are open and willing to advance the separatist cause. They’re unwilling to say “nope, you bring your issue through the courts and hammer out a legal path there”.

The one good thing is that the population will still have the chance to repudiate this in five months and consent the mandate. Problem though is that, because this first mandate referendum will simply open the door to separation without committing anyone to walking through, there’s a greater chance of ‘protest votes’ in favour to send some sort of message.

Big picture, Alberta is about to table a proposal on a new pipeline and hopes and needs to attract private capital. A lot of it. This signals that Alberta presents greater political and economic risk than it did before. The government will play footsies with separatists. Anyone considering a pipeline investment needs to consider the potential political and legal tumult of this mandate referendum returns a ‘yes’ to the mandate, kicking off a government-sponsored endeavour to move separation forward. That’s no bueno.

It also almost certainly means that if there’s a vote ‘yes’ this October for the referendum mandate, that matter will drag on to and through and will dominate the 2027 provincial election.

Smith has attempted to split the baby here. I don’t think her move is quite as politically adroit as some of you do. It’s a decision that lacks character or courage of convictions. She’s still completely pissed off the separatists while offering no real reassurance to the pro-Canada side.

I think we’re about to see some major internal drama within the UCP and the overlapping separatist movement.

Tin-foil hat time, and I mean REALLY tin-foil hat.

She wants separation. She's had backroom conversations with the US and has their support for separation. All she needs to do is create turmoil and enough "pro-separation" noise. She has to make it seem like a large chunk of Alberta wants separation and that they are being suppressed by an unfair and corrupt Federal government who is violating the rights of Albertans to self-determination. The US then intervenes militarily to protect the rights of Albertans.

Tin-foil hat off.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Interesting to note, based on her public appearances. Its been determined the premieres speech was prerecorded on wednesday. Which further added fuel to the fire that the committee etc was all just for show and this was all a pre planned outcome.

And how did that time with PP's declaration that Team Blue's voting against separation, one wonders? I ask because I haven't been tracking chronology closely.

Besides, the political Rorschach still applies: Boosters'll say (rightly) that it don't matter when the right thing to say is said clearly and unambiguously, especially something of national imporance. Haters'll say (also rightly) it looks more opportunistic if PP timed his declaration to come after Madame Premier's.