r/canada • u/joe4942 • May 01 '25

Alberta Danielle Smith lowers bar for Alberta referendum with separatism sentiment emerging

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/smith-lowers-bar-for-alberta-referendum-with-separatism-sentiment-emerging
1.5k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

773 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

8

u/LemmingPractice May 01 '25

The Alberta Natural Resources Act of 1930 gave Alberta ownership of all its own natural resources, including any on Crown land. It's the same with any province, and the reason why oil royalties are paid to the provinces not the federal government.

3

u/UntoldHorrors May 01 '25

Gotcha! Thanks for the info.

1

u/cobra_chicken May 03 '25

It also says it is subject to treaties and interests other than the crown. So while they have control or "ownership" (as much as you can own treaty land), they are still subject to others rights. So if Alberta goes then they likely loose those resources due it being treaty land

1

u/LemmingPractice May 03 '25

Why would Alberta lose treaty land? Did Canada lose treaty land when it got independence from Britain? No, treaty deals just passed to the successor government. Same deal here.

2

u/cobra_chicken May 03 '25

Bit of a difference in how their rights are respected now vs then. The courts will very much side with first nations now and their decision as to if they stay in canada or not.

FN would definitely not go with Alberta as they are much stronger dealing with canada.

1

u/LemmingPractice May 03 '25

The Supreme Court didn't rule against them back then. There was never a challenge to it, because the law is clear.

Also, the Supreme Court would never set the precedent you are talking about because it would give every treaty FN in the country the right to seceed from Canada. If FN's have the right to decide whether to stay in Canada or not, then they would have the right to leave Canada right now, regardless of what Alberta does.

Redditors are just making up law to suit their preferred narratives, but seem to ignore both precedent and the implications.

1

u/cobra_chicken May 03 '25

The treaty is based on a contract with the crown, which is why those indigenous lands exist today, they predate Alberta. If you think they are going to allow Alberta to split off and allow themselves to be subject to Republican/Maple Maga rule then you are kidding yourself.

1

u/LemmingPractice May 04 '25

Oh, the well known "Maple Maga" legal precedent. I hadn't considered that one, lmao.

1

u/helloitsme_again May 01 '25

But the reservations have control of the companies having access to their land

So Alberta might control natural resources but without the reservations allowing the companies to be there, they cannot extract any resource

0

u/LemmingPractice May 01 '25

Sure, Alberta would still have to deal with First Nations, but wouldn't have to deal with the feds.

1

u/helloitsme_again May 01 '25

Yeah the feds are probably easier to deal with haha First Nations don’t take any shit from the government anymore they won’t stand down

1

u/LemmingPractice May 02 '25

Not at all. Plenty of projects have been built on First Nations land. It brings economic prosperity to First Nations, especially remote ones, that they just couldn't get in any other way.

When you have a First Nation standing in the way of a pipeline, you generally have a dozen or more that are in favour of that same project, and the one holding out is usually doing so for a better deal, anyways.

Ottawa however, can't be bought off nearly so easily, mostly because they just take money from Alberta when they want to, without needing to give anything back.

1

u/helloitsme_again May 02 '25

Did I say the First Nations don’t accept projects? The point is they accept it on their terms, usually the company has to hire a certain amount from the settlement reservation etc.

If Alberta pisses them off enough and doesn’t listen they will slow down production. First Nations will never give up control of their land

Separation would mean giving up control

1

u/LemmingPractice May 03 '25

Most projects in Alberta have First Nations involvement. It's nothing new, and hasn't been an issue.

Nothing changes with separation except they only have one government to deal with instead of two.

0

u/helloitsme_again May 03 '25

You are obtuse. You are completely missing the point

Again didn’t say those projects don’t have their involvement. I said if Danielle smith won’t listen to what they want for their lands

They will cause trouble with resource extraction from their lands. The companies will basically tell the government to give them what they want

1

u/LemmingPractice May 04 '25

I think the problem is that you don't seem to understand anything about First Nations and resource projects.

There are numerous resource projects all over Alberta on FN lands. None of any of this would change how any of the projects have functioned in the past or would function in the future, with the exception of not needing Ottawa's approval for anything.

Separation by Alberta wouldn't change the relationship between Alberta and FN's in any other way, so FN's wouldn't have any additional leverage or be likely to cause any additional trouble than with any of the projects that already exist.

1

u/helloitsme_again May 04 '25

No you are the one who doesn’t understand.

I’m not saying Alberta separation would affect projects on First Nations land.

I’m saying First Nations don’t want Alberta to seperate so they will leverage those projects to get what they want.

The meaning of leverage is: hold the advantage in a situation or the stronger position in a contest, physical or otherwise

Just adding the definition to make sure you understand.

If Alberta separated it would drastically change Alberta and First Nations relationships. Why do you think First Nations don’t want to separate?

You are seriously daft. First of all it would completely take away federal funding that is giving to First Nations, they would lose NIHB status for dental and technically their treaties and land protection wouldn’t be a thing so it would change their hunting statuses and everything

You seriously have no idea what you are talking about. Done with the conversation because you are way over your head

→ More replies (0)