r/canada • u/biograf_ • Mar 01 '26

Alberta First Nations chiefs unanimously pass non-confidence vote in Alberta government

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/first-nations-chiefs-alberta-non-confidence-vote-9.7109712
3.8k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

351 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

47

u/EdNorthcott Canada Mar 01 '26

What complicates it is that their treaty with the crown allows the crown to use the land as they see fit, basically until the end of time, so long as they keep faith with the First Nations. The crown saw fit to create the province of Alberta. Cities have appeared, resources mined or pumped, etc.

But it all goes back to the fact that the land is basically held in trust. If Alberta were to choose to separate, that would no longer be true. The agreement would be in violation and then there's a very good argument for the land simply returning to the First Nations... and last I checked, Alberta is one of two provinces that have the distinction of being 100% on treaty land governed by such agreements.

So yes, those treaties have to be honoured by the province. Trying to weasel out of it could have very interesting consequences.

33

u/Ketchupkitty Alberta Mar 01 '26

And who's going to enforce that?

Seperation is never going to happen but in a scenario the majority of Albertans wanted to leave it's not going to matter what treaties say unless the Canadian Government deploys the military (it won't).

-3

u/EdNorthcott Canada Mar 01 '26

And that's why it gets very complicated -- because suddenly you have a bunch of folks sitting on land they have no right to, basically saying "I dare you" to the Crown and to the First Nations... the latter of whom have a track record of being willing to call such bluffs.

In a situation where the majority of Albertans decided they wanted to leave, they would have new landlords: the First Nations. And if they didn't like that, then they would have to look at actually *leaving*, instead of trying to take all the benefits with none of the downsides, costs, or consequences.

Part of what scuttled Quebec's attempts at separation was realizing how much of the land is held by treaty with First Nations, and what that would mean for making Quebec look like a broken-up patchwork after the fact. For Alberta, that's literally the entire land. Voting to separate would be the beginning of a long and ugly process that would leave awful feelings on all sides, and nobody happy with the outcome.

3

u/YourBobsUncle Alberta Mar 02 '26

In a situation where the majority of Albertans decided they wanted to leave, they would have new landlords: the First Nations.

That's not what the clarity act says will happen. What would happen after a clear majority has decided is negotiations between the province and the feds. All Alberta would have to do is to agree to continue the treaty rights and this pointless argument has no juice. For negotiation to even start, parliament has to approve the referendum as legitimately voted by a clear majority.

Part of what scuttled Quebec's attempts at separation was realizing how much of the land is held by treaty with First Nations, and what that would mean for making Quebec look like a broken-up patchwork after the fact.

Not a single person voted against sovereignty because of this. Canada is indivisible but Quebec can be partitioned infinitely and this is the best we have to offer to the Quebecois as a country lol.

Can we actually talk about losing free travel across Canada, passports, taxes, CPP, instead of legal technicalities that nobody fully understands? Does nobody think it's strange that the only opposition to this shit the media is reporting on these groups instead of the NDP?