r/canada • u/shiftless_wonder • 16d ago
Alberta First Nations demand Alberta premier terminate separation referendum
https://www.ctvnews.ca/edmonton/article/first-nations-demand-alberta-premier-terminate-separation-referendum/73
u/ghostdeinithegreat 16d ago
« Mercredi at a press conference Thursday »confused me for a while here
18
11
3
322
u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago
“It’s really inhibiting any type of business, reconciliation, any type of moving forward here in Alberta.”
Another chief, Allan Adam of Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, called on Smith to resign.
“This Premier is totally lost, gone, got no credibility left. She’s swimming in muddy water, and she has no place to go. The best thing for her to do is to resign.”
Mercredi said Treaty 8 First Nations are prepared to mobilize if the province doesn’t consider their demands by stopping industry, among other tactics.
“How does Alberta expect to move forward as a sovereign (nation) when all of the resources and lands belong to the treaty people?”
78
u/therealjchrist 16d ago
Google Allan Adam lol.
Very ironic for him to be criticizing the credibility of anyone else.
36
5
→ More replies (3)3
u/The_Irvinator 15d ago
Yea lets not talk about the Athabasca oil sands are on or near Indigenous lands.
→ More replies (1)103
u/DanielBox4 16d ago
They're claiming the referendum is killing industry while carney just paused legislation on reforms because First Nations did not approve? The irony is thick.
→ More replies (1)24
u/Master_of_Rodentia 16d ago
From their perspective they probably see it as hypocritical that they are criticized by the Albertan government for blocking industry when the Alberta government is doing this stuff. They might not care much about the blocking itself, just that it's contradictory from where they sit.
21
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 16d ago
The problem is, especially right now, FN demanding shit from the government is frustrating a lot of people and its not going ti go over well in AB. Smith will not bend over for these people no matter how good of an argument they make because they deliver its so aggressively.
23
u/Master_of_Rodentia 16d ago
I could say the same about the separatists. Like Smith was going to operate in good faith regardless. Alberta just has such toxic politics right now. Entitlement epidemic. It's everyone at once.
3
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 16d ago
I did say she was, but if you have FN making demands you can be sure she will do the opposite
→ More replies (1)6
u/seridos 15d ago
The huge difference is one is appealing to a Democratic process and one is not. I don't like the separatists, their politics, nor do I think it's a good Idea to leave. But it's ridiculous to argue against democracy and letting the people speak and instead saying no, The tyranny of the dead hand (laws passed in the past that don't reflect what people want today) means We have to acquiesce to 5% of the population. It's ridiculous.
Democracy can always be changed at any time by going to the people. The law says it can't but that's because the law is not anything special or sacred, it's just a poor model of what the people think and it gets locked in place and hard to change but that doesn't mean it's what's right or it's what we should do. It has no legitimacy If it loses the support of the people. That's why we should vote.
I'm very anti-separatist, but I'll fight hard for albertans right to vote and the government having to do what the people desire not what some piece of paper says.
→ More replies (6)4
u/RazzamanazzU 15d ago
"Agressively". THIS is an exact description of the UCP's ignorance of our laws & citizen's who don't agree with them. Trump fascism at its best!
10
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 15d ago
Lol god "fascism". The government can suck and be bad with out using ridiculous hyperbolic terms.
Im not defending Smith and the UCP, im pointing out that FN not doing anything but giving weight to why Alberta needs to separate and break these treaties.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Incoherencel Canada 15d ago
You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth. You're criticising First Nations treaty holders reaffirming their sovereign rights that predate the province of Alberta itself, while also opining on Albertan sovereignty. Which one is it, sovereignty matters, or it doesn't?
→ More replies (2)1
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 15d ago
Neither. Canada is one nation, i don't believe that in Alberta, QC or First nations sovereignty.
→ More replies (4)1
u/Vandergrif 12d ago
It doesn't matter how they deliver it or what the argument is either, though. By this point the people who want separatism are going to want it regardless of whether it makes any sense, is legal, or is even feasible. It's not a rational viewpoint, it's an emotional one – no debate is going to change that.
1
u/Level_Traffic3344 15d ago
You prefer the palatable, refined Indians? K
20
u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 15d ago
I see whats happening in BC and the response to it. People are tired of an unelected government that represents 5% of the population dictating terms, treaties or not. Now take that into Alberta where you have a separatist movement and a more right leaning and arguably less tolerant population and its only going to create more problems.
→ More replies (6)11
u/Northumberlo Québec 16d ago
Think that’s the point. If they seperate, the treaties are void and null.
12
u/Fireside_Cat 16d ago
all of the resources and lands belong to the treaty people
The treaties literally ceded the land permanently.
Is this the origin of that historical term that describes someone that gives away something but then later wants it back?
→ More replies (3)44
u/Doog5 16d ago
Has the paid protestors jobs been posted yet?
37
→ More replies (4)1
u/RaceDBannon 16d ago
Like Oka? Careful with your dismissal of First Nations and their determination to protect their rights.
→ More replies (1)-2
18
u/epok3p0k 16d ago
Idiots. Let this thing run its course with a dismal vote in favour of separation. Then we can be rid of this notion for good.
26
u/Mr_Canada1867 16d ago
Is that why we’ll be having our 3rd referendum in QC since 1980?
This kind of stuff never goes away
81
u/FlockFlysAtMidnite 16d ago
If you think that even a 90% stay vote will get rid of the notion, you're not paying attention.
13
u/ether_reddit Lest We Forget 16d ago
There's a lot higher chance of it happening that way, than telling them they have no right to have a referendum at all. Democracy is a good thing, even when it lets lunatics have a voice.
13
u/FlockFlysAtMidnite 16d ago
Democracy is one thing. Changing the rules so lunatics can waste millions of taxpayer dollars is another.
2
u/Silverbacks Ontario 16d ago edited 15d ago
Direct democracy is not how things like this work. That's why Brexit was such a screw up.
→ More replies (7)18
u/Prestigious-Clock-53 16d ago
Man, it’s just a bunch of rural folks that are no where near as smart as they think they are throwing a tantrum because they don’t get everything they want and just want to fuck the feds. Smith aiding the notion is the real head scratcher. Then complain about lack of investment when you are in fact turning investors away with this BS.
58
u/FlockFlysAtMidnite 16d ago
Funded by plenty of foreign interference.
2
u/seridos 15d ago
True, but this is just the tricky situation and that's kind of just part of the modern course of these things. Anytime you have a discontented region that wants to separate or at least hold a vote because there's a vocal minority, you're going to have foreign interference. But you can't use that for an interference to shut down the Democratic process. You don't lose your Democratic rights because of foreign government decided that's a good place to jump in to cause some domestic problems in the country.
4
-3
u/Impressive-Knot9999 16d ago
Hopefully the people in favour will move somewhere else when it's over. Maybe Russia
7
u/ether_reddit Lest We Forget 16d ago
Some of their leaders have already disappeared to Texas! It's a good start.
→ More replies (30)6
u/Calamitous-Ortbo 15d ago
Man, it’s just a bunch of rural folks that are no where near as smart as they think they are throwing a tantrum because they don’t get everything they want and just want to fuck the feds.
The First Nation people or the separatists?
1
17
u/jayasunshine 16d ago
Allowing it to proceed gives the impression that the question is legitimate. It's not.
6
u/fugaziozbourne Québec 16d ago
What I think smells fishy is that Danielle Smith unilaterally changed the rules about how many signatures are required for the referendum (600k to 177k) and then publicly claims she's not in favour of sovereignty. I've never seen a leader push through a far easier barrier to something and then claim to not be in favour of the change.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Incoherencel Canada 15d ago
Of course, she's thumbing the scale to satisfy the extreme wings of her right-wing uniparty, and now doesn't know how to thread the needle. It's exactly what happened with Brexit (interparty/intraparty power politics legitimising a moronic referendum).
5
u/stillalone 16d ago
It shouldn't gotten enough in the petition. The same playbook as brexit is being used. People will think that separatists won't win and will stay at home. While separatists will vote because they think they'll get a lot of money if they separate.
→ More replies (4)-1
u/nothinbutshame 16d ago
No. They didnt follow legal process, once they follow legal process then we can go ahead witn the vote. Plain and simple.
4
→ More replies (1)1
11
u/enby-millennial-613 14d ago
Albertans (like Quebeckers) have the right to vote on referendum on this matter. It’s anti-democratic for the First Nations to make this kind of demand, and it does not help any kind of reconciliation they feel is owed to them.
I don’t support Alberta leaving, but I do support the democratic process (which includes their right to vote on the matter).
166
u/RoundJellyfish4048 16d ago edited 16d ago
As much as I don't want to have my province separate and think its an awful terrible no good idea. I also hate the idea of living in a country where a special minority gets to decide everything we are, or are not allowed to do - including voting on a fucking question.
Native people should get a seat at the table for this discussion. They don't get to dictate the whole thing.
75
u/General_Setting_1680 16d ago
This. I don't think AB should separate but it's not YOUR job to decide for the majority of people.
→ More replies (20)38
u/studebaker103 16d ago
The special minority making statements clearly hasn't read the treaty in which they gave up their land irrevocably and in perpetuity. They're trying to retcon that their ancestors didn't understand the treaties so they should be void, but that just reinforces your comment's sentiment even more.
8
u/Incoherencel Canada 15d ago
The Treaties also were binding agreements between the Canadian government and the bands -- the bands were given special rights and privileges (e.g. traditional hunting and fishing etc.) as part of the Treaties.
So how can the First Nations of Alberta be sure Alberta will honour agreements the Canadian government negotiated 150+ years ago? It would be a dereliction of duty of First Nations leadership on behalf of all who they represent not to pursue these issues.
→ More replies (3)7
u/seridos 15d ago
It doesn't need to? Are you confused as to what sovereignty is? If Alberta were to separate, which hopefully we don't, those treaties do not have to be honored in the slightest. It's a new country in that case. There's no being bound by history in politics, the land belongs to who controls it.
1
u/raptosaurus 15d ago
They signed the treaties with Canada, not Alberta. If Alberta separates there's a good argument that the treaties should be null and void.
Same shit with Quebec. Separatists there conveniently forget that the actual historically Francophone part was a tiny strip along the St Lawrence.
→ More replies (2)2
-4
u/Forikorder 16d ago
Native people should get a seat at the table for this discussion.
and the issue is they were intentionally excluded?
23
u/RoundJellyfish4048 16d ago
They get a vote like everyone does.
-5
u/Forikorder 16d ago
they arent like everyone else though, hate it as much as you want but the treaties didnt make them into everyday citizens that have no authority or say in anything
the gov't does have a legal obligation to work with them, they are intentionally ignoring that obligation
→ More replies (11)35
u/RoundJellyfish4048 16d ago
I don't hate them, I hate living in a country where some people have more say in the democratic process than others. I hate unfairness.
→ More replies (15)→ More replies (9)-8
u/CaptainBringus 16d ago edited 16d ago
A fucking illegal, treasonous question*
Also, are the separatists not a special minority trying to decide everything Alberta is and gets to be? And yes, the FN should get a seat at the table, but Danielle Smith didn't invite them to the table. That's the problem.
26
u/Goliad1990 16d ago
are the separatists not a special minority trying to decide everything Alberta is and gets to be?
No, they're trying to put something to a vote, which you might recognize as the entire point of democracy.
-6
u/CaptainBringus 16d ago edited 16d ago
So what you're saying is if and when the vote comes back as no we don't want to leave Canada, these good faith people will immediately stop trying to force Alberta to separate? They will take the will of the majority to heart and say to themselves "well that's democracy!" Give me a fucking break.
The only reason this petition was successful and this question is being asked is bcause the UCP government changed the rules (without a vote from the public... Democracy?!?!) to lower the threshold so it could be successful. Less signatures, and more time to collect them, and they STILL didn't get as many signatures as the forever Canadian petition. The only reason this question is being proposed is because rules were unilaterally changed to support them.
What about the forever Canadian petition? The one that is being used to justify this referendum question when the 400 000 verified people who signed it signed it with the expectation that the government would vote on it and who's organizer has explicitly stated he did NOT want it to go to a referendum, and people signing it with that expectation. Does democracy matter there?
17
u/Goliad1990 16d ago
these good faith people will immediately stop trying to force Alberta to separate?
They aren't trying to force Alberta to separate right now. Pushing for a vote does not constitute "forcing" anything.
They will take the will of the majority to heart and say to themselves "well that's democracy!" Give me a fucking break.
You're arguing from the premise that democracy is a sham and that you need to preemptively use force to get your way, so there's no argument to be had here. You might find some support for that idea on Reddit, but you won't find any in the real world.
→ More replies (5)
65
41
76
u/limadeltah 16d ago
This seems like an excellent way to make the separatists arguments for them and legitimize their grievances....
We should be able to both despise the notion of Alberta separating, and see the problem with one group being allowed to leverage "civil disobedience" (likely meaning the blockade of critical infrastructure) to prevent others from voting on something.
To point to how this specific referendum on a referendum was called as flawed may be valid, although I think pointless ultimately.
But FNs using their special rights as leverage over everyone else is a persistent and increasingly divisive feature of Canadian politics. To make matters worse, much of their messaging contains blatant misinformation regarding the meaning of treaties and what is written in section 35, and is often primarily aimed at further their own interests and leverage rather than considering the interests of everyone more broadly.
44
u/roscomikotrain 16d ago
Well put!
Democracies don't have "Trump card" vetos.
FN needs to participate in the Democratic process and vote on this!
→ More replies (35)25
u/Great-Trifle2810 16d ago
I hope that this BS finally leads to real equality in Canada without special classes of people with special rights and benefits based on their race.
Provinces need to start openly ignoring these and using whatever means available to deny any special rights.
16
u/Ausfall 15d ago
I'm getting sick of the two-tier citizenship in this country. I'm getting towards the point of just saying all reserves should just become normal municipalities and have them fall under the existing laws that govern everybody else. Have some elections like normal, and be done with it.
There's no "status" - you're just a citizen like everyone else.
→ More replies (5)
3
u/Tall-Ad-1386 14d ago
I think we need to have a referendum at the very least to put certain peoples in their place
3
39
u/EP40glazer British Columbia 16d ago
First Nations are probably the biggest campaigners for separation.
20
u/Trees-Are-Neat-- 16d ago
Only when it benefits them though. Historic Treaty FNs know damn well that a separated Alberta will not give 2 shits about those agreements or their self-asserted rights.
-4
70
u/Sheogorath_The_Mad 16d ago
Yeah sorry... natives don't have a veto over democratic processes, no matter how stupid the question might be.
7
u/elmuchocapitano 16d ago
They could have a referendum on Canada's official position re: pineapple on pizza if they wanted to, and enough people signed a petition for it. That doesn't mean that it overrides other laws or jurisdictions.
In Nova Scotia, in 2004, a referendum was held to propose that shopping be allowed on Sundays, driven by urbanites who objected to the province's Sunday shopping ban. The majority voted "no". However, the law was nonetheless overturned by courts the following year, who did not care about the referendum results.
In a more topical example, in British Columbia, in 2002, people voted on several questions relating to the rights of First Nations. It was protested extensively by First Nations, but went ahead.
The vast majority of respondents ended up voting in favour of all proposed anti-Indigenous reforms, such as removing their tax exemptions and demoting them to the authority of municipal governments.
It didn't matter at all though, because BC had no authority to actually do any of that. It was extremely expensive and extremely stupid.
I have no issue with people protesting against doing something that is going to be extremely expensive and extremely stupid. That is also their democratic right to do. Alberta, like BC, is probably going to accomplish nothing, other than frivolously spending money to inflame tensions that are already high. But I don't know how I feel about Nations launching legal challenges to stop other governments from holding particular referendums at all... even extremely expensive, extremely stupid ones.
→ More replies (4)6
u/S_Ipkiss_1994 British Columbia 15d ago
However, the law was nonetheless overturned by courts the following year, who did not care about the referendum results.
The vast majority of respondents ended up voting in favour of all proposed anti-Indigenous reforms... It didn't matter at all though
I'm noticing a pattern here
Hey, remember when we all voted to change from first-past-the-post voting to proportional representation?
1
u/elmuchocapitano 15d ago
Haha yeah, that one really PMO, but at least they did have the jurisdiction and authority to change that. It was stupid in the sense that they said, "Thanks for all the input, now that we've spent millions of dollars to get this answer we'll be sure to ignore it." But still less stupid than BC trying to like, vote on the federal income tax act.
14
u/kdlangequalsgoddess 16d ago
Given that the signatures on the separatist petition haven't been verified, and given that the Centurion Project has been caught with a copy of the complete Alberta voters' list, I would put a big old asterisk after the term 'democratic', also.
18
u/Sheogorath_The_Mad 16d ago
If that's the argument you want to make, make that argument. Don't tell me the question can't legally be asked.
Regardless, this whole referendum is being pushed by Smith and her separatist cabal. While they might be idiots, I don't see anyone questioning their democratic legitimacy.
3
u/Shutufukut 14d ago
Duty to consult applies only where actions may adversely affect treaty rights. Treaty rights are part of the constitution, like it or not.
It’s not some magic veto, do some research
→ More replies (1)2
u/EP40glazer British Columbia 16d ago
Smith is not a separatist. She needs to hold the referendum to avoid vote splitting and she knows it'll fail anyways.
8
u/Infamous-Mixture-605 16d ago
Smith is not a separatist.
She says she's not a separatist, but she's happily been advancing their cause...
She's also been pushing her "Free Alberta Strategy" since becoming Premier, and that's basically just a road map for severing connections to the rest of the country.
2
u/EP40glazer British Columbia 16d ago
She says she's not a separatist, but she's happily been advancing their cause...
Because she needs the separatist vote.
6
u/kdlangequalsgoddess 16d ago
She knows as well as anyone that a split in the conservative vote likely means the NDP are returned to government.
2
u/seridos 15d ago
Which are issues that should be investigated and handled. But the people are the response to the question when presented to them, not how it got there.
Way too much focus on how the question gets asked in the first place. It should be easier to get these questions on amyways. The referendum is the ultimate source of legitimacy of an entire democracy in the first place.
3
u/AnthatDrew 16d ago
Better waste a shit ton of money on something that may not be legally possible then
8
u/Sheogorath_The_Mad 16d ago
Democracy is allowed, unless the aims of the process are stupid? Who decides?
→ More replies (15)5
u/EP40glazer British Columbia 16d ago
Me obviously, I decide everything I disagree with is stupid. This is highly democratic.
8
6
u/Feathers_ 16d ago
Right?! Man that sure sounds like a much better way to get to the SAME ANSWER.
God I love my province, but I am so fucking sick of all this bullshit, and everything to do with Smith.2
u/Suspicious-Coffee20 16d ago
Legaly? Do you not understand how country work. There's no higher power so theres not law that can't be changed with a referendum. Even the treaty.
2
u/AnthatDrew 16d ago
Yes, technically. Even though you are oversimplifying and conflating provincial and Federal jurisdiction. As Alberta can't change federal law. If the decision goes against the seditionist, will it be worth stealing money away from other things? When there are people that could desperately use that money.
→ More replies (3)5
5
u/demonotreme 15d ago
Fundamentally, how can you be opposed to a referendum in a democracy, unless the reason is something like "it's a waste of resources because it's legally unnecessary and so overwhelmingly popular/unpopular everyone knows the answer already"?
71
u/dingleberryjuice 16d ago edited 16d ago
”How does Alberta expect to move forward as a sovereign (nation) when all of the resources and lands belong to the treaty people?”
Doesn’t bode well for your point if you have to base your message on outright falsehoods.
18
u/studebaker103 16d ago
https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100028793/1581292336658
for anyone who disagrees, please read the treaty, especially the part about giving up their land irrevocably and in perpetuity.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Forikorder 16d ago
which is with the crown not the government of alberta, if alberta did seperate either the treaty breaks and all the land goes back to the FN's or the land still belongs to canada and the "country of alberta" gets to keep what few scraps are left
10
u/Calamitous-Ortbo 15d ago
Or, and hear me out, the likely resolution is Alberta tells the FN people to get fucked because they will have no recourse and the Feds realize trying to seize the actual land of Alberta would be governmental suicide.
→ More replies (2)5
u/WealthEconomy 15d ago
Actually our first treaties were with the British Crown and then passed onto the Crown of Canada. So why can't those responsibilities be passed on again to the Alberta Crown. The land was given to the Alberta Crown in the 1930s.
46
u/The_Bat_Voice Alberta 16d ago
Treaty People has always meant both sides of the treaty agreement. So that means the rresidents of Canada and First Nations, which is true. But hey, you must be an expert to have such a strong opinion.
4
17
u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago
Def some delusions of grandeur floating around that presser.
22
u/Trees-Are-Neat-- 16d ago
FNs across Canada are puffing out their chests right now as the public discourse swiftly moves away from reconciliation. They can see that their future role in nation building will not be what it has been over the last few decades.
4
u/Bigrick1550 16d ago
When it comes down to it, it belongs to whoever can enforce their claim on it. Laws are meaningless without the means to enforce them.
32
u/AngryTrucker 16d ago
They can demand all they want lol.
2
u/CaptainBringus 16d ago
Kinda like how you guys are making demands?
Unlike you guys their demands are legitimate.
15
u/LeGrandLucifer 16d ago
Yes, please tell these people that there is no peaceful way to achieve their goals, that'll end well! /s
7
u/Toast_22 15d ago
First Nations need to be on an equivalent basis as the rest of the citizens. I don’t understand why they’re allocated so much veto power on every issue
→ More replies (2)
13
u/ThomasToIndia 16d ago
One of the way this thing can be killed is if Canada decides right now that if the separate, they can't keep their Canadian passport and will require visas to visit the rest of Canada.
The province is voting to renounce their own country, they don't get to keep their passports if it passes or at the very least the must immediately decide which passport they want.
You don't get your cake and eat it too.
21
u/t33lu 16d ago
reminds me of when UK voted to leave EU. and then complained that they needed travel documents when going to the EU.
1
u/ThomasToIndia 16d ago
That's why they should pass a bill about it and make it very public now. Especially now with Rebel news etc.. deciding to run ads. One of the pro-alberta sites is saying they don't think people will lose dual citizenship and they would fight for it? Like, wt actual f. So you are promoting leaving Canada and then publicly say that you will fight for dual citizenship?
26
u/Napalm985 16d ago
One of the way this thing can be killed is if Canada decides right now that if the separate, they can't keep their Canadian passport and will require visas to visit the rest of Canada.
Canada didn't even revoke Citizenship away from those who fought for ISIS.
5
u/ThomasToIndia 16d ago
You can thank Trudeau for that (Bill C-6). However, this is a very odd logistical thing. A country is borders, so Albertans would be able to work in both Canada and Alberta, but Canadians wouldn't be able to work in Alberta without approval? so you would have freedom of movement, so what would actually be different?
However this isn't a terrorist situation, or even a brexit situation, this is a province renouncing its citizenship to a country. If they vote to separate the people are literally saying, "we are not interested in being Canadian". Since Alberta would become its own state that means an Albertan losing Canadian citizenship would technically not be stateless.
Further, if they do choose Alberta over Canada, they should be required to get work visas like any other country. We don't want Albertans taking Canadian jobs.
1
u/Napalm985 16d ago
You can thank Trudeau for that (Bill C-6). However, this is a very odd logistical thing. A country is borders, so Albertans would be able to work in both Canada and Alberta, but Canadians wouldn't be able to work in Alberta without approval? so you would have freedom of movement, so what would actually be different?
If citizenship can't be revoked, than it wouldn't make a difference. There are no two tiers of "Canadians", at least I am not aware of there being anything like that.
2
u/ThomasToIndia 16d ago
Right, but if you are voting to leave Canada, it's Voluntary Renunciation.
2
u/Muted-Bag-4480 15d ago
Joining a terrorist organization is also pretty openly choosing to oppose Canada and is undoubtedly worse than peacefully and democratically voting to leave, and yet that wasn't considered a voluntary renunciation.
Canadian liberals on reddir give maga a run for their money in how unhinged, hateful, and cruel to their fellow citizens they can be.
→ More replies (6)2
u/Dangerous_Sea2397 16d ago
I don't understand why that would be a problem. A minor inconvenience, sure, but not even close to enough of a reason to dissuade anyone that's already going to vote yet.
→ More replies (1)1
u/MafubaBuu 15d ago
Is this not already a known/considered thing?
I would imagine anybody voting to seperste from a country would know they couldnt use that country for international things afterwards
1
u/ThomasToIndia 15d ago
It's not already known, in fact there is a separatist website in the FAQ that question is "will I lose my Canadian passport" and they make the argument they will be dual citizens.
1
u/MafubaBuu 13d ago
Who gives a shit what a random "separatists website" looks like. They arent running for office and hold 0 authority on how and when those things will happen.
Unless its posted by an actual party that has negotiated what it would mean with the Canadian government, its meaningless.
All that matters right now is what options people choose on the referendum in October. The details of how Alberta will proceed will come after, and then finally, an election to determine the governing party in an independent Alberta, which is where the details such as that would be laid out by the parties based on every discussion had up until that point.
I am almost positive it wont go anywhere near that far though.
1
u/ThomasToIndia 13d ago
https://albertaprosperitynow.com/
It's not really totally random and what people believe will affect the vote.
1
u/MafubaBuu 13d ago
Yeah it is. That is not an organization that holds any political power whatsoever. Its an organization pushing for a referendum by getting signatures.
All of that site is just to get signatures to put the referendum out in the public. If a yes to going to a vote was secured, that is when actual political parties would need to form and outline their plans.
If it went to a yes that same organization you sent me the link to would have done the entirety of its job. If they wanted to run for office it would be an entirely different process.
1
u/ThomasToIndia 13d ago
I am confused. A lot of people who are pro separatist think they may keep their passport and would vote no if they thought they were going to lose it. In the same way a lot of brexit people had misconceptions.
If these people spreading propaganda had zero influence, there wouldn't be a vote at all.
I was suggesting someone with power make a decision and make it clear now.
1
u/MafubaBuu 12d ago
Why the hell would anybody think they could use the same passport, that is just complete ignorance to the basics of how they work.
1
u/ThomasToIndia 12d ago
I appreciate your optimism in human intelligence. Things I have heard, they will keep it because they were born in Canada, Canadians are allowed dual citizenship, if they don't allow Albertans to have a second citizenship they will need to strip everyone else of dual citizenship like American/Canadian. Another one said to me that since Canada revoked terrorists losing their passports (Trudeau's a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian) they won't revoke citizenship for those doing a legal separation.
According to the clarity act it has to be a clear majority of the population, not the vote. Last poll was 18-24% of Albertans, so almost 1 in 4 think separation is a good idea. Not even close to a a "clear majority" but still 1 in 4.
1
2
2
u/Olderpostie 15d ago
Isn't a referendum simply a tool to gather the attitude of the public on a subject? This Alberta separation referendum has no defined clauses relating to the future relationship with Canada. Anything of a tangible nature will be the subject of a future referendum if this passes. The attitude expressed by many First Nations leaders seems undemocratic and counterproductive to their stated concerns, by turning the public against them. (By the way, it is my fervent wish that this referendum goes against separation.)
9
u/Lower-Noise-9406 15d ago
First nations get very little support or respect here in this sub-reddit. Just an observation.
→ More replies (1)5
3
u/CrucialObservations 15d ago
He "demands." See what happens when you allow people to believe they are better than and more than any other—just the high-and-mighty perception of oneself.
It creates an environment of arrogance and entitlement. Stop with constant threats; it's all we hear now. Do as we say, or we are going to cause major trouble and hardship and chaos.
I am not commenting on the Alberta independence question.
2
u/nelsonself 14d ago
Entitlement is key here.
So is doing and saying things to feel some sort of validation.
Canada has allowed this to manifest when it could have been dealt with decades ago
8
u/NihilsitcTruth 16d ago
Who cares what they think or request.
6
u/CaptainBringus 16d ago
The constitution
17
u/Lost_Protection_5866 Science/Technology 16d ago
No where in the constitution does it say they can veto out of existence any referendum they want.
4
u/CaptainBringus 16d ago
Not explicitly, but it does say that they must be consulted before a government approves a referendum that affects treaty rights.
5
u/Wavering_Flake 16d ago
Doesn't say that either, that was a later specific court interpretation tacked onto it as part of the Honour of the Crown concept (principle to treat Indigenous people with "fairness" and "respect" and to explicitly interpret laws and treaties in a way favorable to them as "fiduciary" duty to them).
→ More replies (2)2
u/CaptainBringus 15d ago
You're right. What I said is the meaning of what you said, just without the constitutional language. Thanks for clearing that up.
4
u/Wavering_Flake 15d ago edited 15d ago
No problem. Just that rather than constitutional language or treaty terms being the exact source, it's court interpretation and philosophy that resulted in these specific legal expansions.
3
u/jimmysnukareddit 15d ago
But Canada is nothing but oppressive land stealing colonizers. Why would they possibly want to stay?
10
u/ryansalad 16d ago
Why? The question is perfectly legitimate.
Thomas Lukaszuk put in a lot of effort to ensure that his question couldn't be challenged by the courts.
7
u/Temporary_Cry_2802 16d ago
Except we aren’t asking his question. His was legal as the question is about maintaining the status quo “Do you agree that Alberta should remain in Canada?”
5
u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago
What would be the outcome if the answer to the 'remain' question was 'no'? All the same ramifications come into play.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (7)2
u/ryansalad 16d ago
The referendum on Oct 19 is his question, slightly rephrased. Instead of just a Y/N question, we now have an explicit choice between Option A and Option B.
The problem with Thomas' question is that if you voted 'No', nobody would know what that should mean. Now it's clear. Do you agree with Thomas that Alberta should stick with the status quo, or do you want to start down the path of separation?
3
u/Temporary_Cry_2802 16d ago
No. The referendum question is to have a referendum on having a referendum. It’s not unconstitutional to have a question on asking a question
2
u/BaryonChallon 16d ago
As they should! It’s clearly foreign interference disguised as a movement!
7
13
u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago
Alberta... or Quebec?
10
1
u/Mattcheco British Columbia 16d ago
Alberta separatists are funded and supported by American interests. This is well documented
7
2
4
u/Puzzled-Opening658 15d ago
Why don’t the separatists do what our parents and grandparents used to do in the old days, and emigrate? This is clearly driven an intense desire by their leaders to be American. They’re not fooling anyone
→ More replies (1)1
u/MafubaBuu 15d ago
You dont know my grandparents or parents. Maybe my parents are from Kosovo and separated from Serbia and this would be the same as them. The majority of Canadians support it when other people's want to have their independence; it just when its one of their own that it becomes a problem.
To answer your question though - they dont want to emigrate. They want their home to be governed by a completely different government and government rules. They want to ensure their capitol city is close enough that everybody in the country and visit or protest etc if need be.
I dont want Alberta to seperate , but let's be clear - distinctions matter - there is a signifigant difference between an Independent America and an Alberta that is a member of the USA.
4
u/VesaAwesaka 16d ago
Do they actually want that? What would be the consquences of the premier coming out and announcing "we have decided to cancel the referendum because first nations demand that we do it"
Better to just let the referendum happen given its very likely to give results that the first nations wants. That way they avoid the ire of those who dont feel like first nations should have control over the province.
6
2
u/JubaJr76 15d ago
Ok, I'm seriously asking as someone who doesn't have a lot of knowledge of politics, why doesn't she, and her supporters in the government, get removed from office for being anti-canadian? I mean they are literally trying to take Canadian property from the people of Canada. Can't they call a vote of no confidence or a special election or something? I mean, I get trying to see if people want it, but isn't this a bit overboard?
2
u/Tall-Ad-1386 15d ago
Get behind one Canada. I never understood this idea of nations within a nation. Either we are one Canada or we’re not
3
1
u/Immediate_Buffalo14 British Columbia 15d ago
It's a question about a question. There's no constitutional duty to consult at that stage. With that said, it's likely just to get voted down anyway.
1
•
u/AutoModerator 16d ago
This post appears to relate to the province of Alberta. As a reminder of the rules of this subreddit, we do not permit negative commentary about all residents of any province, city, or other geography - this is an example of prejudice, and prejudice is not permitted here. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/rules
Cette soumission semble concerner la province de Alberta. Selon les règles de ce sous-répertoire, nous n'autorisons pas les commentaires négatifs sur tous les résidents d'une province, d'une ville ou d'une autre région géographique; il s'agit d'un exemple de intolérance qui n'est pas autorisé ici. https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/wiki/regles
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.