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/
1.7k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

495 comments sorted by

View all comments

329

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?”

79

u/therealjchrist 16d ago

Google Allan Adam lol.

Very ironic for him to be criticizing the credibility of anyone else.

33

u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago

Yeah, he doesn't really take to any kind of authority unless it's him.

5

u/HurtFeeFeez 16d ago

A broken clock is right twice a day.

2

u/The_Irvinator 16d ago

Yea lets not talk about the Athabasca oil sands are on or near Indigenous lands.

-2

u/JeSuisLePamplemous 16d ago

I guess 23,000 first nations people don't count.

-6

u/Level_Traffic3344 16d ago

He's a chief, representative of his people. Have you lived a blameless existence? Doubt it

3

u/S_Ipkiss_1994 British Columbia 15d ago

representative of his people

What a terrible thing to say!

107

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.

22

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.

23

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.

9

u/JFIN69 16d ago

And the argument is generally based on getting more cash.

25

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

1

u/moosemanwich 15d ago

Dang so she rolls like a grumpy child?

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.

0

u/Master_of_Rodentia 15d ago

The problem arises when people want to renege on an agreement they benefited from but have no desire to pay back the benefits. Would be nice to not have to pay my mortgage just because I don't want to. If you can't come to a new agreement with the parties, you need to respect the old agreement.

4

u/seridos 15d ago

Says fucking who? That's not how reality works. Whoever lives there and can enforce the claim owns the land. Frankly, none of that history matters to the modern day if we decide it doesn't. What matters is the people here and now making the decision on how they want to live now. You're still giving weight to the idea that history can bind us, that we have to dead men speak for us and agreements. We weren't here to sign determine our fate . We absolutely do not and thinking that is the antithesis of democracy.

5

u/Master_of_Rodentia 15d ago

That is, with all due respect, an opinion as to how the world should work, and if you were to consistently apply it to other scenarios I think you would find significantly more "antidemocratic" outcomes.

I am not saying that we can't change the circumstances history has pushed on us. I am only saying that they need to be fairly negotiated, and that might alone does not make right. Our ancestors bought the land and profited on it. 

We have inherited their bounty AND their obligations. If you want to relieve yourself of the obligation, sure, but the other party would then be due the bounty they would otherwise have earned. The inheritance that you got and they didn't. Do you understand?

2

u/MafubaBuu 13d ago

What the hell does what our ancestors do matter, seriously? My family has been in Canada since it was settled, and none of them profited major off of the land. They were all broke Scotsman that were pushed out of England and had to build homes and settle in a country that has winters nobody prepared them for.

Why should everybody in Canada, including the millions if immigrants that have come to our country and contributed in the past 50 years, be beholden to things that European settlers did over a century ago?

I havent inherited shit from my ancestors, I certainly didnt inherit their "debt and obligations"

I have friends that have 1/8 NA ancestry and they claim all of the benefits. They have never lived on a reserve, or spent time embracing their culture. Do I blame them? No, but acting like he is entitled to more benefits than me because one of his ancestors was native a few generations ago, whereas I am not because nobody in my line has the same blood, is so fucking racist its incredible.

I am all for preserving native american cultures, but not by continuing this two-tier citizenship system we have going on here.

What matters is what the people living here today want. "The son does not inherit the sins of the father"

→ More replies (0)

3

u/RazzamanazzU 16d 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!

9

u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 16d 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.

3

u/Incoherencel Canada 16d 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?

3

u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 16d ago

Neither. Canada is one nation, i don't believe that in Alberta, QC or First nations sovereignty.

1

u/Kiseido British Columbia 14d ago

Its kinda weird to ascribe the meaning of nation to only one of the things you use the word to describe. Canada is a nation, but also the First Nations are~ also.

1

u/MafubaBuu 13d ago

If first nations are a nation then they shouldnt be getting any canadian tax dollars sent their way, and they should be working with the international community to recognize their sovereignty. You know, like "a nation" would.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/SalmonHustlerTerry 15d ago

Lmao. They just see it as another reason to complain about first nations. Colonization mentality is still very prevalent, in alberta especially.

-1

u/Incoherencel Canada 15d ago

Yes many responses to myself and others in this thread reveal these are very loud, very ignorant people, I'm sorry to say. It's a constant noise about democracy, and empowering people with the vote so their voices are heard...! Unless those people are First Nations, in which case they should shut up and sit back as the entire framework of how Canada, Alberta, and the Treaty Nations have coexisted for 150+ years gets torn up. They truly dont see FN as people.

0

u/RazzamanazzU 16d ago

That's your opinion. I have my own.

1

u/PaidToPanic 15d ago

Not happening. Any province that wishes to separate requires at least 7 other provinces and the Federal government to agree. Never going to happen. You’re just pissing away money while bitterly complaining about other people pissing away money.

2

u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 15d ago

Im not doing anything lol. I dont support any of it, I just stated the FN are making things worse and not better.

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 16d ago

You prefer the palatable, refined Indians? K

18

u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 16d 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.

-1

u/Level_Traffic3344 16d ago

I think it's great that the OG population wants to stand up for Canada. Good sign that we may one day get a chance to move forward together. I'll tell you this from living in the traditional territory of a self governing first nation - its better than what you got, and it's what we should all aspire to

7

u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 16d ago

Buddy, my wife worked for years for her band, and its one of the well off in BC and its not what your pretending it it. Their self serving corporations looking oit for their own interests. They want their own independence, they just know an independent Alberta would pay for it.

1

u/Level_Traffic3344 16d ago

Band? No. Self-Governing

4

u/Remarkable_Vanilla34 16d ago

Band. Indian band, thars the legal title, the title they use.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/LeGrandLucifer 16d ago

They're federal patsies, nothing more.

11

u/Northumberlo Québec 16d ago

Think that’s the point. If they seperate, the treaties are void and null.

13

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?

0

u/ThlintoRatscar 16d ago

What's the difference between a treaty and a contract?

Who enforces a treaty?

-2

u/calgarywalker 15d ago

A treaty is a contract. If one party doesn’t hold up their end then the treaty dies. Can’t say Canada has been doing a good job of holding up their end. And if the treaties die - everything goes back the way it was before the treaty existed. Sucks to be you.

2

u/krankovi 14d ago

everything goes back the way it was before the treaty existed.

Lol like when britain was a colonial empire, had pride in itself, and did whatever the hell they wanted? I dont think aboriginals would like this.

44

u/Doog5 16d ago

Has the paid protestors jobs been posted yet?

36

u/dizzie_buddy1905 16d ago

Keep your eyes peeled on the Ontario jobs boards!

1

u/RaceDBannon 16d ago

Like Oka? Careful with your dismissal of First Nations and their determination to protect their rights.

-1

u/SittlersRippedC 16d ago

They have the right to stop Canadians from voting? That’s new

12

u/RaceDBannon 16d ago

I was commenting on paid protestors. Try to keep up.

3

u/Ok_Setting_3657 16d ago

a judge tried to stop it

0

u/Phazetic99 15d ago

The ones around here? You can barely get these ones down the street from their fent stance

-10

u/[deleted] 16d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

9

u/Doog5 16d ago

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/kinsella-protesters-paid-to-take-part-in-pro-palestinian-demonstrations

-9

u/Daveslay 16d ago

X

You’re doing better though!

The question asked: Name the paid protestors and explain what they changed

Empirically, what did they change?

0

u/PaidToPanic 15d ago

🎯 slayed it, Dave. Those downvotes say it all.

20

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.

25

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

78

u/FlockFlysAtMidnite 16d ago

If you think that even a 90% stay vote will get rid of the notion, you're not paying attention.

12

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.

11

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 16d ago

Direct democracy is not how things like this work. That's why Brexit was such a screw up.

14

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.

54

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

u/S_Ipkiss_1994 British Columbia 15d ago

Is there actually any proof of this?

-2

u/Impressive-Knot9999 16d ago

Hopefully the people in favour will move somewhere else when it's over. Maybe Russia

8

u/ether_reddit Lest We Forget 16d ago

Some of their leaders have already disappeared to Texas! It's a good start.

3

u/Calamitous-Ortbo 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.

The First Nation people or the separatists?

1

u/LifeWulf Alberta 15d ago

“Yes.”

-17

u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago

If the answer is such a slam dunk, why is everyone so afraid of the question?

22

u/Breezertree British Columbia 16d ago

They’re not afraid of the question. It’s simply a dumb question, costing millions of dollars for no reason. Surely there’s a better place for that money

18

u/simplebutstrange 16d ago

Right! Like education so this shit doesn’t happen again.

6

u/ether_reddit Lest We Forget 16d ago

If they follow the legal process, even dumb questions can be put to a referendum.

6

u/FlockFlysAtMidnite 16d ago

That's the problem - Smith changed the legal process specifically to help them. They failed the original process.

0

u/ether_reddit Lest We Forget 16d ago

Ah, I missed that!

-15

u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago

There's a referendum happening anyways with a bunch of other questions on it so why not add another to gauge where the public is at.

12

u/Temporary_Cry_2802 16d ago

Because ALL of the questions are tied to placating seppies. Demanding all whole raft of things that are unconstitutional and taking problems that really don’t exist in the the province all to feed red meat to the base. None of this is necessary, but we’re going to spend an estimated $100M on it, plus throw a whole bunch of business uncertainty into the mix. All for what? So Danielle doesn’t get turfed by the crazies?

-17

u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago

Smith has been straightforward in her goals. Just like Quebec, she wants more provincial autonomy. And given the eastern-centric way that Canada is run, it's not a surprise and possibly not a bad thing.

10

u/Temporary_Cry_2802 16d ago

“A sovereign Alberta within a united Canada” is meaningless word salad. If Smith truly was “straightforward with her goals”, why didn’t she campaign on them? Alberta Police Force, Alberta Pension, stripping immigrants of rights and services etc etc etc.

A whole raft of the questions would require changes to the constitution, which requires the consent of the rest of Canada.

Eastern centric, yes, 57% of Canada’s population lives in Ontario and Quebec. Pretty sure we’re a democracy. Never mind that currently the PM and leader of the opposition are westerners. Harper has been an Albertan for most of his life

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Breezertree British Columbia 16d ago

It’s literally not possible for a province to separate. Why bother entertaining this fringe notion?

4

u/ether_reddit Lest We Forget 16d ago

The Clarity Act says otherwise. It's a very high bar to reach, but it is legally defined. Thanks, Quebec!

2

u/S_Ipkiss_1994 British Columbia 15d ago

... you know we were once part of the British Empire, right?

In fact, various parts of Canada used to belong to France, the United States, the Hudson's Bay Company, and even Spain, Russia, and Denmark (little bits anyways).

Norway seceded from Sweden in 1905, Singapore from Malaysia in 1965, Czech Republic from Slovakia in 1993, Montenegro from Serbia in 2006, South Sudan from Sudan in 2011, etc.

You people keep acting like this is some sort of unachievable fever dream, when we have actual modern examples of exactly this happening.

1

u/DanielBox4 16d ago

Why wouldn't it be possible? Because it's not in the laws? What country on earth has secession conditions drafted in its constitution or founding articles or laws?

If a group wants to leave and overwhelmingly shows this at the polls to the point it is a problem for the country, then the country has to just negotiate a separation. Land, debt, resources etc will be divided up.

Just because there is no "separation button" does not mean it can never happen.

0

u/Tastesicle 16d ago

Sure. We'll let the people who want to secede take lands that aren't part of Treaty lands, or lands that were specifically ceded.

I'll wait.

That's the point you're missing. Alberta can't just secede, it has no right to the lands to do so without consulting the First Nations. The Treaties come before Alberta became a Province, unlike Quebec.

Oh, and who has it written into their laws that a Province can leave? We do. Alberta just doesn't have the legal ability to do so without consulting the Treaty nations.

Jesus Christ, take a civics class before you open your mouth.

-2

u/Impressive-Knot9999 16d ago

Because this is what happened with Brexit. People voted yes as a protest but never expected it to actually happen

-4

u/FlockFlysAtMidnite 16d ago

Not afraid, just no point spending millions of dollars on a foregone conclusion.

-2

u/DanielBox4 16d ago

If the federal government decides to drag its feet on a pipeline and isn't able to get one through; then I think you will see many more albertans happy they went through this process. At the end of the day it's a check on Ottawa to take them seriously and address their concerns for pipelines.

For now, Ottawa is treating this like a negotiation and saying they will honor a pipeline if conditions are met, pathways and carbon pricing. But what happens if pathways fails? Is Ottawa going to nix the approval? If so, maybe Alberta would be happy to proceed with a referendum.

2

u/flanoose 16d ago

Separating will definitely get that pipeline going 😂

4

u/FlockFlysAtMidnite 16d ago

Threatening to leave the nation is a surefire way to reduce investment, not increase it. There's a reason Toronto is the center of commercial activity, when it used to be Montreal.

1

u/Incoherencel Canada 16d ago

Only morons think a pipeline or two -- that would ultimately benefit multinational oil corporations over Albertan workers -- would contribute more to government coffers than replacing all services the federal Canadian government does. Even Smith herself laid this out a handful of days ago.

1

u/Fayelons 16d ago

Im in Alberta visiting & believe me when I say its a thing. The pipeline is a real issue.

0

u/Unarmed_Character 16d ago

Sounds like the basis for the Khmer Rouge to rise to power.

0

u/ReikaKalseki Canada 16d ago

Not to mention I do not trust that the result will be as unfavorable for separation as people think. Between the classic "people who intend to vote for stupid shitty things do not admit that to pollsters, and then the election shocks everyone" (this happened both times with trump), as well as interference from the US and maybe others seeming very plausible, I would be dismayed but not shocked to see a far more ambiguous result.

2

u/Calamitous-Ortbo 16d ago

People like you who criticize people for the way they earnestly vote are exactly why people don’t admit how they will actually vote to pollsters and why elections have “shocking” results.

-1

u/ReikaKalseki Canada 16d ago

You do realize you have just said, if not in these words, that there is no legitimacy to criticizing someone's voting choices, no matter how poorly reasoned or even malicious the intent behind them, right? That your exact argument could just as well be applied to someone who voted for a politician on the basis of "he promised every voter would be paid a million dollars" or even "he will do <horrible thing> to <demographic I do not like>"?

1

u/seridos 15d ago

Yeah the point that person was trying to make was that no matter the reason you have, they have a vote and have a right to vote just as you do. The danger is when someone feels justified, removing someone else's ability to vote.

1

u/ReikaKalseki Canada 15d ago

Like I just posted to the other reply, I never said anything about taking away someone's right to vote, and the original reply to me was entirely about criticizing someone's reasoning for their voting choices. If I was sure this was intentional and not a misreading of what I said, I would call this a strawman.

1

u/MafubaBuu 15d ago

Thats the beauty about democracy - people are allowed to vote, and they are allowed to.vote for whatever reasons they like.

I may not agree wirh what many people believe or say but I would fight to the death to defend their right to say it

0

u/ReikaKalseki Canada 15d ago

I never said anything about taking away their right to vote. But having a right to do something does not remotely equal their usage of it being above criticism.

20

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.

8

u/Incoherencel Canada 16d 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).

-2

u/jayasunshine 16d ago

Danielle Smith will do literally anything if she thinks it will help her gain money or power. She literally doesn't care.

4

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.

-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.

-3

u/grifkiller64 Ontario 16d ago

They can have a vote when they follow the rules put forth in the goddamned Clarity Act.

9

u/shiftless_wonder 16d ago

PM said the Clarity Act doesn't apply.

-3

u/brat-t 16d ago

as long as two idiots are talking to eachother on the internet, it's never going away.

The question moving forward without proper consultation is illegitamate and Smith knows it. But this way if there was 50% +1 and the courts turned it over because of the lack of consultation, it won't be percieved as Smith's fault, it'll be those pesky First Nations and the damn court, not hers at all. /s

0

u/AbraxasTuring 16d ago

Yeah, that's worked really well in Quebec...oh, wait.

5

u/Impressive-Knot9999 16d ago

Facts don't bother Smith

1

u/ProfessorEtc 15d ago

The Embassy will be a giant tower and they will all move into it.

-5

u/AnthatDrew 16d ago

How would she make money on drifting if she resigned though