The 30% is about the same as in Quebec. But, it is likely to rise higher if Carney doesn’t accede to the requests that Smith made. Which he won’t. His talk of creating a Canadian energy superpower is just that.
It should also be noted that the 30% who support separation in Alberta is different than in Quebec. Alberta doesn’t have a leader pushing for separation. Quebec has two parties dedicated to separation who promote that vision. No one is presenting and promoting the net positives to Alberta if it removes the tick of Canada from its butt. If that happens, then those numbers could change very quickly.
It is likely that there will be a referendum shortly as the rules to citizen led initiatives have changed in Alberta by Smith just after the election bringing down the numbers required to trigger a vote. So, we will see what happens then.
Are you guys looking to secede and form an independent country or ask to get incorporated into the United States? Are you willing to wage war to do so?
I would think independent country. Why would there be a war when there is a constitutional/legal method to leave? If that is followed, then no one can object if the conditions are met.
Alberta independence would be a nightmare of a mess. Like most such things, the idea sounds great until you think about it for five minutes. (Similar arguments are often made in California for Calexit.)
What is the divorce court that separates what is Alberta’s from what is Rest of Canada’s?
What happens to Lloydminster—is it forced out on its own, the Singapore of the Prairies? (Probably not, but who gets it?)
Is Alberta prepared to step up and take over all those federal issues, such as transportation, and if not, how long would it take to be ready? It would probably a decade of hard work, by which point most of its supporters will have moved on.
But I guess no one has learned from Brexit.
Add to that, Alberta will be land-locked. All of its exports would have to travel overland through one hostile nation or the other.
Or do they imagine they’ll be the one small, disadvantaged country that Trump wouldn’t bully?
It would take as long as it takes. A successfully passed referendum requires that all parties must negotiate. As I understand it, the ‘must’ part is a requirement. That means Indigenous, Provincial and Federal representatives must participate.
As Dr.Drake suggests, it would be hard to separate. No one said it wouldn’t be. It will even be harder for Canada as their purse is essentially gone. Alberta moves into the top 10 highest GDP per capita countries in the world overnight along with the increase in social benefits that will derive from that. Canada drops precipitously. So, you are going to see a lot of negative talk from the rest of Canada as to why Alberta shouldn’t separate.
Well best of luck. If you make your right wing paradise you might get the white separatist parts of Montana and Idaho to join you.
However if Washington and Oregon and Canada teamed up…now that is a viable superpower…considering California is now the second largest economy in the world, CalCanada would rival or surpass EU and the stump of the US remaining.
Only China would eventually surpass even that. 
Actually, no; it’ll decline as we get further from the election.
Because wanting control of your resources and being able to get them to market means that you must be racist.
Thanks. You confirm how the rest of Canada perceives us.
Throwing away that 27 point halftime lead because you can’t read the room stings a bit, doesn’t it. Could ask the Atlanta Falcons for tips on how to cope I guess.
But of course they’re not Alberta’s resources, they’re Canada’s and more than just Alberta has helped develop them. Just like Texas’ oil doesn’t belong to Texas.
I guess in Canada in particular Quebec sets a precedent with its linguistic and cultural novelty, but I’ve always found these regional loyalties peculiar. Including among Americans, I might add - no slur on our northern neighbors. I suppose perhaps it has more pull if you were born and raised in one spot. I was born over 2,700 miles from where I currently live and I’ve got absolutely zero “nationalist” loyalty to either state (or any of the few others I’ve lived in). I live in CA and think CalExit is foolish bombast, no matter how much I dislike my current federal government.
They are Alberta’s resources. Alberta owns them, not Canada.
Let’s play out a hypothetical here. Let’s say a giant meteor full of unobtanium crashes into British Columbia. It is a miracle mineral with whatever beneficial properties you’d care to name and it is worth more by weight or volume than any other substance on earth. There is no environmental impact involved, the material is soft enough that you can break chunks off by hand and refine it into powder by crushing it in your fist.
Let’s also suppose this meteor lands squarely in the traditional, unceded territory of the BC Government. There are no land claims. If the place where it landed has a Native name, it’s “valley we lay no claim to, now and forever” (note that I don’t think this is actually something that exists but play along). So our space rock has landed on territory that has one single undisputed owner, the government of British Columbia. Overnight, BC stands to become not just the richest province but also the richest nation on earth.
Now having set all of that up, how many minutes do you think it would take for the Federal government to announce that this miracle space rock was destined to benefit all Canadians?
Hmmm…appears you are correct. Apologies for the misunderstanding.
Though I still find regionalism and Balkanization at odds with my own personal philosophy 
.
No, no, Alberta’s racism is entirely separate from its short-sighted perspective on its petroleum resources.
They were granted to Alberta which is NOT a sovereign nationstate by Canada which is.
That could be taken away.
Most countries even Russia nationalized their resources as critical to the state.
Canada almost did with PetroCanada as Norway did with their oil resources.
Equinor, formerly known as Statoil , is a key player in the Norwegian petroleum industry. Founded in 1972 by the Norwegian government, our original purpose was to manage the country’s vast oil and gas resources.
Canada backed out and Alberta totally gave away the resources to the multinationals and are left with an enormous clean up bill that will be funded 2/3 by Canadian tax payers.
If you are not a sovereign state you don’t “own” your resources…control over them is granted.
They might try to make that case, but unless the meteorite fell on federal crown land, to do it they would have to appeal to the good nature and patriotism of the BC Goverment, or find some loophole like taxing the living daylights out of whatever commercial use BC decides to make of it.
Under Section 92A of the Constitution Act, the magical unobtanium, being a non-renewable resource, belongs to the BC Government and thereby to the people of BC, not Canada. This is not the way I think things should be, but it’s the way they are. I think we need more national unity in this country, not less, not the balkanization of individual provinces and threats of separation, which IMHO should be considered treason.
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/resource-rights
The provinces own their resources. And a bit of history on western alienation.
You miss the point entirely.
The rights to the resources may be granted or taken away by the sovereign state of Canada.
The mineral and petroleum resources of northern Canada and the offshore regions of the East and West coasts remain under the ownership and control of the federal government and provide a huge potential for development. The federal government has also passed legislation that provides for the issuing of exploration rights and production licences, under which developers must meet expenditure commitments and pay royalties should commercial production begin. The Canada Oil and Gas Act, 1980-81-82, established a federal regime for petroleum resources that was intended to increase Canadian ownership in petroleum companies and to ensure Canadian benefits in jobs and the procurement of goods and services. With the change of government, in 1985 this statute was replaced by the Canada Petroleum Resources Act, with less emphasis on these “Canadianization” issues and greater certainty in the terms and conditions of exploration and development.
Got it now?