I’ll echo @Biffster 'd remarks. I’m an Albertan also, and I do not want independence. We do not want all of what he says in his post: police force, currency, pension, etc. I would suggest that very few of today’s Albertans do.
Interestingly, it is very difficult to find an Albertan in Alberta. Here in Alberta, I count among my local friends, people from Saskatchewan, BC, Quebec, and many from Ontario. Hell, I came from Ontario, Toronto specifically, where housing was becoming increasingly difficult to afford. Only a very few currently in Alberta want Albertan independence. I should add that I know plenty who came here from outside Canada, also: the Phillippines, Sri Lanka, Britain, Jamaica, and so on; and in their cases, they were coming to Canada, not necessarily Alberta, but they ended up here. They don’t want Albertan independence; they want to be Canadian. I know a few natural-born Albertans, of course, but not even they are interested in Albertan independence.
Point is that Albertan independence, as misguided as it is, might have flown in 1975. It stood a chance also during the days of the NEP. But it’s not flying in 2025, when so many non-natural-born-Albertans have moved into this province; and who prefer to be Canadian first, Albertan second. I’d suggest that it’s those in the minority position, who are screaming the loudest for Albertan independence. But based on my observations, they are still a minority.
Neither of you are going to be convinced that in independent Alberta is going to give you more opportunities, better income and less taxes, better services or any other benefits that would come by not being hampered by excessive regulation and control from the east.
Frankly, your solution is to vote liberal, or become liberal, if we want a voice. But most Albertans, regardless of where they come from don’t seem to want that given the voting numbers.
Your entire premise is that we should find a way to get along with the rest of Canada. Why should we? We pay a disproportionate amount to Canada. They should figure out a way to get along with us.
You want our money? Tell us your plan as to when you will be a net contributor rather than a receiver. No one minds supporting those who are trying if they have a reasonable plan. Doing nothing and expecting others to pay is unreasonable. Putting limitations on our industries because you don’t have the same resources is also unreasonable. If the oil and gas industry was in Quebec they would have already separated, and if they hadn’t, there would be no talk of equalization or blocked pipelines, etc. You’d be naive think otherwise.
People in general may not want to vote Liberal, fair enough, but 5he vast majority also do not want to separate. 17%, Uzi, 17%. Nowhere near a majority. So if you think you’re speaking on behalf of Albertans, you’re not.
17% would vote to join the US. 29% would vote to leave Canada. 35% would vote that way if other provinces joined us in leaving.
What should be concerning to Canadians is that this is without an organized campaign promoting the idea and benefits to Albertans for leaving. It will also shift when Carney won’t be able to deliver on his pipeline promises even if he wants to (which he likely doesn’t).
Goal posts shifting… What numbers would be not pathetic? 49% or 51%? Or only when it becomes a majority?
I would suggest that you take 29% as ‘serious’. What was the turnaround for the liberals to get Carney elected? 21% to 43.8%? So, not inconceivable for political opinions to change quickly. And yes it could go the other way.
Well the 17% are operating under a grand illusion that the US gives a fuck about the people in Alberta and not it’s oil. If I was the US I would dangle the promise of statehood following an integration period and then strand the territory of Alberta with citizenship and no vote. But assume the better nature of American politicans and you are still moving from 11% representation in Parliament (6% in the Senate) to 1.3% in the House and 2% in the Senate.
A radical choice for irrelevance.
If I was an Albertan separatist (29%), I would be concerned that the provincial institutions, were unable to reasonably grow the Alberta Heritage Fund for over 50 years beyond 25 billion, while the Norwegian one managed to hit 1300 billion over 35 years.
Explain why Alberta would make a deal to join the US as a territory? There would be no joining until it was legislated that we were a state. And I’m not saying we should be a state.
Re: heritage fund. $22B a year goes to Ottawa. Norway has nationalized the industry. Alberta has not, nor is interested in doing so. So, for the past 50 years Alberta has given Ottawa over $700B, not counting the effects of the NEP and current lost opportunities due to excessive regulation. Not quite as much as Norway has saved, but there it is. Someone in Quebec is living large apparently.
As a side note. I asked the benefits of Alberta becoming a state to ChatGPT. Surprisingly one of the points it came back with is more representation per capita in the US than in Canada. This is the summary:
So while Alberta might have less Commons-equivalent influence in raw numbers in the U.S., it gains disproportionate clout in the Senate — which is often the more powerful chamber in shaping national outcomes (e.g., confirming judges, approving treaties, passing budgets).
“Alberta would make a deal to join the US as a territory?” - well why would the US take you as a state? They would be the ones doing the taking so it’s kind of their choice in that scenario.
Now the Heritage Fund has grown from 1.5 billion to 27 billion over 49 years giving a growth rate of 6%. Which seems really low for a fund that is funded from provincial oil revenues.
As for the structure of the fund that’s a provincial choice. As for the funding, that’s from provincial non-renewable energy revenues. As for the nature of the industry, I can not begin to imagine an Alberta led push for a nationalized industry.
ChatGPT? Oh come on man. I barely think about this stuff while you soak in it and you need some slop generating AI to explain that the Senate is powerful? However, budget bills originate in the House, where Alberta would carry 1.3% of the votes. I suppose you could argue that it’s now become the presidency, which again Alberta as a state only contributes 8 electoral votes out of 546 or 1.4%.
Lets be honest. Lack of representation is not driving Alberta separatism. We cannot even address the issue if we refuse to accurately talk about the true source. Right-wing grievance.
Unlike Quebec separatists who will freely admit and talk about how their feelings stem from their desire to protect and grow a distinct Quebecois culture (and Canada can directly address their fears and concerns); Alberta separatists refuse to admit that their entire movement stems from the Canadian right being unable to drive the national agenda.
Until we address the larger right-wing grievance movement (or “right-wing entitlement movement” in my well-poisoning opinion) all conversations will be circular and nonsensical.
Why the hell would Alberta agree to join the US if it wasn’t as a state? Even assuming it would want to join the US in the first place. The 17% is a subset of the independence number, not all of it.
What did the reform party want? ‘The West wants in’. Even with conservative governments we weren’t fully in. Now the refrain will be, “The West wants out”.
I’m not sure what you hope to accomplish with your argument. Alberta and Saskatchewan consistently vote conservative. Should we be upset that we aren’t heard because of our preference?
Are you saying Quebecs parochial and in many cases racist desires are something you are willing to accommodate more than our desire to develop our resources that not only benefit us but you as well?
What is it you expect to address and how?
Well I would call them the idiot 17 percent. Likely the happy fiefdom for a number of gibbering fuckwits that make reference to themselves as living flesh and blood sentient-men and look for fringes on flags.
And Reform did a lot of what it wanted. It shifted the economic conversation, triggered the Mike Harris revolution in Ontario, and basically gave cover to Chretien and Martin to restructure federal spending. They even managed to kill the PCs and kick off 10 years of Harper government. Hell Reform’s heirs even eliminated the Wheat Board.
