Join us as we bring in three members of the Alberta Women's Independence Network, Angela, Kathy and Pat, to talk about the upcoming referendum on Alberta's independence from Canada on Oct. 19th, and what that means for the future of the country.
00:00:00.000good evening and thank you everybody for joining a special episode of the levine show as we have
00:00:07.120quite the panel for you if you've been paying attention to social media the last day or so
00:00:12.300john bolton and others we have a collection of constitutional conversations for you we're going
00:00:19.160to presume this is now october 20th and we're starting the conversation about what comes next
00:00:24.080because if there is a successful referendum on october 19th we need to start thinking about this
00:00:29.200And what's better time to start than now?
00:00:31.760As part of the Alberta Women's Independence Network series, this is episode number seven.
00:00:37.640And what we're doing is we're going to present to you the conversation with Bruce Pardee.
00:00:42.520We've got Matthew Broderley and Dennis Calama, who's going to talk about different types of constitutions.
00:00:48.580And we'll just grab that comment. There we go.
00:00:51.720And first, we'll go ahead and bring in the Alberta's Women's Independence Network to talk a bit about this episode.
00:00:59.200We've got Angela, Kathy and Pat. Thanks for joining us all. Here we go. This is the big
00:01:05.700day. Number seven. You guys have been crushing it for six solid episodes. So thank you very
00:01:11.000much for doing that. Let's go ahead and start with Angela. Angela, why are we here today?
00:01:15.800Well, the Alberta Women's Independence Network is a group of ladies that we got together
00:01:22.560a little over a year ago, and our focus has been on reaching out to Albertan women. We also have
00:01:29.660men that join us as well, but reaching out to Albertan women and inviting them to join the
00:01:35.220conversation around Alberta independence. Our focus has been on education and building community
00:01:41.760through respectful dialogue. So as we've been going around the province holding meetings,
00:01:47.320and our focus is smaller meetings, in-home meetings, sometimes local cafes, restaurants,
00:01:51.840and sometimes town halls more one-on-one face-to-face conversations we keep hearing the
00:01:57.840same questions about well what would this look like what would it what could it practically be
00:02:04.320if we were to become an independent uh country of alberta and it was the same questions over and
00:02:11.040over again and so a couple months ago um we got together and started to discuss like how can we
00:02:20.080address these questions in a really meaningful way and we came up with the idea of using a paper
00:02:26.720that colonel redmond colonel david redmond had put out in 2024 discussing six national interests
00:02:34.960that must be addressed and used in a successful country now his paper was geared towards
00:02:42.240canada kind of a call back to what it used to be but when we looked at that paper we realized this
00:02:47.680is exactly the perfect framework for this discussion around an independent Alberta and so
00:02:56.000we've been holding as you said a series of episodes where we've brought in different speakers
00:03:03.920to address these different national interests some of the speakers are from Alberta some of them
00:03:10.080have been from outside of Alberta and we've also invited many of our Albertan podcasters such as
00:03:17.120yourself jason such as john bolton and corey morgan and a few others to join us in this to
00:03:22.480spread this message of um this discussion that we're having fantastic that's a great introduction
00:03:28.640and if you haven't caught any of those episodes or even just a couple go catch up after this one
00:03:32.800as well because it all comes together i think quite well here so kathy uh great job why this
00:03:39.440episode and why these three people because no matter where we go or who we're talking to people
00:03:46.240want to know what about our constitution what about what is this going to look like what what's
00:03:51.760going to govern us and and how can i say yes to something that i don't have an answer to yet and
00:03:57.360so it's been really fun to watch people make that journey through the why the why seems to be
00:04:01.200satisfied now it's can we do this and how as angela said what's it going to look like after
00:04:07.040and so as we were sitting down the three of us and discussing okay well who could we reach out
00:04:12.320two for podcasters and we got that list down but now who could we reach out to for subject matter
00:04:17.760experts well these three gentlemen i mean their names just immediately rose to the top and came
00:04:22.800out it just made perfect sense and the fact that each of them come at this from a different angle
00:04:28.960helps us know that the conversation is going to be very well-rounded that it's going to probably
00:04:34.160touch everybody's concerns everybody's wants everybody's needs um all the things that people
00:04:39.200are thinking about should be pretty close to address by bringing these three guys together
00:04:44.080and thankfully none of them said no so here we are and i'm i'm pen and paper ready man i'm i'm
00:04:51.520ready to take notes i'm ready to learn from them and i'm really excited to be able to foster and
00:04:56.480facilitate this conversation so that albertans can now take it home and continue to have it as
00:05:02.720we go through the summer and get together with family and friends and maybe this could be just
00:05:06.960the fireside chat of the summer of 2026 as what is our constitution going to look like
00:05:13.120fantastic i'm excited as well i've spoken to all three gentlemen at different times
00:05:16.640now we have them all together and there's gonna be a lot of cooks in this kitchen
00:05:20.160but i have a feeling it's gonna be very civil pet um as we're going through this one well how
00:05:25.040important is it to you that the audience engages and asks questions and gets involved as we do
00:05:29.920that as a second half of this episode uh very very important in fact that's kind of the primary
00:05:36.960point of going live and I think it fosters because a lot of people think like well okay
00:05:42.700who's going to be the boss of the new Alberta and the whole point that we're trying to get across is
00:05:48.300that everyone needs to get involved because it's a democratic process so the more people get
00:05:54.140involved and the more questions they ask and comments they make and criticisms they bring
00:06:00.520forth the better we can build uh this new independent alberta so please jump in and
00:06:06.520we look forward to hearing from your comments fantastic i think we're in great hands having
00:06:11.560the three of you putting these together running around alberta having conversations and i'm very
00:06:15.640excited to get this started so we're going to bring you back at the end during the q a portion
00:06:19.960and thank you very much for being here ladies appreciate that a lot thank you okay audience
00:06:25.640make sure that you go start putting your questions and comments in there and uh don't be afraid to
00:06:30.360direct it to a particular panel member or the entire panel or just a general question on what
00:06:35.400you think is going on and then we'll take our best shot at it keep in mind this isn't a debate we're
00:06:40.040not trying to see who wins and also understand that we can't set policy at this stage these are
00:06:45.320just ideas and conversations at this stage that's why we have so many of them so don't think you're
00:06:50.600going to walk away from this understanding exactly where alberta is going to be is multiple paths
00:06:55.400and at some point in the future then we'll have a conversation at probably the constitutional
00:06:59.720convention on exactly what we have so without further ado let's go ahead and bring in dennis
00:07:04.440kelma bruce party and matthew rowley nice to see you all gentlemen as i bring you up here okay so
00:07:13.640so what i'm going to do is i'm going to go around the panel quick introduction on each of you uh and
00:07:18.840then kind of throw in what is your position on the spectrum of constitutional options we'll start with
00:07:25.080dennis so um are you gonna ask me questions or you're only just to tell me to tell people what
00:07:31.800i think well first introduce yourself and then just give us your perspective on the spectrum so
00:07:36.680where do you fit on the spectrum of the constitutional options so my name is dennis
00:07:40.520calvin the only one that probably doesn't have deep constitutional education so i tend to come
00:07:45.880at the world primarily from a literally average citizen point of view and that point of view
00:07:52.200which i've grown to over time based in part on learnings from bruce party and from matthew
00:07:58.760is that the legitimacy of the government flows exclusively from the people through an explicit
00:08:06.200written constitution and that government only exists within constitutional boundaries
00:08:12.360rights are very specific textual and clearly understandable powers of
00:08:19.080government are enumerated specifically in anything not stated explicitly is
00:08:24.720prohibited and you can amend the Constitution but it's somewhat
00:08:28.180difficult so in simple terms a constitutional Republican like myself
00:08:32.160seeks liberty with structure democracy with limits and state authority with
00:08:37.760explicit constraints. So that's the point of view I have. Okay, fantastic. Bruce, same question to
00:08:43.580you, a little bit about yourself, and then where do you fit on the constitutional spectrum?
00:08:49.680Thanks, Jason. I'm the Ontario interloper in this session. I'm a prof at the law school at
00:08:58.220Queens, and I run a small think tank called Rights Probe, and I've been talking about the
00:09:04.000new possible constitution for alberta for for quite a while now i would i would put the spectrum this
00:09:09.700way dennis is the middle man uh i am probably the most radical and matthew is radical in his own way
00:09:21.960he wants to take us back to something that we used to have and uh sort of sort of still have but not
00:09:27.540exactly so my take is that alberta is going hopefully is going to have a moment where all
00:09:37.200things are possible and one of the choices it will have if it chooses to take it is to design
00:09:46.020a free country i mean an actually free country and that depends upon its constitution
00:09:51.880If it doesn't take that opportunity, then it will end up adopting something for its constitution that it is used to, and that is part of the problem.
00:10:03.380So I would characterize these three models this way, if I may.
00:10:07.680Matthew's model is a legislative supremacy model.
00:10:13.900The legislature can do anything, not restrained by the courts.
00:10:17.040dennis's model is a checks and balances model it it tries to insert uh institutions to try
00:10:28.680and control each other in competition with each other courts and legislatures and executive and
00:10:34.160so on and my model is a is a is a freedom model it's a flipped default model and that means that
00:14:47.900Now, Dennis, when we go to you, some Canadians are probably familiar with the Constitutional Republic.
00:14:53.620Can you lay out a couple items that would be a benefit?
00:14:56.880And then a couple things that you would change or tweak, if any, with what we're familiar with with the U.S. system.
00:15:03.180So the things that people will see that would be different under a constitutional republic is, first of all, the people are truly supreme.
00:15:13.020You'd see that in the areas of things like referenda, controlling what government can do, binding referenda.
00:15:20.400You'd see things like your rights explicitly defined and spelled out in a very textual fashion
00:15:26.620that cannot be fiddled around with by a judge who happens to like something different.
00:15:33.060And you see very clear paths of what government can and cannot do.
00:15:37.860And those are the things that you really can restrict government right down to, for example, putting a cap on how much money they can spend.
00:15:47.880So a couple of things that I think we can add in compared to the U.S. system and the ones that are near and dear to my heart are things like term limits.
00:15:56.000I think the penalty for a bad politician is far larger than the penalty of losing a good one.
00:16:04.520So we see things like explicit term limits.
00:16:06.440you get your eight years in office and that's it you're done for your life the other things we see
00:16:12.360is again the referendum which i mentioned mentioned earlier which is any citizen can
00:16:16.760make a referendum and actually make it stick on the government now you need enough votes
00:16:22.360you can't be just a minority doing this but it has to move that way and um so if you push on
00:16:28.280those things and tied with one last innovation growing largely from the westminster system
00:16:35.400and that is the idea of an oversight branch that is actually the last sober thought to make sure
00:16:41.320the rest of government is adhering to the terms of the constitution so that's an addition that
00:16:46.440we put in compared to the american system and we think will help stop lock-up that you see
00:16:51.560down there frequently okay fantastic uh well done um okay so bruce we're going to come to you and
00:16:57.720this is going to be a little bit different because it's a new type of system it's very radical
00:17:01.720so can you hit us with a couple of the items that you think are really important to understand
00:17:05.960and then kind of lay out um a couple of the items that you think people really should understand
00:17:10.920from a cautionary standpoint like this won't be there or that won't be there maybe address two
00:17:16.360things that i think you think are good and then a couple things that people have to wrap their
00:17:20.040head around that you think are important well one way to explain it is to contrast it with the
00:17:24.440models that dennis and matthew are talking about now those two are also very different but here's
00:17:29.400is one thing they have in common they're both talking about giving power to the people
00:17:33.960but it's very important to understand that that what what this is and is not they're talking
00:17:40.420about giving power to the people in the democratic sense that is yeah you can vote it does not mean
00:17:46.500giving power to the people individually it doesn't might it does not mean that you are free and by
00:17:51.560that i mean this if the people elect a government with the mandate to provide for the general
00:17:58.660welfare and that government with the support of the people decide that it needs to override your
00:18:05.780freedom then it will have the mandate to do that so for example let's consider covid
00:18:13.140covid the covid regime that a lot of us did not like was a product of legislatures
00:18:20.660and bureaucracies executive branch if you adopt matthew's model that's what you're going to be
00:18:27.700able to get. Legislatures are supreme. Therefore, they can do anything they want, as long as they
00:18:32.940have the approval of the people. Now, my model works differently in this sense. One of the things
00:18:39.340that both Dennis's and Matthew's model does is start out with a default position. The premise
00:18:45.380is this. If you are elected as a legislature, or if you are a court, if you put all the parts of
00:18:51.500the state together, courts and legislatures and executives, the state can do anything. Its powers
00:18:57.480are unlimited. Its subject matter jurisdiction
00:45:00.800uh definitely a party system is important all of these things came about because they were needed
00:45:07.920that's something to remember and again it's why i i like to be a conservative don't tear something
00:45:13.240down until you know what it's for and you've learned to value it and then either change it
00:45:18.720or in some cases destroy it but if you cut down a tree because you didn't like where it was and
00:45:23.860then you decide that actually it was pretty good you can't just put it back on the stump and hope
00:45:27.500it'll keep growing so with things like the party system it came about because there had to be some
00:45:32.900order and coherence in forming a government within the legislature and it's good to have
00:45:39.220usually a two-party system but i actually like the canadian three-party system believe it or not
00:45:43.860you have this kind of wild card party that can be the the protest vote and take the the balance of
00:45:50.920power in the parliament from time to time if you want to send the government a certain message you
00:45:56.380want to keep them in power but you want to reduce the amount of power they have so a party system
00:46:01.080is good and healthy and has its place anytime you have independent people we'll just have
00:46:05.760independent legislatures or legislators within five minutes they've somehow grouped themselves
00:46:11.000because you need to be able to organize you need to be able to fund it you need to be able to have
00:46:15.680some sort of coherence that gets the government's program through the legislature and if it's all
00:46:21.260independent it's really great until humans start acting like humans and you have 46 chiefs in the
00:46:27.000in the uh in the legislature and nobody's willing to follow anybody else so we have parties to
00:46:33.180create order because part of the goal we see the canadian thing peace order good government
00:46:38.580is that we should have an ordered government that is good and that functions
00:46:43.120okay dennis same question is there a party system and how does that work with the elections well as
00:46:51.180as usual i find myself halfway between matthew and and bruce uh one of the concepts that dr party
00:46:57.340brought forward is the whole idea of the amateur state get rid of these professionals and that's
00:47:01.980something i fully endorse the other thing i agree with on matthew is that there needs to be some
00:47:07.340structure needs to be some sort of parties that because people will run around like chickens with
00:47:12.300their heads cut off if you just let them wander around so but what we're seeing is something
00:47:18.300where there is a party system i actually don't care if it's two or three or five
00:47:22.780it probably won't be 25 but they're relatively weaker because um in the case of the westminster
00:47:30.380system if the party in power loses a vote of confidence then of course need a new election
00:47:35.980and i don't like that at all um so you want to be able to sort of say well you can try and pass
00:47:42.220legislation that doesn't make it let's keep on going so you have a weaker party and it's weaker
00:47:47.580in part because of things like term limits you can't have career politicians who hang around for
00:47:54.22035 years amassing fortunes you say you got your eight years you do your thing two terms in the
00:47:59.580senate you're out and so they're still not completely amateurs the way bruce thinks
00:48:04.700but they're not completely embedded politicians we can't get rid of and that's the balance we see
00:48:09.900okay and then bruce party is there a party system yeah i i broadly agree with dennis
00:48:19.060on the term limits thing i do believe in an amateur government that's the way i put it
00:48:24.480you do not want a professional ruling class with their thumb over you
00:48:29.300but one of the reasons that parties have acquired such a lot of power in our system
00:48:36.680is because governments do so much because governments have a lot of power parties have
00:48:45.340a lot of power so the real solution to to to parties having too much power is governments
00:48:53.960that don't have power what you ideally want is you want a legislature with people who have been
00:49:00.040elected sitting in the chamber twiddling their thumbs thinking what are we going to do today
00:49:08.620we have no power everything is done we can't interfere this or that we can't dictate that or
00:49:14.760this like we have nothing to do and you can have parties there if you want the parties shouldn't be
00:49:21.900dictated by the constitution the people want if people who are elected want to gather together
00:49:26.620in groups and say we all believe in this well that's fine they're free people they can explain
00:49:32.260what it is that they stand for and they stand for it all together that's fine that's a party
00:49:36.280so i don't think we should outlaw parties but the importance of parties is is a problem because it
00:49:43.880reflects the importance of government the constitution should minimize the importance
00:49:49.820of government if you do that then the party problem goes away
00:49:52.820so you're raining on the party a little bit but okay that's cool i like that a lot um okay so
00:50:01.220now it's going to be dennis bruce and matt for the next one uh is there going to okay dealing
00:50:06.280with specifically alberta would there be one level of government or would be a national a regional
00:50:11.860municipal how would the government break down if at all let's start with dennis so we see a single
00:50:17.620level of government um where municipalities are really the only other layer but they're
00:50:24.020essentially creatures of that single layer they would be um paid for by grant they wouldn't be
00:50:30.180holding um be able to create laws other than a very minor sense uh under the guise of the
00:50:36.340the legislatures and so uh certainly not a provincial level or something in between so
00:50:42.180So what we do have, though, is a bicameral system where you've got, like I said, a Senate representing regions and an assembly of citizens representing the will of the broader people, the number of people.
00:50:54.400And that's the only structure you have.
00:50:56.940I see a lot of nodding out of Bruce in your next, Bruce.
00:50:59.860Would you like to add anything to that?
01:05:46.360I would aggressively work within the Westminster system to put some of the tougher rights in that I've been advocating.
01:05:53.160But ultimately, that's where I would go.
01:05:56.300All right, Bruce, if you can't go radical, which way do you want to go?
01:06:00.240Oh, well, so let's just compare the situation between two representatives of these choices.
01:06:10.080The Republican choice, and I know it's not exactly the same as what these folks are, what Dennis and Matthew are prescribing, but just metaphorically, there's the UK, which is still pretty much a legislative supremacy system, and you have the US, which is alleged to be a Republican system.
01:06:29.880The U.S. has a Bill of Rights, and the U.K. does not, essentially.
01:06:34.640It has the European, but, you know, don't worry about that.
01:06:37.540Question, which of these two countries, they both did badly, and we all did badly,
01:06:44.360but which of these two countries did worse during COVID?
01:06:49.240Which of these two countries did worse during the present free speech crisis?
01:06:54.420And so on, down the line of all these problems.
01:06:56.740I think on balance you will find, as badly as it has done, the U.S. has fared better under its Republican system than under the British Westminster legislative supremacy system.
01:07:10.860I do not trust legislatures to be the final word on anything anymore.1.00
01:07:18.020They do all kinds of crazy, stupid, tyrannical things.0.99
01:07:22.540And so much as I dislike the record of our Supreme Court of Canada on our charter and our constitution, I think they've made a real hash of it.1.00
01:07:32.620But the Americans have done better with their system.
01:07:34.680The Americans have what is right now, even though it has lots of flaws in it, their model right now is the gold standard of existing constitutions.
01:07:44.520So if I'm going to pick one and not my own, then I'm going to pick Dennis's because it's the closest to the American system.
01:07:51.640okay and then matt you can either break the tie or create a three-way tie what's your answer
01:07:57.140uh if i can't do the existing if we're forced and all albertans are forced to put their guns
01:08:03.140to the head and say we're going to do something new and different and radical one way or another
01:08:07.460i would actually be tempted to go with bruce on the logic that i do actually agree with him a lot
01:08:14.620in the theoretical sense of the role of government and those type of things the reason that i'm
01:08:20.760advocating for what I'm advocating is because of practicality of where we are, the history that we
01:08:26.320have, bringing people with us on this journey, et cetera, et cetera. But if we're going to go
01:08:31.060no holds barred, I wrote actually a master's thesis arguing pretty much what Bruce is saying
01:08:38.100as far as the role of the government and saying that it's actually the role of the church and
01:08:41.920other social organizations to do anything social. And I agree with that from a theoretical sense.
01:08:47.740the problem is we'd be going from way over here to way over there and that would be too much of
01:08:55.020a shock and you would cause such dislocation to people that it would be problematic but if i was
01:09:01.500forced to choose i'd actually go hang out with bruce in the radical corner that's incredible
01:09:07.080the one that requires no force is the one that you felt forced to choose um and here's kind of
01:09:12.720a good example of what we're talking about here so this is why we have these conversations so0.96
01:09:17.600let's jump to our q a we're gonna bring back uh the ladies to help us out with this uh angela
01:09:23.680welcome back pat welcome back and kathy welcome back so right before we jump into the questions
01:09:30.000i want to ask each one of you a question angela starting with you what do you think of this uh
01:09:34.720panel and the conversation we just had here oh fantastic conversation and so needed um
01:09:41.040um and and we've been watching the chats and it is just very lively um all these different
01:09:48.480thoughts and ideas coming forward has really stimulated I believe a lot of people thinking
01:09:53.580about this and um it has probably answered and and giving answered some questions that they've
01:09:59.040had for a long time so I'm really really excited for it question for you Pat as well you don't
01:10:04.860have to pick a winner but what do you think of this conversation so far oh I like to pick winners
01:10:09.900but i won't this time um fabulous conversation everything i thought it would be and more and i
01:10:16.380think we should keep doing rounds of it because an hour and a half is just not an um not enough
01:10:22.540time so i have a lot of questions hopefully i'll have time to ask them well we put time
01:10:29.180term limits on this conversation so uh we've got to feel what that's like uh kathy what did
01:10:34.140you think of this conversation this is exactly what we've been waiting for and hoping would
01:10:39.340happened tonight and i just hope everybody's ready because we're going to do a part two
01:10:44.140we have to i just we do oh yes and three and four and five so did you hear that gentleman
01:10:50.940you've been elected to another term okay so let me go ahead i want term limits
01:10:58.460two parts so i don't know we'll have to debate this more um the first question is for matthew
01:11:03.420directly uh matthew the westminster's model relies more on conventions rather than hard
01:11:09.340constitutional limits why should the new nation of alberta rely on unwritten expectations matthew
01:11:15.580because it keeps the constitutional limits out of the the realm of the courts and being adjudicated
01:11:23.040by the courts if it's convention then it's everybody saying yeah that's how it always
01:11:27.580has worked out and you have to go with the way that it was in the past so you know looking at
01:11:33.780the u.s with their arguments over a simple idea everyone has to has the right to keep and bear
01:11:39.280arms well they're always questioning this and that but the the way you do it with convention
01:11:43.660is just so have you always been able to own a gun yeah we've always been able to own a gun then you
01:11:47.740can own a gun have a nice day it's actually simpler and it allows public opinion as well
01:11:53.340as the legislature to weigh in on it rather than firing it off to the courts all righty
01:11:59.360hopefully and we got a few from the same one so we actually took the time to ask a question from
01:12:04.440each of you so let's go ahead and do that uh again with alberta nation for independence by the way
01:12:09.540they were watching this morning and had questions that bring them this afternoon and that's exactly
01:12:13.680what they did this one's for dennis how do you prevent a directly elected president from
01:12:18.260accumulating excessive personal power in a young nation well no question that first election is
01:12:25.220going to be pivotal so uh let's as voters be really informed on on our who our choices will be
01:12:31.860but remember the president is subject to the same term limits the same recall options and everything
01:12:38.100that every other elected position is is uh subject to so if the guy tries to do dumb stuff um recall
01:12:45.700them uh the oversight branch can check for failures and pull them from office if necessary
01:12:51.620and i think that's the control we put in place all right quick answer there thank you very much
01:12:57.220dennis and then the next one here is for bruce from the same user uh bruce who has final authority
01:13:03.540to interpret the constitution bruce an excellent question an excellent question this is part of
01:13:40.260But on the other hand, if you're going to defuse power inside your system, then you're going to have to leave it with the judges.
01:13:46.980And I won't go into details, but I've described a court system wherein you, for example, you have trial courts made of two judges who have to agree in order to convict somebody or find somebody liable.
01:13:58.760And the interpretation that they give has to be consistent with each other, the meaning they give to the words of text.
01:14:07.020and then you leave that case and you go to the next case with a panel of two and so on so in
01:14:11.740other words what you're doing is you're giving more people who are elected and on short terms
01:14:17.280short leashes the responsibility of interpreting constitution for the purpose of that case
01:14:23.400and that case alone and so their power is curbed
01:14:26.600all right uh and because we are still a capitalist society we're gonna bring up our
01:14:35.380super chat next and it's a question for all three so let's go ahead and do that uh prairie uh prairie
01:14:41.380cossack asks what's the panel panel's opinion on getting rid of universal voting right and making
01:14:46.960it a privilege let's start with uh bruce on that one please okay the problem with any of these
01:14:54.560ideas like you know it makes sense that only these people should be able to vote or only these people
01:15:00.140should be able to do x problem is that that decision itself requires somebody to make it
01:15:06.580so who are you going to choose to make that decision like is it the people all together
01:15:11.460are we back to mob rule so my answer is no look if you're going to live in a democracy
01:15:16.500every citizen and i think it should be limited to citizens every citizen of a certain age
01:15:23.200you get a vote in other words the same rules apply to every citizen of majority age other
01:15:31.580than if you're going to mess with that then you're really messing around with things
01:15:34.700okay so it is a privilege for citizens of majority age um let's go to matt next on that one
01:15:41.320i i would agree practically speaking what we have now is what we have uh you know part of me likes
01:15:48.600old 40 shilling freehold the idea that you need a stake in the government in the life of the nation
01:15:54.040before you have the right to vote so that it avoids the politics of envy and the whole eat
01:15:58.680the rich and i'll take from the rich to give to you the poor if you give me your vote but
01:16:03.400practically speaking age of majority 18 years old universal voting rights for all citizens
01:16:10.360citizens as bruce said is a good standard that has been effective across many countries and many
01:16:17.320constitutions all right well dennis let's see if you knock our socks off do you have a different
01:16:22.600answer than the two gentlemen there no citizens reach the age of 18 you get to vote that's the
01:16:27.640deal the one adder i put in is i think it should be a requirement to vote so i literally think of
01:16:34.360i think australia does this you pay a hundred dollar fine if you don't show up to vote without
01:16:38.840a you know reasonable excuse because i think that if we're going to depend on citizens uh deciding
01:16:44.600how we want to run they sure the heck better not say i'm too tired i'm too lazy i can't be bothered
01:16:49.560to vote yeah to be honest with you i kind of like that one as well um this rights and responsibilities
01:16:57.160people keep forgetting that responsibility you won't be surprised if i don't but anyway
01:17:02.360of course no force right no force in yours the first be with you um okay so uh here we go here's
01:17:09.320Here's another one for a little bit more timely for the current system.
01:17:13.080Would anyone's system allow floor crossing?
01:17:16.120Let's go ahead and start with Dennis on this one.
01:17:19.080So floor crossing is this construct in my mind of the Westminster system.
01:17:23.020So I see it more as there is no such thing as floor crossing.
01:17:25.880It's more about you vote in favor of a proposed law or action where you don't.
01:17:31.980It doesn't, you belong to the party the same the day after as you did the day before.
01:17:36.540okay and then matt floor crossing i think if in the westminster system it's true there is a room
01:17:45.780for it if the uh person who's crossing the floor has truly consulted their constituents and it's
01:17:52.040a matter of deep principle and not a brown paper bag or a skeleton in the closet there's actually
01:17:58.640a room for someone churchill famously not only ratted but re-ratted uh based on principles so
01:18:05.100i think there's room for it but it shouldn't be this shoddy shabby thing that we've just witnessed
01:18:10.600and especially if a floor crossing leads to a change of majority that would actually be a cause
01:18:16.220for the the king to step in and dissolve the government for an election because you've lost
01:18:21.360or you've gained a majority not through the will of the people through an election but rather
01:18:25.900through backroom dealing king charles are you listening king charles somebody clipped that
01:18:31.280and it's home uh bruce your thoughts no i agree with dennis uh this is one of the flaws for me
01:18:37.120of the westminster system if you're in a republican american type system where there's
01:18:42.240a separation of of powers between executive and legislature in the in the american system
01:18:48.560you know you can belong to one party and vote for or against the bill introduced by the other party
01:18:55.520you're elected as as a representative to exercise your own judgment you do what you think is best
01:19:00.800and then people will judge your voting record okay fair enough um this next one i think i i
01:19:07.200know which is the smallest but let's see what the other two say as well um from healthy full
01:19:12.880uh what model has the smallest government limits its future expansion and does not completely give
01:19:18.080away monopolies on force let's go with bruce because i already know that answer i think
01:19:22.160well mine's the smallest government and has the most limits on its future expansion
01:19:26.880does not completely give away monopoly on force.
01:19:30.700So let me just describe the way force works in my constitution.
01:20:23.540congratulations on that one uh dennis your thoughts there uh traditionally us a large
01:20:28.900government right so uh how small could that government end up being and do they have uh
01:20:33.780monopoly of force so uh definitely within the structure we're looking at it would be
01:20:39.060there have the other controls within the constitution we see things for example like
01:20:43.300a fixed percentage of the previous year's gdp as a control on spending to keep government from
01:20:50.020growing but i also look at the example of texas in the us which has its own constitution its own
01:20:55.860structures as they negotiated their way in after um us was formed and you sort of say let's put
01:21:02.660some of those structures in place that actually prevent government from meeting too often but
01:21:07.300they i think their rule is the government can only meet for so many weeks per year that's it
01:21:12.180get your job done and otherwise wait until next year so i think we can put in some controls to
01:21:16.820limit um limit the uh the the growth of government and the size of government as far as monopoly on
01:21:23.780force this is where bruce and i do disagree i think there has to be some element of managerial
01:21:29.300state in there that includes using force much the same way as i think he said and essentially
01:21:35.140we can say look my neighbor wants to build a three-story purple chicken coop on their backyard
01:21:39.940that's against the law the state is going to come in and remove it or get them to remove it so
01:21:44.420there is some element of force in what we're doing. Yeah, you have something against chicken
01:21:49.060coops. You said that on my episode as well. I'm not sure what the prejudice is. Maybe you like
01:21:53.840pigs. I don't know. Matt, same question. Is there an element of force and how can you have smaller0.98
01:21:59.440government and stop the expansion? I think we do see a good example of this in the current Alberta
01:22:04.360government. Albertans like smaller governments and, you know, you usually win when you say,
01:22:09.200I'll make the government smaller. Sometimes at the same time, the government just goes ahead and
01:22:13.200make something bigger but the ability is there to make the government as small as the electors want
01:22:19.740and to limit its future expansion in alberta we see this the person who stands up and says i'm
01:22:25.200going to tax you more and do more things usually we say yeah it's a bad idea uh and on the monopoly
01:22:31.120of force i do believe government does have the monopoly on lawful force or not a total monopoly
01:22:37.280but a like actually like bruce says the monopoly on who gets to have force and adjudicating that
01:22:43.900so we should have the right to you know self-defense and these other things where we use
01:22:48.360force as private individuals but there should be an adjudicator of that private force in the
01:22:53.640government hence law and that goes back to the very dawn of time so in the westminster model it
01:22:59.800is up to the electors how small and limited they want their government to be
01:23:03.860all right um what i want to do now is i'm going to go to kathy and sorry to put your spot here
01:23:10.660but kathy as you were sitting in the chat going through a bunch and then i'll go to pat and then
01:23:14.680angela after was there some question or question that came up a lot that you'd like to bring
01:23:18.960forward i got a lot more to go so i can keep going through the queue but was there something
01:23:22.460that came up a few times while you were in the chat not the ones that i was watching no that
01:23:28.520that aren't already here in the general chat that we have going on us ladies here
01:23:34.280pretty much is is in there good so i would just keep going okay uh pat i actually think there's
01:23:41.200one in here from you uh how about i go ahead and bring that up and then uh we'll address your
01:23:46.760question right now so why do you believe a governor general or lieutenant governor is more
01:23:52.080effective shield against tyranny than parties oversight branch which can subpoena and remove
01:23:58.360corrupt officials uh directly so i guess this is for matt and then we could actually ask the other
01:24:03.400two gentlemen to jump in on this one as well after so matt actually it's actually dennis's
01:24:07.440oversight branch yes or dennis's yeah not parties can uh yeah i think the lieutenant governor is
01:24:16.400more effective yeah uh governor general or lieutenant governor have that ability to fire
01:24:22.100if so needed ministers of the crown or other people within that system for this exact reason
01:24:28.240Why wait to subpoena them? Why not just fire them if they are? It's meant to be a last resort. It's meant to be the final tool that is used. I think the last time it was actually used was the 1970s in Australia. If I'm correct, Bruce can correct me on that. But it was used in a case where a prime minister refused to vacate his office despite losing an election and the voice of the people.
01:24:54.340so there the governor general said you're gone buddy it was as simple as that so it's actually
01:24:59.140easier than with a subpoena system or any other sort of thing they just fired them
01:25:05.580all right and then dennis will come to you because you're the one that has the oversight branch why
01:25:11.220do you think that's more effective than a governor general and lieutenant governor
01:25:14.040so so actually the whole concept of the oversight branch came from a discussion between matt and
01:25:19.480myself around he was pushing the role of governor general and so forth for the very function he just
01:25:25.420described we thought about and talked about it and sort of what i concluded is you need that
01:25:31.680final check and balance to get rid of someone that's misbehaving in some fashion so the difference
01:25:40.700is i don't trust individuals i actually want to have you know a formal process a grand jury or a
01:25:48.820group of people to look at this and look at the evidence and say yes in fact dennis you're a bad
01:25:52.900dude out you go rather than depending upon the whim of a governor general governor general or
01:25:58.800lieutenant general witness the last two governor generals we've had even the last three or four0.99
01:26:03.480and i go man we're getting some awfully stupid ones i don't see a protection against that0.98
01:26:08.120and then bruce is your position none of the above and if so why0.98
01:26:12.960none of the above none of the above here's why checks and balances are are kind of nice in
01:26:21.820theory and sometimes they work but sometimes they don't work a lot of the times they don't work and
01:26:27.480they don't work at precisely the moment you need them the most and i think again one of the best
01:26:32.000examples of this is covid you didn't have an oversight branch during covid but if you had
01:26:37.380would the oversight branch have been different than the other three branches you already have
01:26:42.460the legislature the bureaucracy the courts the problem is this when you have checks and balances
01:26:49.520inside a single beast that is the state what often happens as is happening today
01:26:56.800is that all of those branches which are checks and balances in theory on each other they all
01:27:04.580basically are on the same page about the big picture question sure they have their disputes
01:27:10.060and quarrels. But in the big picture, they all were on the same page on the necessity for the
01:27:18.600state to govern society and keep people safe with the measures that were introduced during COVID.
01:27:24.640And none of them would step out and say, no, no, this is wrong. And if you are giving the final
01:27:30.060authority to some other branch inside the state to do the same thing, then again, all you're doing
01:27:36.840is moving power around you're making the buck stop here instead of here or here or here you
01:27:42.600have still not done the most important thing which is to say sorry this is not for you this is for
01:27:50.920the individual people out there and you have no jurisdiction to make these calls in the first
01:27:55.640place okay fantastic question there pet um angela did you have a question want to throw in here at
01:28:02.120this stage or just move on to the next one yeah actually i do so i noticed in the chat
01:28:06.520so there was a lot of reaction to the idea of remaining under the crown and so my question is
01:28:13.080for matthew how would this actually benefit us as albertans to remain under the crown what does that
01:28:21.080do for us so the crown provides us a locus of ultimate authority that is not political
01:28:29.400and that does not exercise day-to-day power in other words you can be loyal to them fiercely0.98
01:28:35.240loyal and you can still hate the government's guts and think the prime minister is a doofhead
01:28:41.080and both are permitted at the same time it provides us with those ultimate reserve powers
01:28:46.680that don't rest or vest authority ultimate in the government as a permanent institution rather the
01:28:53.960government comes and goes it is dissolved and reconstituted and there is that sense that
01:28:59.000government is not eternal or like bruce said this state that is this ultimate thing that
01:29:04.360is above all other things so it protects us from that uh and it avoids the whims of a government
01:29:11.320because at the end of the day you have this person who is a thinking feeling human being
01:29:17.000who theoretically and i would argue actually with the majority of our kings and queens of the past
01:29:22.680care for their people and and are able to help them just one little point with the queen bless
01:29:28.920her heart i loved her to death uh she would go in as she was going on walkabout into the store0.74
01:29:34.760to look at the price of goods because she wanted to know what her people were being charged for
01:29:40.280food because of course she had people to get her food she cared enough to look at the little0.93
01:29:45.080details to stop and hear the little people and having someone like that who is the father or
01:29:51.320the mother of the nation as it were who is disconnected from the daily grind of the
01:29:56.540political process provides us a locus for ceremonial and for unity all right um and
01:30:05.180something to look at on your dollar bills as well so bruce said check and balances a few times and
01:30:10.560the next one is a different type of check and balance uh so dave annis or five to six who
01:30:17.600represents 4 525 other dave annis is out there um his question is how does your constitution
01:30:24.140strictly for prohibit fiat money printing and the resulting erosion of citizen purchasing power
01:30:30.520337 million was printed in february 2026 eroding wealth wow none of that ended up here uh let's
01:30:37.200start with bruce on that one great question great question it's important that the state not have
01:30:42.880power to do that and that's exactly what i'm describing right so in this flipping the default
01:30:47.680thing the state has the power to do nothing except what's the list if the list is keep the peace
01:30:57.040resolve disputes protect the country one of the things that's not in that list is printing money
01:31:04.320having a central bank setting interest rates having monetary policies it has no power to do
01:31:12.320any of those things it cannot be done there is no policy there will be no legislation it is outside
01:31:18.240the the limits of what the state is empowered to do period okay dennis yeah i mean while i agree
01:31:29.600conceptually with with what bruce wrote the reality is we need money we need means of exchange
01:31:34.960and we don't want to have everyone wanting running around with piles of gold or diamonds or
01:31:38.800whatever arguing what's worth what so you do need a method of exchange and that's called money now
01:31:45.360the fiat money problem is a different one because going off the gold standard for example way back
01:31:50.080when was one of the larger mistakes in our histories so within things like the value of
01:31:54.640freedom we put in thing put in the aspect that the currency must be backed now do we put that
01:32:00.240in the constitution perhaps yes perhaps no but that is the the concept is that the fiat currency
01:32:07.280doesn't exist it's this represents so much oil so much precious mineral so much whatever and
01:32:14.640we can't issue more currency until we have more of those other precious things of real value
01:32:20.240and i think that's the control we could put in fiat currency is is a curse on our on our worlds
01:32:25.920for sure and matt the king or queen's all over the currency so how does this work for you
01:32:30.800gotta love it a central bank and a currency are important to any modern economy just look all the
01:32:37.580great economies have them for a reason but it is true a fiat currency that is unbacked by any sort
01:32:44.320of real tangible wealth whether it be commodities gold silver is going to be one that erodes the
01:32:50.040wealth of people because it is inflationary now you can avoid that chiefly in statute like i say
01:32:56.280keep the constitution small and the statutes do the work but you have to limit the right of the
01:33:02.120government to print its way out of its money problems and that comes down to going back to
01:33:07.320the last question the limitation of the size of government and the role of government into areas
01:33:13.320that they should be and the people saying if you go into those other areas you're going to have a
01:33:18.440problem okay and as we get into this next question here um suna soul silver has any country ever
01:33:28.480tried bruce's suggestion of government i've honestly never heard of this type of government
01:33:32.800before so bruce one for you bud right not to my knowledge never been tried in the real world i
01:33:39.780mean lots of people have talked about the various ways that one might achieve an actually free
01:33:45.900country uh but in the real world no because there are too many vested interests who are determined
01:33:53.280not to do it this way here's one of the problems there's going to be great resistance to this kind
01:33:58.800of a model for the very reason if i may put it this way for the very reason is that it would work
01:34:05.320it would work to to prevent the accumulation of both political and economic power at at the top
01:34:14.080levels of the of the architecture right so no it has not been done has not been done
01:34:20.980this is i mean i'd like to think that this is one of those moments where it's possible to
01:34:27.800contemplate but if it's not to be then it's not to be all right and this is one of the things
01:34:34.460you've said many times if you're going to make a change make a big one make it worthwhile if you're
01:34:39.600going to if you're going to go where you've never gone you have to do what you have never done
01:34:43.920it sounds like star trek to be honest with you um okay so question out here from matthew
01:34:50.620oh sorry pat you wanted to ask something there i saw a hand up there yeah sorry just before we
01:34:55.580move on to another question my question then for you is because in theory i very much like your
01:35:02.900idea but in practice i feel that especially given the generations of the nanny nanny state
01:35:10.820not enough canadians even not enough albertans are able to make that leap right away it's kind
01:35:17.860of like jumping off the cliff and my question is would there be a potential where we could start
01:35:23.460off with something in the middle like dennis and then have a kind of timeout phase of five or ten
01:35:31.540years where we get the people to get used to the idea,
01:35:36.100but also to start taking the responsibility needed in order
01:35:39.700to actually put this theory in practice.
01:35:56.300uh i think the answer to your question a very good question is no that that's not going to happen
01:36:04.640i don't think this is the kind of thing that can be done incrementally for the reasons that you
01:36:10.060allude to it's very difficult to do at all it's the kind of thing that has to be done cold turkey
01:36:16.380in a moment where everything is on its edge so for example the americans did something
01:36:23.840extraordinary and their constitution is not the one that i'm describing but they did for their
01:36:29.260time something as different as what i'm describing for this moment and they needed that crisis
01:36:36.860for it to happen if they had waited and they said we're going to just reproduce what we have
01:36:43.040from britain we're just going to keep the westminster system we're going to keep everything
01:36:46.420except maybe not pledge to the king and we'll fix it later on do we think that you know 50 years
01:36:53.500after that they would have sat down and said you know folks it's time now to change over
01:36:57.500to a completely different thing well no because by then the interests in america will have will
01:37:04.540have gathered under the system you established and it will be impossible so this is only possible to
01:37:11.980to contemplate because you're making a break with what you have and if you don't do it now
01:37:17.580won't happen another way to look at this one pet is um can you move out of your parents house but
01:37:25.560go back for dinner and laundry or can you be married and single at the same time a little
01:37:30.420difficult a little difficult sometimes you just have to make that leap of faith and get her done
01:37:33.940i'm thinking that we build it into the new system like okay you've got five years to get used to
01:37:39.540this and then the band-aid comes off well you can't do it that way you could do it that way you
01:37:44.220you you could decide on the new system and say fine we're going to have this system looks like
01:37:49.740this we're going to have you know a a five years ten years long transition period from one to the
01:37:56.700other that might work because then you know what you're going to fine yeah but it can't be
01:38:02.620incremental with like growth you have to establish it at the beginning i think is his big point there
01:38:07.820yes uh matthew here's one for you now question for matthew thank you alberta nan for independence
01:38:13.820Why is the constitutional monarchy model best suited for long-term unity in a newly formed independent Alberta when it has failed in Canada?
01:38:23.380It hasn't failed. Canada has failed. And that's not because of the system.
01:38:28.020If we had a republic, we'd be in the same situation.
01:38:30.780The problem is that we have at least four different cultures and nations trying to unite across a vast continent under one system.
01:38:39.620No matter what the system is, it's just too big.
01:38:43.060so it's not the issue of you know the king somehow having affected our lives no he hasn't really it
01:38:49.660isn't even that the legislature is so bad we voted you're you know the majority in the east voted in
01:38:56.520the people who have made all these changes it's because we are not able to have our voice heard
01:39:02.180and even if we had a republican model we still would have had our voice not heard so we fix it
01:39:08.800by cutting off ottawa not by making dramatic changes to the very foundation of all that we
01:39:14.320have it's so so simple get rid of the thing that's causing the problem and don't get rid of anything
01:39:20.960else then if there's further problems you go okay we need to change here we need to change there
01:39:25.760that's actually the westminster tradition is you do have the living tree and an adjustment that
01:39:30.880can be made as you need to but start slow cut cut off the gangrene and then see if you have to cut
01:39:36.960off the whole leg and then uh thank you and then back to pet a little bit there so i guess you can
01:39:43.680be single and married it's called engagement so you know when the wedding date is so under that
01:39:48.400model you're eventually going to get that marriage and get her done um let's go to dennis there's one
01:39:53.360here for dennis so dennis what about globalists that prepare one person after another even with
01:39:59.920your term limits so interference uh in the process i mean i'll be real clear there is
01:40:08.000limited ways a constitution can block every last possible ill and i don't care which one
01:40:15.920of the three you look at here what we require more than anything is an informed knowledgeable
01:40:23.680electorate who are keeping their eyes open one of things i am i lament frequently is that
01:40:28.880the average Albertan doesn't even know how they're governed today they don't know what the rules are
01:40:34.680they don't the constitution is they don't know anything and if we continue down that vein yeah
01:40:39.780then nefarious people like the globalists will come in and say yeah we'll just fool around with
01:40:44.740your system we'll stack in our candidates one after the other and you actually know better off
01:40:49.680than you are today so if citizens don't take that responsibility seriously none of these systems
01:40:56.680will work oh i think mine will mine will because mine will because there's no power to wield or
01:41:02.520very little power to wield the globalists are not going to want to infiltrate my government because
01:41:06.760the governments don't do anything i mean there's no point you can't lobby somebody who has no power
01:41:11.880and there's no in being a member of the legislature in my kind of country is kind of like why would
01:41:17.560you want to do that you're kind of wasting your time so and it will also force the public to very
01:41:23.240quickly become responsible and knowledgeable yes yes correct exactly so yeah and matt you want to
01:41:30.140throw your head in on this one uh because you actually have a head of state and is it also
01:41:34.880going to be hereditary is the next king or queen going to come from the offspring of the current
01:41:40.980one yeah i'd just like to say elections are not always the answer uh it's good to have heredity
01:41:46.560because then you know there's no reason to politic right hey let's try and get our candidate for the
01:41:52.820king. Well, it's whoever is the son of that person is going to be the king. So what are you going to
01:41:57.580do? You can't manipulate it. Elections provide for an industry and interests to build their
01:42:05.460own strategies to win elections. I was just sitting in a campaign thing where I was learning
01:42:10.460how, quite frankly, to manipulate voters, you know, because someone was teaching. They said
01:42:15.880more nicely than that but you're teaching people how to use the system to maximize your vote and
01:42:23.480minimize the other guy's vote so elections don't guarantee protection that is the people the
01:42:29.480populace just what dennis said we need people who are going to think um bruce said it we all agree
01:42:35.080on this point who are willing to act and who are willing to be involved in their government
01:42:39.320okay um next question for all uh back to prairie uh cossack all countries that adopt
01:42:48.640universal voting rights are plagued by vote buying uninformed voting and voting on a short-term
01:42:54.800appetite prove me wrong bruce you want to try to tackle that one first oh i wouldn't want to prove
01:43:00.280you're wrong i think that's true but the point of my architecture is that it doesn't really matter
01:43:06.620that much because the legislature you elect is not going to be doing any fundamental things the
01:43:11.800fundamental things are already set out in the constitution as are the limits to the power of
01:43:16.280the legislature itself and it's going to attract people so so one of the things one thing is that
01:43:23.380one of the things that dennis and i have in common in these models is is term limits for everybody
01:43:27.720but my term limit goes like this everybody who has any role in the state in any capacity whether
01:43:35.100it's a legislator like a politician a bureaucrat a judge an ambassador a receptionist a consultant
01:43:43.020can only work for the state for you know pick a number six to eight years total in their over
01:43:48.200their lifetime so if you are a politician for eight years you can thereafter not be a judge
01:43:53.880not be an ambassador not be a consultant moreover those people who work for the state
01:43:59.860all of them will be paid the median national wage the median national wage in other words
01:44:08.060working for the state in any capacity is no way to get power and it is no way to get rich
01:44:13.100so you're going to have trouble finding people to do it and who cares about the election you're
01:44:19.180going to have people sitting in the chamber with nothing to do okay and then let's go to
01:44:25.120dennis next on this one how would you address this if well i mean well i don't think you'd
01:44:31.320be proven wrong i think uh bruce has some of the the insight required in the sense that
01:44:37.920you know we have to teach our electorate we have to make it not desirable to be in government
01:44:44.800a long time there's no big money to be made i mean where he and i differ is not on term limits
01:44:50.640uh as a concept but i just say look you do need professionals who can deal with complex things
01:44:57.740i come from large united body of work you cannot bring a guy in at the lowest bidder
01:45:03.020some guy's going to make 500 bucks an hour doing something he's not going to come to the government
01:45:06.440a competent person won't come in for do it for 50. so we have to find a way to somehow
01:45:11.900differentiate between the folks that actually wield power so the elected officials the top
01:45:17.600level bureaucrats away from the people that are doing the day-to-day work that need to be paid
01:45:23.120a competitive wage because you need that skill set and that talent so that's the way i see it
01:45:28.460okay then matt i'll throw this question to you as well because there is no term limits you can
01:45:33.300have lifelong appointments uh what do you say i think it is important that everybody not be
01:45:39.660elected that's why there should actually be appointments that are serious one of the problems
01:45:44.620that we had with pierre trudeau and his ilk is they deliberately appointed uh less than bright
01:45:49.660people because they wanted to destroy the senate and the crown as legitimate and so they appoint
01:45:57.500you know whatever kind of dingbat they can find who can't actually do the job and is who's going
01:46:01.740to embarrass the office so appoint good people to those things that can then ensure that they
01:46:07.900hold the elected side to account so that the vote buying uninformed voting and voting on a short-term
01:46:13.580appetite can't take over the system okay uh question we got two more questions for all and
01:46:21.160then we'll start to wrap up so frank asks what is the size of government still 87 mlas let's go
01:46:27.980ahead and start with dennis on this one don't have a specific number in mind i think it's uh 87 feels
01:46:34.300pretty big for me um i tend to think of something like 40 senators 40 mlas or mps whatever you call
01:46:42.540them um because i'd like to see the size of government being small i don't think many things
01:46:47.260are improved by having many many voices in the room arguing their points okay and then matt we'll
01:46:54.620go to you next and then bruce at the end here uh i think representation by population means you have
01:47:01.020to have a fair number because otherwise if you have one person representing 150 000 people it's
01:47:06.380just stupid you can't do that so you have to have a large enough house that when we say representative
01:47:11.500they truly are representative and on the senate side i actually just in my little personal bna1.00
01:47:17.740set it at 50 members that were divided among the counties and the cities of alberta just as a way
01:47:23.100to have enough people that again they represent their part geographically of the province but
01:47:29.740again it's not set in stone on that you'd have to think it through more carefully than i did
01:47:35.100okay and bruce how would you split it up yeah i'd prefer something smaller but i would imagine
01:47:41.420two chambers one elected by population and the other elected by geographical territory so that
01:47:47.980you counterbalance the distorting effects of concentration of population other than that 87
01:47:53.160might be too many for one chamber but i'm i'm i don't know what the exact number should be
01:47:59.220okay and you kind of just you have this power bruce like you know what's coming up uh so i'm
01:48:05.100going to still bring it up um how often dave asks how do you make sure the urban centers don't use
01:48:10.780their tiny uh their majority to impose their will on rural areas we'll start with you bruce
01:48:16.340because you kind of just answered that and then we'll get to matt then dennis yeah yeah you have
01:48:20.460you have two chambers and if you have one of those chambers elected by geographical territory
01:48:25.080that is you know one or two senators let's call them to be elected to the senate based upon
01:48:31.940square footage in the territory and the same size of each territory then you completely offset any
01:48:38.580distorting effects of population okay and i just noticed that we're losing matthew shortly so let
01:48:44.160me just kind of get to the last one and then we'll start to wrap up with you matthew uh let me go
01:48:48.120ahead and get this one off um okay so i just had it let me just go get it question for all uh if
01:48:57.240the party system if there's a party system do we abolish whipped votes for representatives to truly
01:49:02.720speak for their constituents so the party really controlling the representatives let's start with
01:52:48.300And one of the fantastic things about this moment in Alberta is that I can talk to people like Dennis and Matthew about these things in a serious way, in a way that is, you know, has potential real world implications as opposed to sitting in some dry academic chamber and talking about it theoretically.
01:53:07.940So my hat's off to both of them for engaging in this and putting forward their ideas.
01:53:12.620It's been a treat to get to know both of them and a treat to be on this podcast.
01:53:35.460That's kind of an interesting argument there.
01:53:38.200One of my favorite ice creams growing up, and sorry if I say this wrong, but Napoleon, Napoleon, was a strawberry, chocolate, and vanilla because I like a little bit of all of them.
01:53:47.700So, Kathy, I'm actually going to come to you next.
01:53:50.020Do you see pieces of all of these that you actually like?
01:53:52.960And maybe there's a way to kind of create something very different here.
01:53:58.160The one that I really have trouble with is with is with Matt, with the Westminster system.
01:54:06.060I've everybody knows what I'm going around doing my speeches.
01:54:09.300It's to bring that education piece as to how we became a province.
01:54:13.140And I have never, ever seen it work to our advantage.
01:54:16.020So even in a smaller setting in the country of Alberta, I just can't see how there's not going to be one part of the of the country of Alberta that's left out because of the way that it's that it's set up in the Westminster system.
01:54:29.740But I'm willing to be proven wrong. I really like what Bruce says.
01:54:34.140I'm libertarian, too. So get out of my way. Let me live my life and and let's go on.
01:54:39.200And if you do me wrong, we'll do something about it.
01:54:41.160But at the same time, Dennis says, you know, he comes in as that measured voice, bringing kind of the two sides together.
01:54:47.260That is probably much more palpable for Albertans to be able to wrap their heads around.
01:54:52.420So, again, this is why we just have to keep having these conversations so that Albertans go to that referendum, very educated as to what they're saying yes or no to.
01:55:03.080And then, more importantly, to the Constitutional Convention that will follow, knowing exactly what's before them and what they're saying yes or no to.
01:55:11.160so i just really appreciate this conversation and i look forward to doing it again
01:55:16.200fantastic uh angela same question do you think there's a piece of each one of them that you like
01:55:20.920or are you just a chocolate vanilla type of gallon forget that strawberry from the crown
01:55:26.840yeah i do i honestly do have a hard time um understanding the importance of the crown or
01:55:33.880what value it would bring to us um and again like kathy i am um libertarian um leaning for sure um
01:55:44.440i like what bruce has to say and i i think it was it's going to take a lot of education to get
01:55:52.360albertans to to be able to envision that and to understand that uh what what he is pointing out
01:55:59.080um and so if we don't get to that point that kind of leaves us with denisis which would not
01:56:04.920necessarily be a bad thing at all i can see a lot of good in it i really do believe that the cure to
01:56:10.920what ails us is to have a very active and informed electorate which is why we're having these
01:56:18.360discussions and these conversations and why we're inviting folks like if you haven't had a chance to
01:56:23.800go and look at the six previous episodes please do you'll find a list of them on our on our facebook
01:56:30.200and on our x pages because um we definitely need folks who are informed and and able to
01:56:37.560feel confident when they stand in that polling booth and and check that box yeah i don't want
01:56:43.560to freak anybody out but it may be one of the most important non-family and personal related
01:56:48.360question you ever answer so making sure you're informed on it pet same question can we take
01:56:53.800pieces of each of it or are you going to throw out one all together too i think we're going to have
01:56:59.240to and uh i think it's no surprise to anybody that in terms of a westminster system it's just
01:57:06.440a non-starter and i actually disagree with a couple of things matthew said the uk is a small
01:57:12.680country smaller than the land mass of alberta and how well is that going there um and the crown is
01:57:19.560not of no consequence because through the governor general the crown controls the military and the
01:57:27.160government and so i don't agree with that whatsoever um i'll be honest i'm i'm a bruce party gal
01:57:37.320however i don't think that our population as a whole is prepared for that i don't think they'll
01:57:43.800go for it and in that sense that's why i asked my question which is can we start with the middle
01:57:52.520and put term limits on that and decide in five or ten years you need to get on your feet get used to
01:58:00.440the idea of not having a nanny state do everything for you and have a plan for incrementally i am
01:58:08.200my background's in behavioral science so we need to incrementally you know properly positively
01:58:15.240reinforce people to get them on board um so that's that's kind of my idea and in terms of
01:58:21.720the common thread where we need an educated and engaged citizenry rather than either precluding
01:58:30.120people from voting or mandating that everyone should vote maybe there should be a test
01:58:38.040that you need to pass before you vote which will be educational and you know get you up to speed
01:58:48.280before you're making such decisions for your fellow citizens and yourself
01:58:53.480should the first question be can you name your representative now
01:58:56.920we got about 30 seconds and we're going to lose the stream so i'm going to have to wrap up on
01:59:03.640that point and i actually think there's a lot more support than you would think for that kind of
01:59:08.440thinking pat so thank you very much to matt for being here uh as well it's a tough position to
01:59:14.280take is you're fighting uphill battle because there's a lot of resentment and jadedness because
01:59:20.040we're currently in that system uh dennis thank you so much for sharing yours as well i think a
01:59:24.520a lot of people understand it they get it and then bruce i think we have to keep talking about
01:59:29.160yours some more because if there's a lot of support for it you might be able to see that
01:59:33.160radical shift to make this all worthwhile kathy pat angela you all rock but thank you all very
01:59:38.600much for being here tonight i appreciate it make sure you share it out there's multiple places you
01:59:42.520can find us so share it out follow everybody involved and i definitely want to make sure
01:59:46.280that you guys all understand that i love you all very much and god bless thank you jason