John Bolton - November 22, 2025


Courtroom CLASH： APP vs First Nations OVER Alberta INDEPENDENCE


Episode Stats


Length

29 minutes

Words per minute

140.59071

Word count

4,100

Sentence count

261

Harmful content

Hate speech

2

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

In this episode, Dr. Dennis Modry of the Alberta Prosperity Project joins me to update us on the progress of the case and give us an update on what's going on with the case. Dr. Modry talks about what he saw in court this week and why he thinks we're going to have a referendum.

Transcript

Transcript generated with Whisper (turbo).
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:00.000 So you're pretty confident that we're going to have, regardless of, even if this doesn't turn
00:00:05.280 out in our favor, what was discussed over the last three days, and will be discussed a bit more
00:00:09.440 before January, that we will have a vote on independence.
00:00:14.160 This is an unstoppable movement. This is an absolute unstoppable movement.
00:00:23.500 Hi, it's John, and welcome to the channel. Great to have you along. Let me just turn on my light,
00:00:27.320 maybe get a little more light on my face here. Oh, there we go. So much more handsome. It's good
00:00:31.520 to have you along today. Got the big blue mug of coffee with me as usual. I wanted to give you an
00:00:36.460 update on what's going on with the Alberta Prosperity Project. They've been in court this week,
00:00:41.580 Wednesday through Friday. I did my very best to watch as much of it as possible. I'm not a lawyer,
00:00:47.880 so sometimes it went right over my head, but I've got Dr. Dennis Modry here from the Alberta
00:00:51.840 Prosperity Project to talk a little bit about what he saw and how we're moving forward. When it comes
00:00:56.600 to our question, let me read it to you. Do you agree that the province of Alberta shall become
00:01:00.920 a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada? And Dr. Modry, thanks very much for
00:01:06.340 being here. I do appreciate it. My pleasure, John. Okay, so what I understood going into this,
00:01:14.000 and it's interesting because I've never really watched, I watched this online, I've never really
00:01:18.340 watched something happening from court. This was Court of King's Bench Justice Colin Feesby,
00:01:25.460 who was overseeing this over the last several days. Jeff Rath, Eva Chippyuk were there representing
00:01:31.020 the Alberta Prosperity Project. And Mitch Sylvester, it was interesting, it was listed as Chief
00:01:35.260 Electoral Officer versus Mitch Sylvester, the Chief Electoral Officer of Alberta, is Gordon McClure,
00:01:41.920 if I remember correctly. Correct.
00:01:44.140 What I thought going into this, Dr. Modry, was you were going to hear from a number of Aboriginal
00:01:49.120 groups or Indigenous groups and their lawyers regarding the question and whether the question
00:01:54.460 and a referendum here in Alberta for its independence would be an infringement of their
00:02:00.420 treaty rights. Is that what this was all about? Because I think this got a larger scope over the
00:02:05.460 last three days from what I could see. It kind of expanded a little bit.
00:02:08.880 Well, so, to begin with, everybody knows I'm not a lawyer.
00:02:18.380 Yeah, well, I'm not either.
00:02:20.240 All right.
00:02:20.960 Yeah, yeah.
00:02:21.440 So, from a simplistic cardiac surgical mind.
00:02:26.980 Radio announcer here, Dr. Modry.
00:02:28.640 There you go. There you go.
00:02:30.380 But I've thought about these things for quite some time.
00:02:34.460 And, you know, when you look at the Citizens Initiative Act and you look at Sections 2-4,
00:02:44.120 to the average reader, you would come to a conclusion that if you're to have a referendum
00:02:53.380 on a constitutional change, that it cannot abridge Section 1 to 35.1 of the Constitution.
00:03:04.020 If you, just give me a second here. If you could, let me just tell people what they are.
00:03:07.600 Okay. So, Section 2-4 of the Alberta Citizens Initiative Act is this.
00:03:11.340 An initiative petition proposal must not contravene Sections 1 to 35.1 of the Constitution Act 1982.
00:03:17.740 Now, Section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982 recognizes and affirms the existing Aboriginal and treaty rights
00:03:25.020 of the First Nations, Inuit, and Métis people of Canada.
00:03:28.420 This constitutional protection means these rights cannot be extinguished by the government
00:03:33.060 and includes a duty for the Crown to consult with Indigenous groups on actions that may impact their rights.
00:03:38.680 Just to make it clear so people know where we're going here.
00:03:40.860 And it was mentioned, those two things were mentioned a lot over the last three days.
00:03:44.820 Right. Right. Exactly.
00:03:46.720 So, when you look at it from the perspective of the Aboriginal people in the province of Alberta,
00:03:57.840 their concern centers around their rights being compromised.
00:04:05.540 But this is an initiative petition, meaning that you can't, from an initiative petition per se,
00:04:14.220 abridge any rights because there are multiple steps.
00:04:19.000 After the petition goes forward, and it will be easy for us to get the 177,000 signatures,
00:04:28.140 then what happens is that the petition then goes to the provincial government.
00:04:35.100 And it's up to the provincial government to make a decision as to whether or not they will even hold a referendum.
00:04:42.880 And if they hold a referendum, then they have the right to choose the timing and the nature of the question.
00:04:52.360 On top of that, any question that contemplates Alberta becoming a sovereign country,
00:04:59.480 the question has to be approved by the House of Commons.
00:05:02.760 So, there's a number of steps here.
00:05:06.240 And I think what the Aboriginal people generally were concerned about,
00:05:13.380 and in a way it's a legitimate concern, but the timing is wrong.
00:05:19.260 So, their concern is that what is the implication to them of simply having a petition go forward to a referendum?
00:05:32.520 And so, they're, in a way, putting the cart before the horse.
00:05:38.140 So, it's multiple steps between having a petition and then a successful referendum,
00:05:44.960 which triggers the Clarity Act, and that triggers constitutional discussions.
00:05:51.060 And then, ostensibly, you need to get to a point where the seven of ten provinces agree to open and change the Constitution.
00:06:02.980 The House of Commons has to agree.
00:06:04.220 The Senate has to agree.
00:06:07.080 And there you are.
00:06:09.240 And that would be the essence of the negotiations.
00:06:12.560 Now, what I think Justice Feesby brought up, as well, and I think the Aboriginal people would be concerned about,
00:06:28.120 is the way in which matters would be handled subsequent to a successful referendum.
00:06:37.820 Okay, like I say, that triggers the Clarity Act.
00:06:40.200 Now, I don't know if I can share the screen or not, but I could take you to what they were concerned about, in particular.
00:06:50.500 Let me see.
00:06:51.060 I've never done this before.
00:06:53.780 Well, it doesn't matter.
00:06:57.000 Let me explain it to you this way.
00:06:59.580 What Justice Feesby was concerned about was, and what the Aboriginal people are concerned about, is a hypothetical, okay?
00:07:11.280 And the hypothetical could be this, that when the Supreme Court analyzed the Quebec secession reference,
00:07:19.720 okay, they concluded in Section 154 of that analysis that a province doesn't have the unilateral right to declare its sovereignty subsequent to a referendum.
00:07:39.420 In other words, you have to go through the rabbit hole of discussions and you have to get the other provinces to agree and the House of Commons to then ratify it and the Senate to ratify it in order to remove Alberta from the Constitution.
00:07:57.840 That's the modification in the Constitution, okay?
00:08:02.540 However, Section 155 states something different.
00:08:08.300 It says, well, not necessarily different, but you could interpret it different.
00:08:15.540 Section 155 states this, is that although a province doesn't have the right constitutionally to declare its independence, independently,
00:08:32.000 it could make an unconstitutional, okay?
00:08:36.100 It's important to understand this terminology, an unconstitutional declaration of independence
00:08:42.080 if other countries acknowledge that unilateral, unconstitutional declaration of independence,
00:08:50.920 which in fact would be a de facto declaration of independence.
00:08:56.220 And in court today, as I recall, yesterday and today,
00:09:03.040 I believe that our general counsel made the point that our general counsel made the point that,
00:09:08.880 that, that, let me get my wording correctly again, again, I'm not a lawyer, but you need to parse your words very carefully.
00:09:22.440 In court, I believe that our general counsel stated that there was no plan to make an unconstitutional declaration of independence.
00:09:35.220 And the Alberta Prosperity Project, in its entirety, has been committed to following a legal pathway.
00:09:43.900 Now, what came up, of course, was Justice Feesby did refer to podcast information provided not only by Mr. Rath, our general counsel,
00:10:01.120 but my, but by myself as well.
00:10:04.560 We made reference to Section 155, okay?
00:10:07.940 And he brought it up in the context of us visiting with the U.S. administration.
00:10:14.980 He actually, on Wednesday, I remember him talking about this.
00:10:18.240 He brought up the fact that Jeff Rath, we've had her on the channel many times,
00:10:22.660 has said on podcast that on day one, the United States would recognize Canada as a country,
00:10:28.520 and the words that UDI was brought up.
00:10:32.040 And Jeff said, I don't recall exactly saying that.
00:10:35.220 I did go back and look at my videos.
00:10:36.460 I don't believe he said it on my videos, but maybe he did it in the past.
00:10:40.220 But this was brought up, I think, all three days, the UDI.
00:10:45.040 And you want to go through the process following along with the Clarity Act that was determined after the 1995 referendum in Quebec.
00:10:53.000 And do you think, I don't want to take all day here, but do you think that there should be any concern for Aboriginal groups
00:11:02.400 when it comes to just having a referendum here on Alberta's sovereignty?
00:11:08.100 No, I don't think so at all, because here are the options.
00:11:15.120 The options are that, number one, First Nations could maintain their alignment with Canada.
00:11:24.820 And so the reservations per se, which is about 1.5% or less of Alberta's landmass,
00:11:35.460 they could maintain their ties to Canada, they could maintain their reservations,
00:11:42.360 and they could maintain their treaty rights, including transference across any border.
00:11:52.060 Okay, so they could conceivably just say, no, we want to remain in Canada,
00:11:57.960 and we want to maintain the same fiscal arrangements that we have with Canada.
00:12:03.700 We want to remain as Canadian citizens, as First Nations or Aboriginal people in general.
00:12:11.720 We want our treaty rights so that we can cross international borders,
00:12:17.920 such as the J Treaty contemplates, where Aboriginals in Alberta can just cross the U.S. border,
00:12:27.820 into the U.S. border.
00:12:29.240 So there's no reason why you couldn't have something similar take place.
00:12:36.560 If the Aboriginal people said, in the context of a successful referendum on sovereignty,
00:12:43.080 we just want to remain in Canada, we want everything to stay exactly the same,
00:12:49.040 well, that's one thing that could happen.
00:12:53.120 Right.
00:12:53.360 That's the exact thing that could happen.
00:12:55.700 What they're concerned about, however, is that in a constitutional conference,
00:13:01.780 their rights could be restricted.
00:13:03.940 But I see no reason for that.
00:13:08.440 And although that didn't necessarily take center stage in the discussion,
00:13:14.980 what did come out from Justice Feasby is that in terms of Aboriginal rights,
00:13:23.240 they could conceivably be diminished, or they could stay the same, or they could be enhanced.
00:13:31.460 All right?
00:13:31.580 Well, that's, you know, what's interesting you say that, because I think it was today,
00:13:34.760 Jeff Rass said, you know, this would be an opportunity for Aboriginal groups in Canada
00:13:38.400 to actually have a say in their future.
00:13:41.740 Well, because they would have this, because if this went to the very, one of the end stages,
00:13:45.700 it would be Canada, Alberta, and Aboriginal groups sitting around at a table
00:13:51.140 to determine the future of how things happen.
00:13:53.420 And right now, the Aboriginal groups have their treaties from the past,
00:13:56.400 but they could actually determine how things would work out for them moving forward.
00:14:00.580 Am I not right there?
00:14:01.540 Yeah.
00:14:01.720 Sure.
00:14:02.580 Absolutely.
00:14:03.220 Now, I want to make a point.
00:14:04.600 Sure.
00:14:04.780 And the point is, is Mr. Raff did make mention of, you know, some of the reservations have
00:14:13.540 not done very well.
00:14:15.080 In fact, many of them have not done very well.
00:14:17.600 There are some reservations that still don't have fresh drinking water.
00:14:21.320 That, to me, is a failure of federal governments, governance, I should say.
00:14:27.500 But what never came out today is that for First Nations, their average survival rate is 19 years
00:14:37.120 less than it is for non-Aboriginal people in the province of Alberta.
00:14:42.860 So that informs the listener that, in fact, many people, particularly First Nations people,
00:14:52.380 many of them are severely compromised.
00:14:54.740 And why is it that they would not want to find themselves in a better circumstance?
00:15:01.400 So, number one, we could say that First Nations people, Aboriginal people in general,
00:15:12.160 could simply avoid a constitutional conference and say, we're not going to participate in a
00:15:19.660 constitutional conference, if there's any risk of our rights being diminished.
00:15:28.400 Okay?
00:15:28.740 They, conceivably, they could do that.
00:15:32.100 And, or just not attend and say, we're going to remain in Canada.
00:15:37.520 All right?
00:15:37.820 So, a constitutional conference then takes place.
00:15:40.260 And nothing changes with respect to Aboriginal people. 0.56
00:15:44.620 They have all their rights.
00:15:46.180 They cross the borders the way they are now.
00:15:49.160 And life goes on.
00:15:51.600 Subsequent to a constitutional conference, one of the conclusions could be that at any point
00:15:59.600 in the future, Aboriginal people or First Nations people, could come to Alberta and say, we would
00:16:09.780 like to negotiate becoming part of Alberta and get out from under the control of the federal
00:16:19.180 government.
00:16:19.560 They could do that at some point in the future, ostensibly.
00:16:22.940 So, I think, to a very large extent, and I mean this sincerely, because I have a heart,
00:16:31.220 as you know, being in the medical profession, my role has been to help people.
00:16:35.680 And it really bothered me when I heard that their survival rate was 19 years less.
00:16:39.460 I didn't know that.
00:16:40.280 Yeah, it's crazy.
00:16:40.760 So, from my point of view, and I think this reflects the majority of people with respect
00:16:46.840 to the Alberta Prosperity Project, if not the majority of Albertans, if not all Albertans,
00:16:52.920 would want to see this disparity in survival resolved, and therefore would be supportive
00:17:01.340 very much of wanting First Nations to have a better deal.
00:17:07.100 But that does not mean that the rest of Albertans need to be extorted, all right?
00:17:13.560 So, what it means is that First Nations can remain in Canada under the current terms, or
00:17:23.280 they can participate in a constitutional conference in which their freedoms are respected, their
00:17:32.740 treaties are respected.
00:17:34.080 But the outcome of all of that is subject to negotiation.
00:17:41.360 So, would it be the case, for example, and I don't know this, that the outcome is that
00:17:47.360 they become a citizen like everybody else, where they have a similar justice system, they
00:17:52.660 pay no taxes, because that is what is contemplated for the rest of Albertans, is that they will
00:17:58.280 pay no taxes either, including property tax.
00:18:01.160 And so we have really one citizen, but they have something in which they have these treaty
00:18:07.960 rights, where they can cross borders.
00:18:10.880 And whereas I'd like to say that we can do that as well, but perhaps Alberta, as a sovereign
00:18:15.880 country would have similar rights, because we're Canadian citizens, Alberta citizens are still
00:18:22.880 Canadian citizens.
00:18:23.760 So, we would still be able to cross the borders as well.
00:18:27.760 It sounds to me that this actually provides the Indigenous groups with more options moving 1.00
00:18:34.760 forward.
00:18:35.760 Do you think that the council representing Mitch Sylvester, CEO of the Alberta Prosperity Project,
00:18:41.760 Jeff Rath, do you think he made the point here?
00:18:43.760 And do you think the Justice, Colin Feesby, do you think he was open to what was being
00:18:50.760 said here?
00:18:51.760 How do you think he perceived what was being told to him by the Alberta Prosperity Project?
00:18:55.760 And do you think that, well, I guess maybe the question to ask you, do you think we won
00:18:59.760 our case today?
00:19:00.760 I know that it's going to go on for a little bit longer.
00:19:02.760 There's going to be some more discussion about this.
00:19:04.760 But how do you think we did today, over the last three days?
00:19:07.760 Yeah, yesterday and today, I thought we did excellent.
00:19:11.760 Because, as you recall, it appeared as though both sides were focusing on two things.
00:19:18.760 One, does the simple posing of a question contradict Aboriginal rights?
00:19:28.760 Okay.
00:19:29.760 And second, will it adversely affect borders?
00:19:33.760 And I don't think the amici or the representative, the legal counsel for the First Nations, made
00:19:45.760 a case that was sufficiently persuasive that our question should not go forward.
00:19:53.760 So, I don't think our question can't be in Section 1 or 35.1 at all.
00:19:58.760 And it's hard to go four steps further to get to that point, because it simply does not.
00:20:06.760 It only triggers the provincial government to consider whether or not to hold the referendum,
00:20:14.760 and if so, based on what question, and if so, what is the timing?
00:20:18.760 So, I think he's going to rule on whether our question alone contravenes Section 1 to 35.1,
00:20:28.760 and whether or not our question compromises their mobility rights.
00:20:35.760 And I can't see how it does.
00:20:37.760 What I'm concerned about here, and what I was thinking while I was watching this over the last three days,
00:20:42.760 is how does this infringe upon the rights of a vast majority, which I think is a vast majority of Albertans who actually want to have a referendum?
00:20:49.760 A small group of people, Aboriginal people in Canada represent about 5% of the population,
00:20:55.760 a very small percentage of the population in Alberta could be holding back a vote on something like this.
00:21:01.760 And that's what concerns me about this.
00:21:04.760 If we're denied this opportunity, our rights are being infringed upon, don't you think?
00:21:11.760 Well, yes, that is the case.
00:21:14.760 Yeah.
00:21:15.760 However, what is the fallback position?
00:21:17.760 Yeah, yeah.
00:21:18.760 The Premier and the provincial government, the UCP party, they're in a difficult situation,
00:21:25.760 because the majority of their members are in favor of sovereignty.
00:21:29.760 So this is a potential powder keg for the provincial government.
00:21:34.760 And tick, tick, tick, about a week from now, they're going to be sitting at their AGM, correct?
00:21:39.760 Yeah, at the AGM.
00:21:41.760 But when I say it's a powder keg, what it means is a massive splitting of the party.
00:21:48.760 Okay.
00:21:49.760 Now, I know there are people that are going to say, well, we don't want to split the party because of...
00:21:56.760 Ned Nenshi.
00:21:57.760 Because...
00:21:58.760 The NDP.
00:21:59.760 Yeah, we don't want the NDP to get in.
00:22:03.760 And so just on that risk alone, I believe that the provincial government itself will hold a referendum,
00:22:11.760 wherein it does not, and this is the agreement of the amici as well, to the judge.
00:22:23.760 They made the case that the legislature, the government, is not bound to the same degree as a citizen,
00:22:34.760 because the legislature represents the population of Alberta.
00:22:39.760 Okay.
00:22:40.760 Yep.
00:22:41.760 Government represents the population.
00:22:42.760 So if the government decides that it's necessary to defuse a potential powder keg and hold an honest referendum that is compliant with the Clarity Act,
00:22:54.760 then I think there is an extremely high probability that the provincial government will hold a referendum on that basis.
00:23:04.760 Okay.
00:23:05.760 If they don't, then they run the risk of splitting the party.
00:23:09.760 And I want to comment on that for a second.
00:23:11.760 Sure.
00:23:12.760 Because it is true, many people have said, that that's the last thing they want to see is for the NDP to get in.
00:23:20.760 All right.
00:23:21.760 All right.
00:23:22.760 So that is one point.
00:23:24.760 But let's look at what was happening prior to the 2015 provincial election, where the Wild Rose was competing with the Provincial Conservative Party, the Progressive Conservative Party.
00:23:39.760 And the Wild Rose Party was leading in the polls and had a very high probability of winning, right?
00:23:49.760 That's true.
00:23:50.760 What does that tell you?
00:23:52.760 It tells you that the people that were supporting the Wild Rose Party, there was also an NDP party, right, at that time.
00:23:59.760 Yeah.
00:24:00.760 But the people that supported the Wild Rose Party had one thing in common.
00:24:05.760 Do you know what that was?
00:24:07.760 The courage to win.
00:24:10.760 The courage to win, to get out from under what had been viewed as a progressive Conservative Party that had gone too far to the left and had become, in essence, a Federalist Party that was ineffective in terms of dealing with the federal government.
00:24:31.760 That's what the Wild Rose Party had, the courage to win.
00:24:36.760 So the question comes up, then, if it were necessary to deal with a provincial government that was unwilling to hold a referendum on sovereignty, okay, then there are two options.
00:24:52.760 You do what you can to try and take control of the UCP party, or you form another party.
00:24:58.760 In both cases, you have the question posed to the members, do you have the courage to win?
00:25:06.760 Because if you have the courage to win, then you have the courage to be able to say, we are going to win this.
00:25:16.760 And we are going to take the risk that an NDP party could arise again and, I mean, win an election.
00:25:28.760 But I don't think that's probable.
00:25:30.760 I think in a very real way, in a very real way, and I want your listeners to look me in the eye and ask yourself the question, do you have the courage to win?
00:25:40.760 Do you have the courage to change the UCP if necessary?
00:25:44.760 Or do you have the courage to win with a new independence party that maybe all the parties come together?
00:25:50.760 I don't know what the right answer is, and we're going to get some information, aren't we?
00:25:56.760 As a result of the machinations at the AGM.
00:26:02.760 Yes.
00:26:03.760 We're going to get another answer when we hear the result of the court proceedings, which I suspect now will come before mid-January.
00:26:12.760 So let's say, for argument's sake, the court rules that we can go ahead with our petition question.
00:26:18.760 In which case we do that, and at some time in the late spring, the election in Alberta has the signatures and the provincial government has the petition, successful petition.
00:26:36.760 And then they make a decision as to when they will hold a referendum.
00:26:40.760 So that's really where we are right now.
00:26:44.760 I want your people to listen about this point I'm making.
00:26:50.760 It's the courage to win.
00:26:52.760 Well, you know, I was thinking, I like quotes, and I think the quote is, fortune favors the brave.
00:26:57.760 Right?
00:26:58.760 Yeah.
00:26:59.760 You know?
00:27:00.760 So you're pretty confident that we're going to have, regardless of, even if this doesn't turn out in our favor, what was discussed over the last three days,
00:27:08.760 and will be discussed a bit more before January, that we will have a vote on independence one way or the other.
00:27:15.760 Because I know Keith Wilson told me that here.
00:27:17.760 He said that when we were at the independence rally a few weeks back in Edmonton as well.
00:27:22.760 You're pretty confident about that.
00:27:24.760 This is an unstoppable movement.
00:27:28.760 This is an absolute unstoppable movement, just like I think what's happening in Quebec right now.
00:27:34.760 Yeah.
00:27:35.760 Well, I think it was brought up yesterday.
00:27:38.760 There was an article in the National Post talking about they're basically declaring independence.
00:27:43.760 They're unilaterally declaring independence in Quebec right now.
00:27:46.760 And, you know, they're moving towards a provincial election.
00:27:49.760 Who knows?
00:27:50.760 He may be on the way out.
00:27:51.760 The Parti Québécois want to say they want to be independent once again.
00:27:55.760 It's interesting times, isn't it?
00:27:57.760 Really interesting times in Canada as well as here in Alberta, for sure.
00:28:01.760 It's funny.
00:28:02.760 When you bring up Mr. Legault, it makes me think about a comment he made a number of months ago.
00:28:06.760 And he said, we would be embarrassed if Alberta left first.
00:28:10.760 Yeah.
00:28:11.760 Yeah.
00:28:12.760 They've tried a couple of times.
00:28:13.760 I remember it was back in 80 and it was a 95.
00:28:15.760 I remember 95, a lot more than 80.
00:28:17.760 It was only 15 at the time.
00:28:18.760 And it was, was René Levesque, I believe, wasn't it at the time?
00:28:21.760 I remember him crying in the forum as they lost that vote by quite a bit.
00:28:25.760 But I feel better about this.
00:28:27.760 And for being a doctor, you did a good job discussing what happened in court the last three days.
00:28:33.760 I'm glad you were here because at times it could go right over your head.
00:28:36.760 There was so much talked about.
00:28:37.760 I know you're talking with Jeff Rath, who was there representing the APP.
00:28:41.760 And of course, Mitch Sylvester, who was sitting with you for several days through there.
00:28:45.760 I appreciate you talking to me and passing along this information.
00:28:49.760 Thanks so much.
00:28:50.760 I hope to talk to you again real soon.
00:28:51.760 Hope to see you again soon.
00:28:52.760 Very good, John.
00:28:53.760 Pleasure as always.
00:28:54.760 Dr. Dennis Modry from the Alberta Prosperity Project.
00:28:57.760 Thank you very much.
00:28:58.760 And if you like this video, please share it.
00:29:00.760 You can give it a thumbs up, subscribe to the channel, ring the bell for notifications as well.
00:29:04.760 I'll see you in the next.
00:29:06.760 Take care.
00:29:08.760 Bye-bye now.