On today's show, John and Jeff talk about the ruling from the Supreme Court of Alberta regarding a question put forward by the Alberta Prosperity Project to the Chief Justice of Alberta, Mitch Sylvester. The question asks whether or not Alberta should be allowed to hold a referendum on separation from Canada.
00:00:00.000I have constituency association presidents, UCP constituency association presidents calling me and saying that if Danielle does not fix this problem that I'm about to tell you guys about, that they're going to be demanding a leadership review.
00:00:16.520Hi, it's John and welcome to the channel. Great to have you along.
00:00:19.940I have got my big blue mug of coffee and I said on a video earlier that coming from Ontario, I used to do a radio program there where I talked a lot about politics.
00:00:30.080I talked to a lot of politicians, but there's nothing, nothing quite like Alberta politics.
00:00:35.820Things happen so quickly here. I moved out here 13 years ago and it is a, it's a, it's a unique place when it comes to politics.
00:00:42.780And joining me, as you can see, I've got Jeff Rath here who was in court on Friday and Jeff, you, you got a ruling on what you were in court about.
00:00:53.720The judge ruled against you today, found the question that was put forward by the Alberta Prosperity Project.
00:01:00.400You were there for Mitch Sylvester, the CEO, unconstitutional and it infringed on Aboriginal rights.
00:01:15.480And the first thing I'd like to focus on is before we got a ruling from the judge, we got a ruling from the Alberta legislature in the form of a document called bill 14.
00:01:26.520It basically tells the judge that he cannot rule in this case and that the case is to be dismissed without cost to all parties.
00:01:34.000And when the judge got a letter from the province to that effect yesterday, probably around four o'clock, I think he got so angry that the legislature was interfering in his court case that he stayed up all night and wrote a 63 page decision that he released from the bench this morning to preempt the legislature, preempting his ruling on the court case.
00:02:02.220Okay. So are you guys following me on this?
00:02:05.020Yeah. Well, no, I know I'm following you. I was going to, I was going to come back around to that, but it's fine to start there because, I mean, I spoke with Mitch earlier about this and he's quite optimistic about what's going on here.
00:02:16.060Yeah. I see it as, you know, I don't like anybody characterizing this ruling as a loss for us. I see it as a win, right?
00:02:23.880Because the legislature pre-ruled to say that they're getting rid of the very section that we were in court over, which frames a very narrow question. Right.
00:02:33.240And I think that the judge was so annoyed that the legislature took away what was going to be his favorite toy this Christmas, which was writing a very lengthy, you know,
00:02:43.340treatise on all of the reasons that Albertans shouldn't, you know, want to separate from Canada.
00:02:49.900He was rushed in that by the legislature, basically saying that the case was to be dismissed.
00:02:55.220So he rushed out this decision from the bench. And I have to say, with the greatest of respect to the learned justice, for whom I do have a lot of, you know, like a great, great respect as a constitutionalist, you know, a lot of what he says in this judgment just doesn't make sense.
00:03:11.880And, you know, I guess it's an open question as to whether anybody would appeal it, whether we'd appeal it or the Alberta justice would appeal it, because it's entirely moot at this point.
00:03:21.960It's largely, you know, once Bill 14 gets passed, it's entirely irrelevant to use one of the judges' words.
00:03:27.540I think Keith Wilson said it on a podcast. It's kind of a nothing burger now.
00:03:32.080But, you know, there's some things that he did in there, you know, that I think kind of bear comment.
00:03:37.300Like on page five, you know, he's criticising, you know, Mitch Sylvester, you know, for the forming of the question.
00:03:45.640And he says the referendum proposal cannot take the position in this case that his constitutional referendum proponent cannot take the position in this case that his constitutional referendum proposal is just a legally inconsequential consultation with Alberta or that the substance of his constitutional referendum proposal is something other than Alberta independence.
00:04:04.280But the problem you have is in him saying that he's completely ignoring the secession reference of the Supreme Court, which says that a referendum itself is not legally binding.
00:04:26.640It's merely a political exercise that has no legal impact.
00:04:30.480And then he says you've got to jump ahead to what the, you know, what the net result is going to be, you know, that you have to look at, you know, what the, you know, like you have to presume that the amendments to the Constitution that are sought under the referendum would in fact take place.
00:04:53.380And then he says because we assume that those amendments would take place, we then have to, you know, we then on that basis say that these amendments contravene rights that are guaranteed under the, you know, under the Charter and under Section 351.
00:05:07.860The problem with that legal reasoning from a constitutional perspective is that if we assume that the amendments took place, don't we also have to assume that the amendments took place in a legal manner within the constitutional framework, at which point they don't contravene anybody's constitutionally protected rights.
00:05:27.580You know, it's a massive glaring, you know, logical and legal hole, you know, in his reasoning that every other error that he makes in that decision flow from.
00:05:37.300So I don't want to get into it, you know, in detail and go, you know, from one end to another, everything that's wrong with that decision.
00:05:44.020We're now at a point where, you know, this decision is completely irrelevant because of the fact that we've got Bill 14 coming down the pipe that's going to allow us to gather our signatures, which we're very grateful for.
00:05:58.200We're going to have our referendum question and we're going to have our, you know, our referendum likely in October of 2026.
00:06:06.200So, you know, we're actually very happy about where we're at and we see all of this, you know, as, you know, as a victory.
00:06:13.020I want to ask you one, I want to ask one more question about this and then we will move on because I want to get to Bill 14 because it's, it's quite astounding.
00:06:19.760And it was really fun to talk to Mitch this morning because you could see, you know, the grin on his face about this.
00:06:50.380Yeah, but I mean, I understand where he's coming from, you know, I mean, it's, you know, it's, I have to say it's extremely unusual.
00:06:58.820I mean, I've been practicing law for, you know, going on 35 years now.
00:07:03.300I'm in my, you know, I'm in my 35th year of practice and I've never had a court case legislated out from underneath.
00:07:10.920I mean, as a result of winning numerous constitutional cases over the years, I've been responsible for many changes in legislation and many changes in the law where, you know, the most recent one by way of example was the Ingram case that I won where I forced the court to declare every single COVID order issued by Jason Kenney throughout the pandemic to be illegal because the Public Health Act said that Hinshaw had to be making the orders.
00:07:39.240But really it was Jason Kenney and his cabinet that were making the orders, right?
00:07:43.580So after the fact, they changed the legislation so that the cabinet, in fact, could order the chief medical officer of health to replace her medical opinion with whatever the cabinet told her to do, right?
00:07:57.920But that's, you know, they're legislating after the fact, you know, to change, you know, to fix a loophole that's been created by me winning a case in court, right?
00:08:07.340I was thinking the case hasn't even concluded yet.
00:08:12.240And the Alberta legislature, you know, has thrown a flag down on the field and, you know, is calling a timeout.
00:08:19.360And notwithstanding the timeout, the judge said, well, to hell with you, you're, you're, you know, and again, in fairness to the judge, I agreed with them on this.
00:08:28.120And I actually wrote a letter to the court saying, hey, you know, as far as it goes tomorrow, you know, what the legislature tabling a bill, it doesn't become law until it's proclaimed.
00:08:38.980And, you know, we have three Treaty 7 First Nations and their legal counsel that have gone to great trouble to prepare submissions.
00:08:47.340I think it would be disrespectful not to hear them for the completeness of the record, right?
00:08:53.080But, you know, we're in a very, you know, and we may want to set aside time at some point in the future to discuss whether or not, you know, the legislature interfering with the judicial branch in this manner, you know, is in and of itself constitutional, right?
00:09:07.620Because it's really unusual that something like this would happen.
00:09:11.020But, you know, I think on balance, you know, it is constitutional and it is legal and whether judges like it or not, the legislature is the boss of them, right?
00:09:21.460And, you know, but I think it really, really aggravated Justice Feesman.
00:09:25.420Well, you know, it was pretty, it was pretty evident for the epilogue to this decision.
00:09:29.900And, you know, and the fact that this decision was rushed out the way it was.
00:09:33.720But, yeah, I was thinking about you as well, because here you are working on this case and then poof, it goes up in the air while your work's gone.
00:09:40.400And all the, you know, the time you put into this as well.
00:09:43.860There's nothing, there's nothing, there's nothing a barrister hates worse than having a phenomenal trial completely, completely ruined by a good settlement.
00:10:01.340Okay, let's forget about all the stuff about the Citizens Initiative Act and Justice Feesby and whatever.
00:10:07.560Like I said, from our perspective, it's Bill 14 from an independence perspective, from a getting to get a referendum question perspective, you know, getting our signatures perspective.
00:10:23.940So if they, you know, all of this now is taken out of the hands of the chief electoral officer, it's on the desk of the attorney general, you know, so hopefully, you know, the attorney general does what they promised.
00:10:35.280And that's to, you know, allow our question and our signatures to go forward.
00:10:39.020But under this new act, he can say no, right?
00:10:41.780Or he can refer our question back to the court for any reason.
00:10:44.940So, you know, we're not happy with certain aspects of the bill.
00:10:48.280But if they do what they promised and let us move forward the way that Premier Smith has said that, you know, we can, you know, that's going to be a very positive thing for Alberta independence.
00:10:58.680The bigger problem we have now, and this is another Bill 14 issue, is we might be going to do a leadership review within the UCP in the new year.
00:11:07.960Yeah, can we, can we, can we hold on that for just a second?
00:12:11.460In the body of the article, they said that Danielle had said she's going to come out and be campaigning for the Federalists.
00:12:17.620And Danielle's people said it never happened.
00:12:20.500CBC has now retracted that and has basically admitted that they just made it up, right?
00:12:25.260But they do say that Danielle did repeatedly repeat that slogan that drives all of us nuts, that, you know, she stands for a strong Alberta within the United Canada, right?
00:12:38.360The American slogan that got her booed repeatedly at the UCPA GM, I would note, right?
00:12:42.940Yeah, and she said she thought that she thinks Canada can work.
00:12:47.220And, of course, Alberta sovereignty within the United Canada is what she said in there.
00:12:51.080She never said she was going to campaign against the yes side.
00:12:54.400Right, and apparently she was taken out of context or they amplified what she was saying and twisted it into something a bit more than she said.
00:13:01.140So to the extent that I was wrong about that, I would like to publicly apologize to Premier Smith for any comments that I made in that regard.
00:13:08.940It was very shocking to a number of us, I think with good reason, because I think she had always said that she was going to be neutral, you know, with regard to any referendum.
00:13:17.280And for her coming out, you know, apparently coming out on CBC and claiming that she was going to be campaigning alongside a little Tommy Lukasik and Jason Kenney was a lot, a bit much for a lot of us to take.
00:13:32.520And to that, I would, you know, I would, I would unreservedly apologize to Daniel Smith for perpetuating those awful lies told about her by CBC.
00:13:42.900Yeah, and as frustrated as we get, and I said it here, I'm frustrated with the process, waiting and waiting and waiting.
00:13:50.600Daniel Smith has been a good friend to this movement by doing these things.
00:13:54.720So, you know, we owe her some gratitude, I think, in a way.
00:13:58.940Bill 14 is going to, yeah, I know, to maybe be having signatures in January.
00:14:04.680Yeah, no, and I mean, we're, and obviously we're happy about that to the extent that, to the extent that this is bona fide and that we're not, our, you know, our petition isn't going to end up on Mickey Amory's desk.
00:14:15.760You know, for him to refer it back to the court or, you know, for any other reason or for Mickey Amory to not approve our petition.
00:14:23.920And, you know, you know, that would, you know, that would cause some hard feeling.
00:14:30.580And I think we need to move forward like everybody's moving forward in good faith and we'll see.
00:14:34.400That being said, though, I would note for, you know, if Mickey Amory's listening or Danielle's listening or anybody on their team is listening,
00:14:42.880they do need to reconsider some aspects of Bill 14 because there's some real mischief in that Feesby decision about the fact that, you know,
00:14:52.440if legislation says something can't contravene the Charter or Section 35,
00:14:59.400his interpretation would not allow them to have a referendum on independence even under the Alberta Referendum Act
00:15:05.880because they're moving that provision from the CIA into the Referendum Act.
00:15:10.420So any references in the Referendum Act or any statute to not allowing referendum questions, you know,
00:15:18.480that defend the Charter or Section 35, I think just need to be removed entirely because, you know,
00:15:25.000at the end of the day, if the Attorney General has final discretion, you know,
00:15:28.760the Attorney General is more than capable of determining what questions should or shouldn't go forward
00:15:34.060without having some sort of internal limiting language within the statute, right?
00:18:34.060And what it talks about is the sections of the Elections Act and the certification of people running for members of the Legislative Assembly.
00:18:43.840And what they've done is they've struck out words that say that one of the principal officers of the registered party or applicable constituency association
00:18:52.640and substituting the leader of the registered party.
00:18:56.700And then clause striking out one of the principal officers and substituting the leader.
00:19:01.100So those of us that aren't mired in, you know, sort of the day-to-day minutiae of constituency associations, how MLAs are appointed, you know, et cetera, right, wouldn't know what that meant.
00:19:14.740Well, what it means is effectively Danielle and her team have gone from her having two clear pits for MLAs, right, to now having all 87.
00:19:24.240So she's basically, she and her team are turning her into Justin Trudeau, where if she doesn't sign your nomination papers, right, you can't run.
00:19:35.220So think about what that does to the caucus and what that does to MLA.
00:19:40.860If you're a bad little boy or girl in caucus and you're not behaving the way Danielle wants you to behave and you're not doing what the party, you know, like, not the party,
00:19:48.900but the executive council wants you to do, like, even a sitting MLA, and I'm not going to name any names because I don't want to single people out,
00:19:55.740but if you're an MLA that's seen as a bit of a maverick, right, Danielle can choose not to sign your nomination papers,
00:20:01.720just the way that Justin Trudeau did when he told people running for the Liberals, well, if you're not pro-choice, you know, and you're pro-life, I'm not signing your nomination papers.
00:20:10.520So she's literally turning the UCP, which has always been a grassroots organization, into a top-down organization like the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
00:20:20.360or the Liberal Party of Canada, where the leader, the dear leader, you know, has a veto over every single MLA that runs
00:20:28.420so she can refuse people's nominations and then replace people with her pick.
00:20:33.180Let me circle back to where we were just a few minutes ago, Jeff, because you're saying these reasons she could deny signing the papers.
00:20:42.440Deny signing the papers because you're somebody who believes in the independence movement in Alberta?
00:24:12.420We bear her, I personally bear her no ill will.
00:24:15.720But, you know, when you see things like this and people are calling you and pointing them out and explaining to you why they're so insidious.
00:24:25.040You know, I think I have an obligation to discuss them in public and to talk to people about what this is doing and to please, you know, beg Danielle and the team around her to, you know, to try to internalize the fact that, you know, the more they try to dictate to people within the party, the worse her political position becomes.
00:24:44.900I mean, this is even like that silly motion that she tabled, you know, that led to Daryl Smith or Daryl Comick running against Rob Smith for president.
00:24:54.860You know, where she's trying to limit, you know, she did, she limited speech and debate at the AGM.
00:25:00.180You know, this wouldn't have been anywhere near a big story, like, you know, in terms of my having to go to the mic and ask people to stand on their feet.
00:25:06.420If we just had a debate in the normal course about independence and then took a straw poll amongst our members in the normal course as to how many people favored independence and who didn't, that was the one thing Danielle didn't want.
00:25:18.220Because, of course, all of a sudden, if it's clear that 85 or 90 percent of your base are firmly in favor of independence, you've got to drop that stupid slogan, strong Alberta within the United Canada, right?
00:25:43.240I want to wrap up here in a second, Jeff, because I'm running short on time.
00:25:46.060And the thing is, because you didn't have the discussion, now we can say 85 to 90 percent of the people in the party want independence.
00:25:52.940And there's no proof that it's not true.
00:25:55.260So, I mean, you could have straightened off this a week ago.
00:25:57.360Well, and there's lots of proof there is.
00:25:58.020And on top of it, you know, we wanted to have the debate and the discussion because I still want to hear from, you know, Premier Smith and others, you know, why they think staying in Canada is so much better for Albertans.
00:26:10.340Because we know, you know, eliminating, you know, what the benefits are, eliminating federal income tax, eliminating federal corporate income tax, GST, excise tax, carbon tax, industrial carbon tax.
00:26:21.900You know, all of those things that they're doing, having a strong and stable currency, you know, where they're not doubling the money supply every 10 years and robbing us of our savings and the equity in our homes.
00:26:32.400Right. Right. So those are all, you know, if our kids want a future for all of us that have really analyzed this and have really thought about this, the only future for our kids and our grandkids is if we can get Alberta out of Canada.
00:26:44.800Because the way Canada is going, they're going to drag Alberta down with them and they're in the process of doing it.
00:26:52.320I think you've said the words fiduciary duty in the past to do what's best for the people of Alberta.
00:26:59.200And of course, and seeing that being independent would be better and best for the people of Alberta is not her duty to at least, you know, entertain the idea, you know, more or at the very least, you know, as was suggested by a former professor of I, Leon Craig, who, you know, six or seven years ago wrote to Jason Kenney and calling on Kenney to appoint a minister of independence preparedness.
00:27:24.480Yeah. Right. You know, why is it Danielle doing that? You know, you know, you know, failing to plan is planning to fail. Right. And, you know, and that's what she's doing.
00:27:34.520And then on top of it, you know, she keeps lying to people. And again, I promise to be nicer, but I'm sorry, but I think this is, you know, what she was doing that she was, I was elected on a mandate to, you know, fix Canada and elect.
00:27:47.240She was not B.S. She was not elected to fix Canada. She was elected on Rob Anderson's free Alberta strategy mandate.
00:27:54.940So, you know, that was her whole platform, Alberta pension coming home, collect taxes in Alberta, policing, you know, on and on and on, right.
00:28:04.000Equal end equalization, the sovereignty act, you know, that was all free Alberta strategy.
00:28:09.340That's what she campaigned on. So she actually campaigned on getting Alberta ready for independence.
00:28:16.260And now she's claiming the opposite, you know, so it's, you know, it's pretty, you know, pretty confusing to everybody watching this as to what side of Danny's mouth she's talking about on any day of the week.
00:28:28.480So let's let so in a couple of minutes, can you here's the day.
00:28:33.340Okay, we started off, you know, maybe going back to yesterday, we had this Bill 14 come up.
00:28:38.700But today, kind of a defeat in court, but Bill 14's here.
00:28:43.040So your summary of the way things are going, how are you feeling?
00:28:46.240No, no, I refuse to acknowledge I was defeated.
00:28:49.400I keep saying it. I know you were going to say that.
00:29:23.460And I just hope that Danielle understands that her base does not want, you know, Justin Trudeau as our leader, right?
00:29:30.500So this idea that she wants to have a veto over every MLA on a going forward basis.
00:29:36.560I mean, I'm telling you, if she persists in that, there's going to be a revolt at the constituency association level, and she will lose her party, right?