00:07:00.000Good day, good morning. I'm Derek Fildebrandt, publisher of the Western Standard, coming to you with a live stream this morning on February 20th, a nice cold morning here in Calgary.
00:07:17.440We're going to be chatting today about the big speech from Alberta Premier Danielle Smith last night, broadcast at a quarter to seven Mountain Standard Time.
00:07:30.000Quite a landmark speech, one that will probably be remembered when the books on her premiership are written.
00:07:38.440Where it goes, we're going to speculate.
00:07:40.980We're totally going to speculate, do our best to analyze here.
00:07:46.400But I want to involve you guys in this.
00:07:49.760You can post, if you have comments, questions, put it in the comments if you're watching this on X, YouTube, wherever.
00:07:56.500um but also you can call i have not done uh the call-in before we've just got set up for
00:08:02.820kind of the call-in here you can join the conversation at uh 1-866-479-west extension
00:08:11.560711 you got the number right there at the bottom of the screen uh 866-479-west extension 711 you
00:08:20.420can you can call in uh hopefully you have something intelligent to say if not i'll hear
00:08:25.380yet anyway but uh i know uh cory and marty up north have been doing the call-in feature on
00:08:31.140our shows lately i've i've enjoyed watching and listening to that uh maybe we'll have maybe we'll
00:08:36.340have fun here too um okay so let's talk about the speech um it's the reaction right across
00:08:46.260canada has been uh furious fast and furious response to what she's had to say um there is
00:08:54.580a series of referendum questions. We're going to get to that, but we'll kind of start with
00:08:57.920the earlier parts of her speech first. She talked about, you know, there's a budget coming
00:09:03.920for Alberta next week. It's not expected to be good. Huge, huge deficit, possibly a record
00:09:10.820deficit. She, I mean, like most Alberta premiers who have had deficits, pointed to oil and oil
00:09:19.820is down and it's it is a mugs game try to predict this stuff uh sometimes it works out sometimes it
00:09:25.900doesn't but uh you know anyone who could predict this stuff accurately would be uh would be a rich
00:09:30.640man um and the government got it wrong i mean and it's pretty common to get it wrong it's it's
00:09:36.780difficult stuff to predict but she's pointing to uh oil and uh yeah to some extent yeah oil is uh
00:09:44.280is down quite a bit but didn't really fess up to she can't control that no premier can control the
00:09:53.700price of oil but what can you control you can control your taxes and you can control your
00:09:58.400spending and controlling spending is not something that alberta's government's been doing for a very
00:10:02.940very long time uh spending has been wildly out of like danielle smith is i think run pretty good
00:10:10.320government on a few different fronts. One of those fronts is not the budget. The budget's
00:10:17.040been a disaster. It's been a pretty free spending government. And she says, oh, we're not going
00:10:24.040to slash spending or anything, but we're going to limit spending to below inflation and population
00:10:29.700growth. That's helpful. If they would have done that for the last three years, we'd be in a better
00:10:39.760spot than we are now. J.C. Kenney, in his time as Premier, did not cut spending. He limited growth
00:10:46.480in spending, and that was better than his predecessor, Rachel Notley, and Rachel Notley
00:10:52.040continued largely what her predecessor, Alison Redford, had done, which is just an Ed Stelmack
00:10:57.440before that. The budget is totally out of control, and there just doesn't seem to be any appetite
00:11:02.380in the government for cutting spending, which is what's necessary here. But she's talking about
00:11:07.660putting the brakes on spending increases it's better than nothing but it's not going to fix
00:11:13.160the problem here we've got we've got structural budget problems and no one seems to really have
00:11:17.740the appetite to do anything serious about it so okay uh one thing she did point to though
00:11:24.800that i think is is a fair criticism um that she's made or i should say fair defense she's made
00:11:31.500about some of the spending problems we've got is around immigration.
00:11:36.580We've had 600,000 people come into Alberta recently,
00:11:41.860wild numbers that we simply cannot integrate, we cannot assimilate,
00:11:48.260we cannot make work in that kind of time.
00:11:52.160And so she's pointed at these numbers largely controlled by Ottawa
00:11:55.300and pointed at least put some of the blame on immigration.
00:12:00.260And, I mean, the reaction to it from the usual suspects has been extremely predictable.
00:12:22.360This is, yeah, so Rachel Notley's response here, it's not, it's far from the craziest response.
00:12:29.400but it's um it's definitely not out of line with uh with a lot of the response we've seen
00:12:36.840uh rachel notley says danielle smith making racism great again first they came for the trans people
00:12:45.880then a then they came for the unionized workers next it was judges now it's immigrants i think
00:12:53.160that you or someone you love won't be next if you think someone you love won't be next you're
00:12:57.960sorely mistaken and then it goes on and on and on but uh you know that that's taking from a poem of
00:13:03.560uh of a lutheran i think lutheran pastor during the second world war who was imprisoned who wrote
00:13:08.840you know first they came for the jews because i was not a jew and then they came for the unions etc
00:13:14.440so this is rachel notley saying uh controlling immigration simply limiting the number of
00:13:23.960immigrants we have coming into alberta is nazism nazism this is um it's the alberta reich uh i
00:13:32.820mean so it's predictable crazy stuff but no we've got uh our schools are swamped anyone who knows a
00:13:38.420teacher uh in our big cities particularly parts of our big cities in alberta that have a significantly
00:13:45.280higher uh proportion of migrants in them will tell you the big problem in our schools is that
00:13:52.660we've got a huge number of students who do not speak English adequately. In many cases, not at
00:13:58.840all. Like no, no English. There are a very significant number of students in our schools
00:14:05.320who speak no English. Like we've brought in people to this country who don't speak our language.
00:14:14.520And then in addition to people who speak no English, huge number who also speak poor English.
00:14:20.740And so you have completely dysfunctional classrooms, classrooms where you can't focus on a lesson being taught because a huge number of the students can't understand what's being taught.
00:14:32.100So strains like that or people who are coming in and are drawing on social services, they have not paid into this.
00:14:40.060They haven't been a part of the social contract.
00:14:41.840They have not been paying taxes in, but they're withdrawing services out.
00:14:46.380Maybe they're working, but they're working in low-wage jobs where they're not paying very much, if any, tax, but they're able to draw on social services.
00:14:57.160They're able to draw on health care, these kinds of things.
00:15:01.140And so this creates a huge net negative financial pressure on Alberta, in addition to all the social problems this obviously creates.
00:15:11.820So she pointed to this as one of the culprits, at least, for the budget deficit we have, some of the strain we've got on infrastructure, on education spending.
00:15:27.860And the usual suspects have just completely lost their minds.
00:15:32.660So, OK, then she proposed a series of referendum questions.
00:15:37.880Let's see. One, two, three, four, five. I think it's ten. Six, seven, eight, nine. Okay, it looks like nine. I'm going to go through each of these. It's pretty broad ranging. Referendums are not new to Canada. They're not new to Alberta. But they're not usual. They're very unusual in our system.
00:16:02.460And I generally favor us having at least some more direct democracy, but I'm not sure about this, the way this is being, yeah, having nine, ten questions, in addition to citizen initiative questions like independence, which is likely for a vote in the fall.
00:16:37.040So the premier in her address laid out these questions.
00:16:41.180The first are a series of non-constitutional questions, largely the things that Alberta can do on its own.
00:16:47.540And the second are a set of constitutional questions that would require negotiation with the federal government and other provinces.
00:16:54.340So let's go through. We'll start with the non-constitutional questions. We'll call them the domestic Alberta questions first.
00:17:02.180Do you support the government of Alberta taking increased control over immigration for the purposes of decreasing immigration to more sustainable levels, prioritizing economic immigration, of migration, and giving Albertans first priority on new employment opportunities?
00:17:17.920Okay. So, I mean, it's a big question, but it's important. I wouldn't be a surprise to anyone that, yeah, of course we should. Of course I think we should. But I'm wondering why that is a referendum question. Just do it. Like, why are we waiting until the fall to vote on this?
00:17:39.760ask any poll albertans the super majority of people including most uh successful and integrated
00:17:49.600migrants will agree with this that yes we should take control of immigration from ottawa quebec is
00:17:55.400allowed to do it in large measure so we should do it too uh you know let's let's send notice to
00:18:00.440ottawa right now that we're demanding the same powers as quebec has and we're going to use those
00:18:06.420powers to limit migration, to focus on economic migrants, and prioritize Albertans getting jobs
00:18:16.620before we bring in people to fill those jobs. I think almost everyone except for the Rachel
00:18:22.440Notley's and those types are going to agree with this. I'm not sure why we have to wait
00:18:27.620until the fall to vote on this. We should just do it right now. And I think the government's
00:18:35.240got a mandate for it you know we've been talking about this this was uh you know not hidden that
00:18:41.760this is something the ucp wants to do the ucp has been talking about taking control of immigration
00:18:45.660for some time especially since uh danielle smith became the leader of the party and the premier
00:18:50.080albertans know that this is something that's been in the books uh that's been that's been cooking
00:18:55.500i don't know why we don't just do this all right second question do you support the government of
00:19:01.540Alberta introducing a law mandating that only Canadian citizens, permanent residents, and
00:19:06.580individuals with an Alberta-approved immigration status will be eligible for provincially funded
00:19:11.100programs such as healthcare, education, and other social services. Okay, so what's implied there is
00:19:19.200that there will now be an Alberta-approved immigration status. In addition to the federal
00:19:23.480immigration status, Alberta will decide, do we want someone here or do we not want this person
00:19:33.080here? And if Alberta does not want this person here, we're not going to give them social services
00:19:41.480funded by taxpayers. So healthcare, education, we could put in there, driver's licenses, that kind
00:19:47.520thing. Again, I'm not sure. I'm not sure why we would vote on that. I think most people would
00:19:55.020agree. Of course, not everyone. No one agrees on everything. But I chance to say a majority of
00:20:00.900Albertans, including a majority of well-integrated and successful migrants, would agree with this.
00:20:06.860Let's just do it. Let's just go ahead and do it.
00:20:14.860All right. Next question was, assuming that all Canadian citizens and permanent residents continue to qualify for social support programs as they do now,
00:20:24.700do you support the government of Alberta introducing a law requiring all individuals
00:20:29.100with non-permanent legal immigration status to reside in Alberta for at least 12 months before
00:20:34.600qualifying for any provincially funded social support programs? I think that's pretty similar
00:20:41.520to the previous question, question number two. Again, I think most people would agree with it.
00:20:48.160In fact, that's just common sense stuff that's crazy that we're not already doing. And we don't
00:20:52.860need anyone's permission for that. We don't need Ottawa's permission for that. We should just do it.
00:20:58.140So again, you know, this is a question that the Premier wants to put to a referendum that
00:21:02.640I agree on. I think it's good policy that we should do. We should just do it. We should not
00:21:06.840wait until the fall to do it. I would be shocked if this kind of thing was defeated in a referendum
00:21:12.820question. Let's just make this government policy. Next one. Do you support the government of Alberta
00:21:22.240introducing a law requiring individuals to provide proof of citizenship, such as passport,
00:21:27.360birth certificate, or a citizenship card to vote in Alberta provincial election.
00:21:32.200Again, why the hell are we not? Are we actually going to have the referendum without checking
00:21:37.680people's proof of citizenship first? Absolutely, we should be checking proof of citizenship.
00:21:43.200And for all of you people saying, oh, it's fascism, it's racism, it's mean to ask people
00:21:48.900to show identity before voting uh some kind of card before voting just remember where you stood
00:21:55.780during covid when people had to show a special identification to get in and buy a sandwich at a
00:22:01.620restaurant or to get groceries oh it's like groceries you didn't need it but you had to you
00:22:06.460know they made you mask up but you want to you want to go to a restaurant you want to watch a
00:22:10.260movie you want to do anything really you had to uh you had to show you know uh jason kenny's uh
00:22:17.120COVID vax card. So all of you who think that this is somehow racist and bigoted and fascistic
00:22:25.180to show identification and proof of citizenship when you're voting, just think about where you
00:22:31.020probably, in all chances, think about where you probably stood during COVID when people had to
00:22:36.200show identification to buy a bloody sandwich. Also, you know, people saying, oh, some people,
00:22:44.580you know, it's difficult for them to get ideas. If you are too stupid to get an identification
00:22:49.400card, I don't want you voting. You're too stupid to vote. No, I don't agree that everyone should
00:22:55.900vote. It's everyone's duty to vote. No, if you're too stupid to be able to go get yourself a driver's
00:23:02.040license, you're probably too stupid to decide how much tax I should be paying. You're probably too
00:23:07.560stupid to decide what the foreign policy of our country should be. You're too stupid to figure
00:23:12.900those things out you're doing society a favor by not voting so it's a pretty low bar to set
00:23:19.740that you've got the iq to go in and get a driver's license some kind of identification
00:23:26.760if you can't do that or if you can't be bothered to do that we shouldn't be bothered to countervote
00:23:33.660it's a pretty damn low bar to set so again i would have a hard time imagining most albertans would
00:23:42.400have uh oh that was question five question five should be it right now there we go i have a hard
00:23:49.120time imagining that most albertans would have a problem with this we're going to require proof
00:23:54.780that you're eligible to vote before we let you vote i have to show proof that i'm eligible to
00:24:00.940drive a car before i'm allowed to drive a car i have to show proof that i'm legally eligible to
00:24:05.920own a firearm before I'm allowed to own a firearm. When I go buy a gun at Cabela's, I have to provide
00:24:12.960my PAL. I have to provide my possession and acquisition license and show that I am legally
00:24:19.440eligible to own a firearm. Why are we not required to do that when we vote? Now, I don't know what
00:24:28.100what number of people are voting that are ineligible to vote. I can't say.
00:24:36.260I know some areas in the States, it's rampant. There's probably significant scales of voter
00:24:44.640fraud taking place there. What scale here? I don't know. But it does become a bigger concern
00:24:50.580the more you have large numbers of people living in your society who are not citizens.
00:24:55.320when everybody living in an area is generally a citizen it's less of an issue it's less likely
00:25:01.720to be voter fraud people who are ineligible to vote to vote it's going to be less of an issue
00:25:05.900at least maybe not no issue but it'll be less of an issue but when you've got massive numbers
00:25:11.700of people massive numbers of people coming in who are not eligible to vote
00:25:17.240it's something we got to be paying attention to so again i i'm not sure why we're having a
00:25:24.680referendum on that. I like voting on stuff, I guess. But, you know, and citizens should have
00:25:32.520a right to vote on some things. That's why I like the idea of citizens initiative, like we've got
00:25:37.260going on for the independence referendum. That's something that the political class considers a
00:25:41.560little too spicy to touch. Okay, I get that. I can appreciate that. But to their credit, the UCP
00:25:50.620strengthened the citizens initiative legislation first they introduced it under kenny but it was
00:25:56.440kind of unworkable at that time then they made it workable under smith um so to their credit
00:26:01.840they've brought this in so when there's an issue that's too spicy citizens can do an end run around
00:26:07.160the political class and require that we vote on this together and people can vote yes or no
00:26:12.180so that's a good that's a reason for referendum and i think uh on major constitutional questions
00:26:18.480that's that's a place for people to vote in direct democracy but this stuff is pretty standard you
00:26:26.480know these five questions i've laid out here from the premier speech last night these are pretty
00:26:30.100standard government policies that i think have broad support i like if people don't like them
00:26:37.380those the opponents can go and do a citizen's initiative petition
00:26:41.140and bring in uh their own referendum to repeal these laws you know when a government does
00:26:47.500something that's not broadly got a democratic mandate that people don't broadly support.
00:26:53.100Like, you know, think of the NDP, Rachel Notley's carbon tax. They did not have any democratic
00:26:57.320mandate to do that, but they had the legal right to impose it. Okay. So if we had citizens initiative
00:27:03.360legislation at that time, the people of Alberta could have gathered enough signatures and held a
00:27:08.320referendum on overturning that legislation. That'd be an appropriate way to do it. Similarly here,
00:27:14.440If people didn't like the five points put out by Smith here and she had just legislated it and passed by the legislature, then the opponents of this legislation could go out, collect the signatures and try to overturn these laws.
00:27:31.020Maybe they'd get enough signatures for a vote, but I doubt they'd win the vote.
00:27:34.540So I don't know, these five points around immigration, these are all very moderate things.
00:27:39.500And like, my only problem with these policies is that they probably don't go hard enough. We have been swamped. You know, we have taken a migration model that, I mean, had its problems. I think it was over generous in the past, but it wasn't at least disastrous.
00:27:59.440and then and we totally screwed the pooch we totally screwed or ottawa screwed the pooch on
00:28:04.300it and we've got to reverse that we've got to engage at some level at least of of humane
00:28:11.540remigration she's not talking about anything like that these are very moderate immigration policies
00:28:18.300very moderate um that i think have got the broad support of the alberta public my only problem here
00:28:26.440Two problems. One is it's probably a little too light, but, you know, I'll take what we can get.
00:28:30.760This is a good step in the right direction, these policies.
00:28:33.420Okay. But why would we have a referendum on this?
00:28:38.960Just do it. Legislate this tomorrow. The legislature is in session.
00:28:43.260There's a budget next week. Everyone's there.
00:28:45.520Introduce the legislation. Pass it. Let's make this policy right now.
00:28:50.100Let's do it. Let's not wait for the fall in a referendum campaign.
00:28:53.600let's let's just do it now and if the opponents of these laws don't like it guess what we have
00:29:01.020citizens initiative legislation you know Rachel Notley and these people can go out and they can
00:29:07.660go in gather signatures in the cold like independent supporters are doing right now
00:29:12.040they can go out they can gather signatures and they can force a referendum on repealing this
00:29:16.300I don't think they'll be successful but you know that's up to them we'll see I think that's the
00:29:22.620to do it you know um i like a degree of direct democracy but we do elect people for a reason
00:29:29.980and that's to make decisions tough decisions complicated decisions and you know alberta has
00:29:37.420pioneered a degree of direct democracy in this to check the ability of the political class to run
00:29:44.220roughshod over um uh to to override the politicians if the politicians go astray
00:29:55.020but this is a this is what we elect people to do to make to make decisions similarly uh when kenny
00:30:00.220was premier you know we had two referendum questions uh held in conjunction with municipal
00:30:05.260elections one was on uh getting rid of equalization which you know i'll talk a bit more about that in
00:30:10.940in a bit but that got completely ignored obviously by ottawa nothing happened on equalization
00:30:15.420whatsoever and the other one was around changing daylight savings time i forget it was pretty
00:30:21.580complicated and that's the problem is like i think i think broadly people don't like our system
00:30:26.780around daylight savings time uh but people also didn't necessarily like the reform that was
00:30:31.900proposed in this referendum question it was confusing people don't know because that's
00:30:36.140something that requires study it's not a strict yes or no question on something i don't even say
00:30:43.260it's simple but say like independence do you believe alberta should be an independent country
00:30:47.340or remain in canada people are going to have a thought about that they're going to have strong
00:30:51.100feelings on it and they're going to know which way to vote for the most part daylight savings time
00:30:57.340i don't even remember how i voted i remember i looked into it and i was like i could go this way
00:31:01.340and go that way but the proposal there was one proposal that a lot of people liked which wasn't
00:31:05.740even an option. That's something that a committee of MLAs for both parties, NDP and UCP could
00:31:11.640probably actually agree on. It's totally non-ideological. It's a technical question.
00:31:17.880Put it to a committee of MLAs, bring in some experts, they can study it, and then they just
00:31:23.160make a decision. And if we don't like it, we can have a citizen's initiative to overturn it.
00:31:27.160That's the way our system should work. We elect people, we pay these people to study the issues
00:31:33.680and make a decision. And if we don't like the decision, we've got two options. We can throw
00:31:38.520them out the next election. Or now, this is a new thing in our system, we can have a citizens
00:31:43.380initiative petition to trigger a referendum to overturn their decision. And I think these first
00:31:51.300five referendum questions concerning immigration fall into the category of this is what we elect
00:31:58.340you to do. Just do it. Do these things right now. Immigration is a problem right now. And it's
00:32:05.840something we got to deal with right now. And this is not a constitutional question. This is just
00:32:10.080a straight up policy question. This probably got pretty broad public buy-in for these kinds of
00:32:15.260measures. So just do it. I don't know why we have to have a referendum on it. I'm probably a bit
00:32:22.880more forgiving, not entirely, but I'm a bit more forgiving on the second round of questions,
00:32:27.220the constitutional ones let's talk about these
00:32:34.580all right the first constitutional question is do you support the government of alberta working
00:32:40.580with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the canadian constitution to have
00:32:45.780provincial governments and not the federal government select the justices appointed
00:32:51.140to the provincial king's bench and appeal courts
00:32:53.460okay well that's interesting uh you know uh premier smith has talked a bit about this that
00:33:04.740you know quebec has some say in a point in the appointments over federal judges in its area
00:33:10.080and alberta should too the problem is quebec got that without a constitutional amendment
00:33:14.940quebec got that uh because they're quebec they're special uh they get a say over uh supreme court
00:33:22.640justices that are appointed for the three Quebec seats. Quebec actually kind of gets a de facto
00:33:27.900veto over even Alberta's seat on the on the Supreme Court because they have to be bilingual now and
00:33:33.020there's really not many fully bilingual Albertans. It's a very very small number because there's
00:33:40.880really no functional reason to outside of like a couple small communities like maybe like
00:33:46.100Wacklebish and stuff in the in the northern part of Alberta other than some very small communities
00:33:51.580there's not a lot of french mother tongue speakers in alberta and there's no practical reason to
00:33:56.520really be learning french growing up in alberta unless your parents want you to be a supreme
00:34:01.320court justice or the prime minister like so there's that's literally there's nine supreme
00:34:06.540court justices in the country one of which sometimes goes to alberta so one and then
00:34:12.440prime minister so like it's a pretty there's like two jobs two job openings where you got to speak
00:34:18.620French. Or unless you want to move to Ottawa and be a bureaucrat or something. It's just in terms
00:34:24.500of the effort we put into our kids' education, we just don't put a ton into making them fluently
00:34:30.200and permanently violating you because it doesn't make any economic sense. You're way more likely
00:34:35.360to run into someone who speaks Punjab in Alberta than someone who speaks French. You're way more
00:34:40.940likely to run into someone who speaks Mandarin or Cantonese than someone who speaks French.
00:34:45.980So anyway, I've got to get, it's kind of a, I'm getting off track here, but Quebec gets
00:34:52.940a big say over the judges, and they even kind of get an indirect say on the judges from
00:34:59.600So what Daniel Smith is asking for here is reasonable, and I do think most provinces
00:35:03.960probably would like this power, that our appellate courts, you know, court of king's bench, things
00:35:12.560like that uh that the provinces um uh are able to select those justices that makes good sense
00:35:20.200this is good this is a good constitutional reform but i don't think it goes anywhere likely because
00:35:26.740quebec more or less already gets this without a constitutional amendment just because they're
00:35:32.320quebec and quebec will not agree to amend the constitution for things we want unless they get
00:35:38.360all the other things they want and then we're into the big grab bag of issues like meech lake
00:35:42.340in Charlottetown, where they're going to ask for things that we can't possibly give them.
00:35:48.100Second question. Do you support the government of Alberta working with the governments of other
00:35:52.740willing provinces to amend the Canadian constitution to abolish the unelected federal
00:35:57.180Senate? Okay. Again, you're going to run into the same kind of political issue around it. Quebec is
00:36:04.380not going to allow this, because even if Quebec wanted to get rid of the Senate, they won't agree
00:36:10.160to get rid of the Senate on just a one-off issue here because they're going to want all their
00:36:14.700language and cultural issues put in and separate status, asymmetrical federalism. They want all
00:36:21.620of that enshrined in the Senate a la Meach Lake and Charlottetown. That's what they want. And
00:36:26.980they're not going to agree to give us anything unless they get that. And we can't give them
00:36:30.680those things because those things create an even less fair federation. Also, I'm not sure we want
00:36:38.560no senate um i mean would no senate be better than the current senate yes it would the current senate
00:36:46.460is grossly unfair it's appointed by the prime minister so most of the time it's just appointed
00:36:51.860by liberals without any real democratic mandate from alberta so even alberta senators quote unquote
00:36:58.300are not they're not even appointed by someone who has the backing of alberta in most cases
00:37:04.520And the numbers in the Senate are crazy. Roughly a quarter of the seats are for Ontario. Roughly a quarter are for Quebec. And, you know, the territories, I think, get one each or something. And then things get completely screwy. Alberta, BC, Saskatchewan, I think we get six each.
00:37:27.820Alberta alone has roughly three times the population of all four Atlantic provinces.
00:37:34.380Roughly three times the population of all four of the Atlantic provinces, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick.
00:37:43.420New Brunswick alone has nearly twice the senators of just Alberta.
00:37:51.820New Brunswick alone has nearly twice the senators of Alberta.
00:37:55.920But Alberta has three times the population of all four of those provinces.
00:38:20.980So would no Senate be better? Yes. But here's the thing. There is no functional federation
00:38:28.620in the democratic world that doesn't have a balanced upper legislative chamber of some kind.
00:38:36.820So the U.S. Senate, the German Bundesrat, the Australian Senate, you know, we're talking
00:38:44.760democratic countries that are also federations. Britain is evolving, the United Kingdom is
00:38:49.760evolving into a quasi-federation. And so its House of Lords is probably going to need a shake
00:38:55.140up at some time too. But among actual federations in the democratic world, every single one has a
00:39:02.460functional upper house of some kind that represents the subnational units. In the United States,
00:39:10.400it's very simple. Every state has two senators, and that's it. Those senators used to be actually
00:39:16.140appointed by the state governments until roughly the turn of the 20th century, then they became
00:39:19.740directly elected. I actually think that was a mistake, because the idea was to integrate the
00:39:26.140state governments with the federal government, make them coordinate with each other. In Germany,
00:39:30.700the Bundesrat, that's the upper house of the German parliament, they don't all have an equal
00:39:38.880number, but the smaller states, small, small ones like Saarland, have more, let's call them
00:39:45.300call them senators for shorthand here, they have more than their population would normally
00:39:49.440account for, and bigger ones would have less. But the bigger states, you know, like Nordrhein-Westfalen
00:39:54.560will have more senators than Saarland, but not as much as of a straight representation by population
00:40:01.660the way it is in their lower house of parliament, the Bundestag. So that's another way. And those
00:40:07.820senators are directly appointed by the state lander governments. So when there's a state election in
00:40:12.700Germany, the delegation to their Senate, the Bundesrat, it turns over. And so you've got
00:40:18.900direct collaboration from the state governments into the federal government. There's different
00:40:23.000ways of doing it, but they've all got some version of having an upper house representing
00:40:28.780the subnational units or subnational governments, and gives some greater representation to the
00:40:34.720smaller provinces, the smaller states, the smaller lander. If Canada got rid of the Senate, we would
00:40:40.400be the only democratic federation on the planet that i'm aware of that has no upper house and
00:40:47.300it's an important function otherwise the big the big provinces or the big states say ontario
00:40:52.960california new york in order to invest fallen they would too easily dominate the smaller ones
00:40:59.540this is a protection for the smaller and even the mid-size sub-national units so i don't like the
00:41:05.160idea of having no senate but i mean if you gave me a straight up or down question between
00:41:09.120uh no senate and the current senate i i we'd have to pick no senate the current senate is
00:41:16.480under we're a fairly big province in canada not as big as ontario quebec but we're fairly big
00:41:23.140but we have less say than even than the big ones and we have less say than the really small ones
00:41:28.280so it makes no sense so i don't know uh smith has put forward the position i think it was first
00:41:36.020famously put forward by Brad Wall when he was the Premier of Saskatchewan, just getting rid of the
00:41:39.680Senate. I'm not sure I like this one. Again, if it's just a binary decision between current status
00:41:45.200quo Senate and no Senate, I take no Senate. But I don't think you can have a functional federation
00:41:50.880without some kind of functional and legitimate upper house of Parliament. All right, next question.
00:41:58.340Do you support the Alberta government working with the governments of other willing provinces
00:42:01.880to amend the Canadian constitution to allow provinces to opt out of federal programs that
00:42:06.060intrude on provincial jurisdiction, such as health, education, and social services without a province
00:42:11.780losing any of the associated federal funding for use in its social programs. That's kind of
00:42:20.660something, like that's something that Quebec has actually wanted for itself, not necessarily for
00:42:26.700other provinces. But Quebec doesn't really care if other provinces have it or not. You know,
00:42:31.280The dynamics have been that they demand it for themselves.
00:42:34.380That is something you probably would get the backing of Quebec on.
00:42:37.100But, again, they generally will not open the door to the Constitution at all unless they get their grab bag of sovereigntist, Quebecois, nationalist issues.
00:42:47.620They're not going to give you anything unless they get those things.
00:42:53.140My problem is that the provinces should lose the associated federal funding.
00:42:59.480The federal government should have no role at all in funding health care. It should have no role at all in funding social services because these are areas of provincial jurisdiction.
00:43:10.580They are illegitimately involved in funding health care and social services. That is the jurisdiction of the provinces.
00:43:19.900The federal government's been allowed to weasel its way in by funding these things on a provincial level.
00:43:40.020They're able to then attach strings to the funding that's involved.
00:43:43.580Well, there just should be no funding, period.
00:43:45.440Because if Ottawa is funding something, it should be allowed to attach strings to it.
00:43:48.360So the answer is to not allow them to fund it. But I get, you know, some of the poorer provinces, Quebec, Atlantic provinces, Manitoba, they don't want to lose the funding that comes along with it.
00:44:02.680So I don't know. I get where she's going on that one. And you know what? This would be better than the status quo.
00:44:09.140So I don't want to make the perfect, good the enemy of the perfect, or perfect the enemy of the good. It would be a significant improvement on the status quo. But one of the reasons for this is so that we subsidize other provinces less. That should be something we want. It's just obviously not something most other provinces are going to agree to.
00:44:31.900And the last constitutional question, do you support the government of Alberta working with other willing provinces to amend the Canadian constitution to better protect provincial rights from federal interference by giving provinces, giving a province's laws dealing with provincial or shared areas of constitutional jurisdiction priority over federal laws when the province's laws and the federal laws conflict?
00:44:55.800i gotta give that one more thought but that one strikes me as potentially negative
00:45:03.540and negative in a alberta way in particular um you know a lot of critics of you know alberta
00:45:14.240sovereignty uh and you know sovereignty not being just full independence but people you know
00:45:19.140daniel smith says a sovereign alberta within a united kingdom a lot of critics of that uh you
00:45:24.740you know, pro-Ottawa types, you know, they don't understand, you know, when they say,
00:45:29.440well, Alberta's demanding that, you know, a pipeline should go through BC over BC's wishes.
00:45:37.100The idea isn't that, the idea is division of powers, not that the provinces should have
00:45:43.040unlimited power. The idea is about clear delineation and separation of powers and
00:45:49.840interprovincial infrastructure, you know, infrastructure that crosses provincial boundaries
00:45:55.220is supposed to be a federal national jurisdiction. So, you know, perhaps I'm trying to read this
00:46:04.140charitably. I'm trying to read it charitably, but I could see areas where this would be
00:46:11.080in our favor, but I can see areas like, say, pipelines where this would not be good,
00:46:15.680where this would say, okay, well, BC's got some jurisdiction on this and Ottawa's got some
00:46:21.980jurisdiction on this. And so BC or Quebec, they just get to veto a pipeline.
00:46:28.980Okay. You know, if someone's reading this differently than me, you know, put it in the
00:46:33.560comments or call in. I want to hear it out. I could go both ways on this, but the way I'm
00:46:41.040reading this one right now, I'm not sure it's good for a functioning federation.
00:46:45.680You know, the idea, a good federation should have maximum powers as low as possible, as close to the people as possible at the subnational and at the local levels.
00:46:58.420And those subnational units delegate powers to higher levels of government, say the federal government, where cooperation among jurisdictions is required.
00:47:09.220Things like national defense, things like foreign policy, infrastructure that crosses boundaries, currency, that kind of thing.
00:47:21.200Those are the kind of things that we want delegated to the so-called higher levels of government.
00:47:27.840So I see this proposal as potentially problematic.
00:47:32.680I'm going to have to suss it out a bit more.
00:47:34.240I'm not saying it's not a hard no, but that one's a soft no right now.
00:47:42.000On some things, it should be pretty clear.
00:47:44.420Should Ottawa be allowed to ban paper straws in Alberta?
00:47:47.660What possible national benefit does that serve?
00:47:52.660You know, why does every province have to have paper, I should say ban plastic straws, sorry.
00:47:58.020Why does every province have to have no good straws?
00:48:00.560Why does every province have to have paper straws?
00:48:04.240There's no good reason I can think of why all 10 provinces and all three territories have to have the exact same law on straws.
00:48:13.500That's an area where, obviously, the subnational units should win out.
00:48:17.700There's no national interest in banning old-fashioned, great plastic straws.
00:48:24.700Okay. But, you know, infrastructure crossing provincial boundaries, pipelines, power lines, railroads, highways, canals, these kinds of things, that is a clear area of national interest.
00:48:43.300And you can quibble about it if an individual project is a good thing or a bad thing. That's circumstantial.
00:48:49.100That's something that should be federal.
00:51:10.180I mean, if Quebec holds a referendum on a constitutional question, you better believe everyone's coming to the table and we're treating Quebec very politely and nicely and asking them to, you know, maybe negotiate down what they're asking for.
00:51:30.000It was crickets. We didn't even get a letter back from Ottawa. They didn't even tell us to pound sand. They just didn't answer the door. We rang the doorbell and no one came. We heard the party inside. We just weren't invited in. They didn't even open the door. I'm not even sure they peered through the window to see who was there.
00:51:46.020so my concern is we're going to hold this these referendum questions and we're going to get
00:51:51.980ignored um that's not a reason necessarily to not hold it though i've always said you know like when
00:52:01.400i was in the alberta legislature i was i was the first elected member of the alberta legislature
00:52:06.300since 1982 who openly supported alberta holding a referendum on independence uh maybe you kids
00:52:14.020weren't ready for that. Maybe you guys weren't ready for that, but your kids are going to love
00:52:18.400it. It was maybe ahead of its time. But I felt at that time that Alberta needed to start moving in
00:52:25.220the direction of independence. But, you know, some people thought it was too soft, the policy
00:52:31.020because the policy was called equality or independence. Because some of the more hardcore
00:52:37.040of you are not going to like to hear this, but this is the reality. A majority of Albertans
00:52:41.560will never vote for independence unless they believe that Alberta has exhausted all other
00:52:48.380attempts at good faith negotiation for equality and fairness in Canada first. They're just not
00:52:55.560going to be prepared to pull the trigger on a admittedly pretty radical idea of becoming
00:53:03.020their own sovereign and independent country unless they are confident that we have tried
00:53:12.140everything else first. Similarly, you know, the American founding fathers in the Continental
00:53:16.640Congress, they sent the, the American Revolution was shooting for a year before they declared
00:53:23.840independence. They were literally fighting a war for a year against the British Empire
00:53:28.700for a whole year before they declared independence. And before they declared independence,
00:53:32.680they sent the olive branch petition to the king and then the the king responded uh go to hell i'm
00:53:40.520gonna hang you all for treason but they they reached out to the king for redress saying like
00:53:45.000we're your loyal subjects we want to stay a part of mother england the british empire uh we love
00:53:51.640britain we just want to be treated fairly we want representation with taxation i mean see the seats
00:53:57.240in parliament or that the 13 colonial legislatures have more power than they currently do and can't
00:54:04.520be overridden by parliament and the king. They sent a very reasonable proposal to the king
00:54:10.280called the olive branch petition, extending an olive branch of peace to the king. And it was
00:54:16.440the king's response saying, to hell with you all, I'm going to hang you all for treason.
00:54:20.920And then the Continental Congress voted with a hook and crook unanimously for independence.
00:54:29.080It's a very different circumstance in Alberta where no one's shooting each other.
00:54:36.380But I think the principle remains that a majority of Albertans will not vote for independence unless they believe that every possible measure that can be taken to make it work in Canada first has been done has been done.
00:54:57.180If we don't do that, you know, the moderates who are maybe sympathetic to independence and angry and have grievances with the federal government or other parts of Canada, they're not going to vote for it unless they understand that.
00:55:12.140And yes, I'm probably in the chats here.
00:55:14.700We're going to get people saying, hey, we've been trying forever.
00:57:28.440You know, putting forward reasonable proposals for constitutional reform to make things work in Canada is probably a non-starter, just like the equalization referendum.
00:58:07.580But that country is lost now. And I don't think it's capable of reforming itself. I think it's probably past the point of no return at this point.
00:58:20.680I hope they would say yes. I don't think they will. I think the chances are extraordinarily small.
00:58:27.720But I think we owe it to our own history, our own heritage, and our institutions to try.
00:59:06.000But at the very least, at a minimum, even if those of you say there's a zero percent chance, I think it is important that we do this, if nothing else,
00:59:42.540So, yeah, I mean, okay, Missy Forever says the referendum will prove that the Constitution doesn't work because they won't do anything.
00:59:58.460I'm not sure that proves the Constitution doesn't work, but it might prove that federal reform doesn't work because they are very likely to do nothing.
01:00:07.480People on both sides are going to say, well, the rest of the country will do nothing.
01:00:09.840And, you know, the federalists who say, well, why are we holding these referendums?
01:00:39.340And if they say no, then, you know, during the independence referendum campaign, when you go knock on a door and someone says, hey, well, I want to work it out, you know, you find someone who's not a elbows up forever Canada guy, you know, people, but you find someone who's a bit more moderate in the middle and they say, you know, yeah, I get independence, but I'm not there yet.
01:01:00.740But I really think we should, I really think, you know, we got to make Canada work.
01:01:09.460Well, you could talk about the history of the Reform Party and the Wild Rose and all of these things till you're blue in the face.
01:01:19.460But chances are most normal people haven't experienced that.
01:01:22.720Most people haven't opened up the history books and, you know, remembered Preston Manning railing about a Tripoli Senate in a church basement in 1988, you know.
01:01:34.140They're just not going to remember that.
01:01:38.160So at least to be able to look them in the eyes and say, hey, you probably voted to reform the Constitution, and these guys said no.
01:01:46.100So at a minimum, I think it strengthens the hands of an independence campaign if the rest of Canada says no, after we've put forward good faith reforms to the Constitution first.
01:01:58.360So that's me trying to be a pragmatist.
01:02:15.140But we're probably going to have 10 referendum questions, I think, because there is that citizens initiative referendum on independence.
01:02:27.400Can't be sure. But if I'm a betting man here, I'm betting they get the signatures to trigger an independence campaign, a referendum campaign, which would also be held probably, I think, at the same time.
01:03:13.180Where does the independence referendum fit in on that?
01:03:17.580Does it get held the same day and it's just one of 10 options?
01:03:23.780If so, that would seem an effort to help that referendum probably lose.
01:03:31.260I know people can reasonably take both sides of this argument.
01:03:34.580I know the federalist side, they're going to say,
01:03:38.060these nine referendum questions are designed to help an independence referendum win.
01:03:42.560And I've seen some of that from the usual crowd on X. I don't think so. I think it hurts it. Because then it, you know, a bunch of people who would otherwise vote for independence, they can say, well, I'm not all the way there. I'll vote for these more moderate options of we're going to take control of immigration and we're going to demand constitutional reform.
01:04:15.140I think the way this should work is that if the Premier says we're going to have this, we're going to vote on these nine items October 19th.
01:04:27.280um i think if we have a successful petition drive for a referendum on independence which
01:04:36.120again i think they're very very likely to get the signatures for that it should be scheduled for
01:04:41.840perhaps a month afterwards you know i don't know what day of the week it is but you know roughly
01:04:46.880like november 19th as long as it's not a weekend or a holiday or something um november 19th or
01:04:53.520early in the new year, something like that. It should be after. So you give Albertans a chance
01:04:59.420to vote on these questions here, immigration reform, etc. Okay. And then you've got the
01:05:05.320constitutional questions. You've got to give then a little bit of time, a reasonable amount of time,
01:05:12.080so maybe more than a month. You also don't want to do it during Christmas. But you have to give
01:05:17.680the other provinces in the federal government time to consider these questions? To consider,
01:05:23.900okay, Alberta says we want to get rid of the Senate. We want the provinces to appoint
01:05:29.160their appellate court judges for their own provinces. We want to allow a clearer separation
01:05:38.860of powers on things like health care, social policy, and we want the provincial legislation
01:05:45.200to trump federal legislation where there's shared jurisdiction okay uh and then you allow the other
01:05:51.960provinces and the federal government time to consider it and if they ignore it or they say no
01:05:56.480well then albertans can be informed by that reaction when they go a month two three months
01:06:03.880later to vote on the potential independence question they should not be voting on the same
01:06:09.020day? Because these are very big things. Why would you vote? Because if people voted for
01:06:15.640independents, I know it's a minority opinion right now. We got a poll coming out today.
01:06:18.820It's in the mid-30s. It's around 34%, 34, 35. I think it gets up to 38%. We had a poll.
01:06:29.020We polled Albertans, a pretty big sample size, 1,500 people. We asked if the pipeline MOU deal
01:06:36.520between Daniel Smith and Mark Carney falls through,
01:07:05.000on the exact same day as independence like that's very conflicting that's sending very conflicting
01:07:12.960messages uh also you know if say the reform proposals pass but the independence one fails
01:07:19.600then you've you've completely wasted all of your leverage for actually negotiating with the other
01:07:23.460provinces so i think what make a lot more sense is that you know the nine questions put forward
01:07:29.040by premier smith those get voted on october 19th if we're actually going to vote on all these things
01:07:34.400And, you know, as I've already said, I'm not sure they should all be referendum questions. Some of them should just be enacted as policy immediately. But we're going to vote on these things October 19th. And then we give, you know, say three months from October 19th. So say, you know, January 19th, roughly, as long as it's not a weekend or something, something like January 19th, roughly, 2027.
01:07:53.700then we can vote on the Citizens Initiative referendum on independence.
01:08:01.300And if in those three months the rest of Canada has found Jesus
01:08:06.620and we reform the Constitution, we either get rid of the Senate
01:08:11.540or we reform the Senate into something democratic,
01:08:14.600something with more fair representation to acknowledge
01:08:20.540that the country's population among provinces has changed a bit since 1905
01:08:27.380when Alberta and Saskatchewan were admitted as provinces
01:08:29.920and assigned our senators and never changed since.
01:08:32.860But, you know, we reform the Senate, we reform area, you know,
01:08:38.140the Constitution around areas of shared jurisdiction, appointment of judges.
01:08:40.960You know, we get some significant constitutional reform in Canada.
01:19:41.540I think you're, I think JP Alberta First is saying something pretty similar to what I'm saying,
01:19:45.780except he's just saying to do it earlier.
01:19:49.520That, you know, she could have her referendum questions along with Lukasik's question.
01:19:54.820I don't think Lacan's questions coming up for a vote because he seemed to realize after he got the signatures that he doesn't actually want a referendum.
01:20:01.820He had triggered his own independence referendum.
01:20:03.760He's like, well, I didn't read the legislation.
01:20:07.360So I'm not sure we're actually going to vote on that.
01:20:11.600But anyway, so have her referendum questions.
01:20:16.080He wants, JP Alberta First wants to do it in June and then have the independence vote in October.
01:20:22.440um so i i we're on the same page that those questions should be held before the independence
01:20:28.620vote i agree with that uh but i i i think you want more time for a referendum i mean independence
01:20:37.120it's a big deal and frankly like the movement i've been in the movement and it's not as old
01:20:45.760and well developed as it is in quebec in quebec you know they develop all these cultural institutions
01:20:50.080around this stuff and they spent decades before they even had their first referendum you know
01:20:54.440then another roughly 15 years before their second referendum and it's been god knows how long uh you
01:21:00.840know 1995 they might have another referendum in the next two three one to three years who knows
01:21:06.100um more runway is not a bad thing i know some you just you just want to start shooting you just want
01:21:13.760to pull the trigger and vote on it now because it's going to feel good but it's not going to
01:21:19.100feel good if you get slaughtered and having more time allows a a more thoughtful campaign it allows
01:21:26.140people to consider this idea because guess what it is a radical idea forming your own country is a
01:21:32.460radical idea radical you know canadians have all been taught radical equals a bad thing anything
01:21:39.600that is not you know if you have you have three numbers one two and three canadian always picks
01:21:44.400two they always pick what's in the middle you know canadians have been conditioned to think
01:21:48.560that anything big, anything aspirational, anything outside the box is bad. Anything radical. Radical
01:21:54.520equals bad. And radical often equals bad. Anywhere. But not always. We've done radical things before
01:22:01.840that have been good. We've done radical things that are bad. But this is a radical proposal.
01:22:08.560And it's going to take time for people to take it in. Because remember, you're talking to your
01:22:13.140friends you know uh you know i have a beer with my buddies in my barn we've got a big alberta flag
01:22:20.100and wild rose country mud flaps on the wall we sit around we all agree
01:22:23.940but a lot of people don't a lot of people don't you know it's uh a lot of people need some some
01:22:34.980convincing here and you know in the federalist circles they say well everyone i know is a
01:22:39.520federalists they're forever canada and uh we love uh jason kenney and nahi denji and thomas
01:22:45.720lukasik and anyone who doesn't think like that is crazy i don't know anyone who's you know not
01:22:50.040a federalist these separatists are crazy i don't know any well guess what we have the same problem
01:22:54.820on our side too we roll in our circles and we tend to talk with people who agree with us more often
01:23:00.800than not there's a lot of people who've got to be one over here and so having more time especially
01:23:07.580after a uh a series of referendum proposals where we're we albertans are being the reasonable ones
01:23:14.300proposing amendments to the constitution compromises to make canada work let canada
01:23:20.760stew on that let let them give them a reasonable amount of time to consider it and come back to
01:23:25.260the table um you know that um give some time for that to happen i know some of you just want to
01:23:33.060vote now. It's a bad idea. And I know that's always been the attitude of so many people in
01:23:37.940the independence movement. I was in it when it was not a very popular idea at all, when it was
01:23:44.020pretty fringe. So, you know, I don't take positions on things to be popular. I've taken
01:23:50.080very unpopular positions before. It was not very politically advantageous to do so. But don't just
01:23:57.600pull the trigger because it feels good and you want to do it now. Because guess what? It's going
01:24:01.820to feel good when you get your referendum scheduled and it's going to feel like shit when you get
01:24:05.100beaten badly you want to set yourself up as Lucien Bouchard said for winning conditions
01:24:11.000give yourself the best chance possible that means giving a bit more time and letting this set of
01:24:16.860referendum questions go first and give the rest of Canada the provinces and the feds a good faith
01:24:23.200uh, period of time to negotiate reasonably. All right. All right. All right. I'm going to leave
01:24:40.660it there. I actually have to get back to the rest of my job and try to run this shop here.
01:24:44.580Uh, but I've enjoyed the chat this morning. Oh, geez. I got, I've been ignoring text messages from,
01:24:51.180uh from john here uh all right okay well i know we have uh okay this oh this that's because this
01:25:03.240was on x um uh george uh he's got a long long name here but george uh he says aren't these
01:25:10.520referendum questions just proof that smith is completely out of touch with the feelings of
01:25:14.040majority of albertans uh they are either that simply her way of dodging responsibility to an
01:25:20.080legislature will be criticized by those outside of Alberta. George says Smith has federal political
01:25:26.140ambitions. She knows that doing what needs to be done arbitrarily, as is her job, she will have
01:25:33.160these policies thrown back at her by her eastern competitors. When she runs federally, she wants
01:25:37.920to hide behind a referendum. If you want to say she's dodging taking a tough position by holding
01:25:46.100these referendum questions? Maybe. You can make the argument. You can make it fairly on either
01:25:51.340side. As I said, I don't think there should be referendum questions on these immigration things.
01:25:55.820I think we should just do it. Do it yesterday. The constitutional questions, no, those are
01:26:02.760rightfully put towards a referendum. I do not agree, though, that she's got any kind of
01:26:07.780significant political, federal political ambitions, and she's trying to appease an East.
01:26:11.340a lot of pundits get it wrong about why jason kenny is no longer premier they thought it was
01:26:17.200because of covid covid was what pushed it over the top but ultimately it's because he always
01:26:21.780had his peripheral vision on ottawa that he saw the premier's chair of alberta as the stepping
01:26:27.260stone a way station on the way to the prime ministership he was going to come back to
01:26:31.780alberta save alberta unite the parties defeat the ndp uh be popular and then once the federal
01:26:38.440leadership the conservative party comes open he could hop over there and it was self-evident to
01:26:43.200everyone and and it was we kind of put up with it for a bit but it became very obvious you know he
01:26:49.300talked a bit tough for alberta but wouldn't actually do anything uh there's no way in hell
01:26:55.320he would have allowed a citizens initiative uh referendum on independence he has made clear even
01:26:59.900very recently he would never allow this this is just not allowed these people are hijacking the
01:27:04.100system. They're bad people. They should go away. Shut up. No referendum for you. He had his
01:27:09.760peripheral vision on Ottawa. And we could see that. And it became tiresome. And when we needed
01:27:15.680someone to really fight back against Ottawa on equalization, and then during COVID, he had
01:27:22.120nothing but words for Trudeau, really. Words and a few court interventions. But otherwise still
01:27:28.940followed the lead of Ottawa on COVID restrictions, vaccine passports, mandates, masking, all this
01:27:38.700crap. He followed their lead. We saw that. We don't see that from Smith. Smith is probably the least
01:27:45.760popular politician outside of Alberta. Even a lot of conservatives, right-wing conservatives in the
01:27:53.720East don't like her because she's Alberta first. She might not be all the way there as a full
01:27:59.600Alberta nationalist supporting independence. She's not there. But she has been Alberta first.
01:28:06.120Hard for Alberta sovereignty. We got the Alberta Sovereignty Act, albeit a very watered down one
01:28:10.540from what was originally promised during the leadership campaign. But we still got it. It
01:28:14.520was a significant action. I would have liked the original as proposed, but we still got something
01:28:18.720good there. We got the Citizens Initiative legislation making an independence referendum
01:28:27.660possible. You know, I really just have a hard time squaring the accusation that she's got
01:28:35.600federal political ambitions with her actions, with her language. She would be wildly unelectable
01:28:42.720outside of Alberta. And I like that, because I want my Alberta Premier to see the Alberta
01:28:47.960premier's chair as the highest job the way a quebec nationalist sees being quebec premier
01:28:54.600as more important than being canadian prime minister i want my premier i want the alberta
01:28:59.240premier to see being alberta premier as more important than being prime minister that's the
01:29:04.520top job and i and she gives me that she very much gives me at least me that impression um
01:29:11.160Um, you know, I, uh, tough on her sometimes, you know, earlier in the live stream, I was
01:29:16.780tougher on, on some things, but that's, that's, you know, I, I, you don't even have to be
01:29:23.240Her, her opponents, I'll say she's just crazy Alberta nationalist closet separatist, yahoo
01:29:29.720shooting guns in the air that, you know, her opponents see this.
01:29:34.380So people on her side should also see it for what it is.
01:29:37.500I, I don't think that's, I don't think that's a fair accusation.
01:29:40.800I don't think if I was her advisor and I am telling her, advising her on how she should prepare the way for a federal run, I would tell her to do the exact opposite of everything she's been doing here.
01:29:57.000So I have to respectfully disagree with you on that one.