From the Foreign Desk: Sir John A. MacDonald

 ALBERTA SEPARATION?

Historically speaking, Canadian governments don’t like referendums. The 1992 Canadian referendum to bring Quebec formally into the Constitution (they did not sign it when Pierre Trudeau had a new one written) was defeated and that led directly to the 1995 Quebec referendum. Which was defeated so narrowly (less than 50.5% voted no) that Quebec separatists to this day claim that the vote was stolen.

So, why would Danielle Smith (Alberta Premier) decide to hold one on October 19? First, there is a law in Alberta that if a certain number of signatures are reached on a petition, the province will hold a referendum. That is how the question of holding a referendum on the question of holding a referendum to separate from Canada was started, right? Not quite. First of all, as the earlier sentence said, it was not a vote on separating from Canada. It was a vote to, sometime in the future, hold a vote to separate from Canada. Something that, personally, I don’t think was ever going to happen even if the question of holding a separation vote was successful. Everyone who was anyone in Canadian politics was on record saying that separation was a bad idea and that they were opposed to it. Both Conservatives and Liberals were united in this. Indigenous chiefs were on record saying that Alberta could not leave Canada without their approval (not sure where the legal basis for that comes from, but there you have it). Courts had, at one point, completely blocked the province from even asking the question, but was reversed on appeal.

But the vote failed. 75% of Albertans voted to not hold a vote on separation, and Danielle Smith has said that this ends the question. Personally, I think the fact that 25% of Alberta voting to possibly separate is extremely significant. That would be the end of the whole issue, right? Vote failed, no further votes to be held in the immediate future, the question is now settled.

There’s just one problem that pretty much all the media in both Canada and around the world have missed. You see, this wasn’t a referendum with just one question on it. It was a referendum with ten questions on it. And the results from the other nine questions are…a bit more interesting than anyone really wants to discuss.

You see, the referendum was only going to have nine questions on it, and the separation vote was added only a few months ago. The other nine were questions regarding immigration, voting, health care and Alberta’s relationship with Ottawa. And only one of those questions has (barely) been rejected.

Question one (separation was question ten) asked if Alberta should take more control over immigration. 55% voted yes. Question two (provincially funded programs restricted to Canadian citizens and permanent residents) 52% support. Question three (12 months residency before immigrants are eligible for social supports such as welfare) 53% support. Question four (charge fees for new immigrants to access health care) 52% support. Question six (Province should pick judges) 52% support. Question seven (Abolish the unelected senate – which is similar to the British House of Lords) 51% support. Question nine (provincial law takes precedence over federal law when federal law conflicts with provincial responsibility) 50.5% support.

Did you notice we missed two? Question eight was whether the province should opt out of federal health care programs but still receive funding with 48% support. That one pretty clearly fails. And the big one. A voter must show proof of Canadian citizenship to vote in provincial elections – 62% support.

Why these questions? Danielle Smith has said that she needs public support to implement these measures as Ottawa (specifically, Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney) is VERY opposed to these ideas. Don’t think for a second the problems that the US is having with uncontrolled immigration and voter fraud have not been noticed in Canada. They have. It’s just that the Conservative government of Danielle Smith in Alberta is the only one willing to actually do something about it. The voters of Alberta have given her a clear mandate to go forward on these ideas.

Will things change? To a certain extent. But on others, not a chance. The West has wanted the Senate abolished since the 1990s, if not earlier. They have been ignored. The idea that Ottawa would allow the provinces to choose judges? Will never, ever be allowed. Ottawa guards that prerogative jealously. Putting provincial law above or on par with federal law? Far too dangerous a precedent for Ottawa to even consider.

But the questions on health care? Limiting immigration access to welfare? Requiring proof of Canadian citizenship to vote in provincial elections. Yes, they can go forward, though I am sure that in Alberta, just as in the US, there will be constant judicial challenges. But it leads to anyone paying attention to start asking the question. Why are these common sense ideas so dangerous to the federal Liberal government in Ottawa. Hopefully, leading to questions and doubts in voters minds about whether the Liberals really have Canada’s best interests at heart. (spoiler alert: they don’t).

There’s one more thought that’s been buzzing around in my head for the last couple of days. There was a huge push to defeat the separation question, but the others were largely ignored. I’m wondering if Danielle Smith took a page from Donald Trump’s playbook and had the separation question added as a bit of misdirection. Get Carney focused on the separation issue while the program she really wants goes through. It’s a possibility. Canadian politicians learn from Trump too, they just don’t like to admit it.