Alberta Independence vs. Separation: Know the Difference Before You Wave the Flag
To the surprise of nobody, Danielle Smith is pandering to the independence and separatist crowds as what appears to be a direct response to Pierre Poilievre losing the federal race to be Prime Minister and losing his seat.
So what is the deal with this crowd? Well, for starters, they are highly confused on the definition of both independence and separation (secession), which is also equally not a surprise—much like Danielle Smith's response above.
What is the difference then? Why does it matter? Read on! We will start with independence.
Alberta Independence
This means a movement by Alberta toward more autonomy while still remaining within the Canadian federation. This approach puts emphasis on provincial control in many different areas, such as:
-
Policing – Establishing a provincial police force to replace the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
-
Pensions – Establishing a provincial pension plan that is separate from the Canada Pension Plan.
-
Taxation – Collecting and managing all provincial taxes independently.
-
Immigration – Gaining more control over immigration policies affecting the province.
-
Natural Resources – Gaining more control over environmental assessments and interprovincial energy infrastructure.
-
Healthcare – Severing the link to federal funding of healthcare curricula and development.
-
Provincial Constitution – Adopting an Alberta Constitution, provided it doesn't generate a paramountcy situation.
These are just the core areas—and the most common ones to note—the ones that come with the most consequence, scrutiny, and legal issues. By now, you have no doubt noticed that there has been an overt push by the UCP in Alberta on each and every one of these key points. They are actively pushing for independence already. And as you may have also noticed as of late, this has come at the cost of great scrutiny and scandal. Just look at the
#CorruptCare scandal going on right now, easily the biggest topic in Alberta aside from Danielle Smith herself—but certainly not the only one.
What are the challenges with "independence," you may ask? Well, the biggest elephant in the room is the move away from reliance on the federal government for day-to-day public service funding—like healthcare, education, etc. That cost would need to be covered internally by Alberta. Hence, why we are seeing such a push for privatization of healthcare and education. They are pushing for it so badly, that they are bending rules and getting involved in shady deals. These scandals will eventually blow open though.
The next biggest challenge is separating from the Canada Pension Plan. I want to first say that using Quebec as an example holds no water. They started their QPP at the same time CPP started, so the dependence was/is far different than Alberta separating from CPP all these years later and seemingly expecting the majority of the funds. Welp, sorry—it doesn't work that way. It's far more complicated than that, but it is easily one of the largest challenges in an "independence" scenario.
Then we have other challenges such as provincial employment insurance, disaster relief, and even data privacy regulation. They sound innocuous, but they most certainly are not—they are actually huge barriers, which I plan to cover in further articles later.
Without further rambling, this should paint a fairly easy-to-understand picture of what "independence" is and what it would entail to achieve.
Let's Move On to Separation (aka: Secession)
This means Alberta completely leaving the Canadian federation and becoming its own country (or joining another one). The emphasis on this approach is straightforward—so much so that even morons can understand it. But it is also the impossible scenario, since the fail-safes and stopgaps involved in such a process would entirely prevent it from happening. Let's cover them here:
Step 1: Clear Referendum
Alberta would be required to hold a provincial referendum asking citizens if they support leaving the Canadian federation. According to the 1998 Supreme Court Reference on Quebec Secession, a "clear majority" on a "clear question" is an absolute legal prerequisite before any other steps toward separation can happen.
Step 2: Constitutional Negotiations with Canada
The federal government would be obliged to negotiate with Alberta following a successful provincial referendum. Under the Supreme Court decision, separation would require good-faith negotiations on a wide range of issues, including (but not limited to):
-
Division of assets and liabilities, such as federal infrastructure within the province, provincial debt, pension liabilities.
-
Borders, which would include Indigenous land claims and rights under existing federal treaties.
-
Citizen status, including dual citizenship or migration agreements.
-
Trade, pipelines, interprovincial transport, and water rights.
These are just some of them, and as you can see, paint a very difficult picture for just the second step alone. These discussions would be extremely lengthy and fraught with legal battles, which would undoubtedly drive up costs for the provincial government—costs paid by you, the taxpayer. Hmm, perhaps that missing Tylenot money would be used to back such legal battles? Or perhaps all of the kickbacks or money floating around in the
scandal? I don't want to go off-track here, but it wouldn't surprise me if this is actually a hidden playbook feature, by design.
Step 3: Amendments to the Canadian Constitution
This step calls upon the 7/50 Rule, where seven (7) provinces consisting of at least 50% of the Canadian population must agree to any such constitutional change.
Welp, the door just slammed shut right here folks. I'm not speculating—this is an absolute hard stop and would be the final step in Alberta's quest for secession. Anyone who believes it is possible to overcome this is completely and utterly delusional—like Keith Wilson.
The parts of the Canadian Constitution that would need to be changed under the 7/50 rule include:
-
The distribution of seats in the House of Commons and Senate (Sections 37–42).
-
The federal division of powers, where Alberta is currently bound by federal law (Sections 91–92).
-
Alberta's role in constitutional amendment processes (Section 38).
Let’s also not omit the fact that an Alberta withdrawal would undoubtedly cause massive disruption in the House of Commons and create major upset across all remaining provincial governments.
Step 4: Establishing Alberta National Institutions
Currency being the first that comes to mind here. Are they going to continue using the Canadian Dollar? The American Dollar? The Euro? Or are they going to come up with their own? Oil Bucks? Danny Dollars? Convoy Coins? Facepalm.
A Central Alberta Bank would be needed to manage monetary policy, inflation, financial regulation, etc.
Their own military/defense? Okay, now it’s getting silly. I mean sure—the Canadian Armed Forces would no longer be a thing in Alberta, so current members would lose their jobs or face relocation. If they opt to stay in Alberta, they would undoubtedly have a lot to say about what compensation would look like, how much they would be paid, veterans affairs, etc. Hoo boy—not a good idea to mess with these people. I know.
Foreign affairs would need to be in place—a diplomatic corps, embassies, trade missions, border control systems.
Customs and immigration need to be handled, passports, identification systems—the list goes on, but you get the gist of it. If Alberta actually wanted to separate, the only viable path would be to become its own country, not pitch to join another. Could you imagine the cost to Alberta taxpayers to make all of this stuff happen—without Canada’s funding support?
LOL. Hell to the NO you can’t.
There are more steps, but covering them at this point seems completely pointless. One key closing statement though: Alberta would need to do the things, have the checks and balances in place, and be recognized as a country of its own by other nations before anyone would do business with them.
Maybe Russia, North Korea, or Donald Trump’s version of the USA would be willing to engage with a pseudo-country, but nobody else would. Alberta would have to prove itself stable on a global level before gaining any traction as its own nation.
In Conclusion
There is a clear difference between Alberta Independence and Alberta Separation (Secession), and people—including the Alberta Republican crowd—seem to choke on those differences. Probably has something to do with education levels, but one can only speculate.
Danielle Smith is clearly onboard for something—not sure which one—but most likely the independence scenario and not the separation one. As idiotic as she might be, she at least wants to keep Ottawa around so she can go begging for “change” when she needs it most.
But at the end of the day—neither scenario is likely, and with any luck, neither is Danielle Smith’s continued political career.
Do you like this post?