Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Alberta leaving Confederation - laudable or laughable - post 2019 Election conversation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Alberta leaving Confederation - laudable or laughable - post 2019 Election conversation

    {admin edit] I moved the separation conversation here, and I will see if I can split out some more recent discussions from the catch all thread. {/end edit}

    Originally posted by RichardS View Post
    Kenney brought up separation in front of the senate today...hearing that shocked me. I would have stuck to the facts presented...and I didn't hear the comment personally so I am going by second hand reports a during a meeting I had with the GoA this morning. Personally, I would be disappointed at a threat to separate...
    [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]
    I agree.

    Kenney went straight to the nuclear option in Ottawa, suggesting separation which is totally impractical. If Alberta separates, then what? Will that suddenly make Cold Lake an ocean deep water port? Will we see tanker traffic on the North Saskatchewan River? Will BC all of a sudden allow a pipeline ?

    Last time a guy named Levesque went to Ottawa and hammered his fists about separation, he lost every battle with a guy named Trudeau...

    Think about it.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  • #2
    Originally posted by RichardS View Post

    Kenney brought up separation in front of the senate today...hearing that shocked me. I would have stuck to the facts presented...and I didn't hear the comment personally so I am going by second hand reports a during a meeting I had with the GoA this morning. Personally, I would be disappointed at a threat to separate...

    The other theme underlying this will be the equalization program. Shot 1...energy/resource management and inter-provincial jurisdiction. Second shot...equalization depending on how the energy conversation resolves...

    I didn't spend a lot of time on this, but from one article in the Globe, it seems he alluded to separation, rather than directly mentioning it. Nevertheless, he is called out on it by a few Libs.

    My sense so far is he is following a carrot and stick strategy. He is literally putting all options on the table, but follows with more measured negotiations in practice. We will see how effective this strategy is. In meeting Trudeau, the brief comment was looking for common grounds, which is sensible.

    I wonder whether they talked at all about external, shared problem of China, as following canola we now have a Red Deer pork plant getting in the line of Chinese fire: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...orts-1.5121095

    Originally posted by RichardS View Post
    Just a simple opinion based on game theory...no political allegiance or endorsement implied...


    I realize how polarized our politics has become (well, across the world really). It is sad to see the need to say things like that just to be careful. I note KC also repeatedly mentions he voted UCP. Really, a civic dialog should not need any disclaimer. But we are where we are ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
      Originally posted by RichardS View Post
      Kenney brought up separation in front of the senate today...hearing that shocked me. I would have stuck to the facts presented...and I didn't hear the comment personally so I am going by second hand reports a during a meeting I had with the GoA this morning. Personally, I would be disappointed at a threat to separate...
      [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]
      I agree.

      Kenney went straight to the nuclear option in Ottawa, suggesting separation which is totally impractical. If Alberta separates, then what? Will that suddenly make Cold Lake an ocean deep water port? Will we see tanker traffic on the North Saskatchewan River? Will BC all of a sudden allow a pipeline ?

      Last time a guy named Levesque went to Ottawa and hammered his fists about separation, he lost every battle with a guy named Trudeau...

      Think about it.
      You can't fight geography - the province of Alberta is landlocked with BC to the west, if Alberta separated it still would be landlocked with BC to the west.

      Comment


      • #4
        Jack Mintz: Why Alberta’s discontent with Canada is harder to quell than Quebec’s

        ^the bargaining power would be completely different. No pipelines? Sure, no railway trains cross Alberta then, and no planes fly over it. BC would be completely cut off from the rest of Canada (other than a painful northern route through the wilderness). Not to mention the massive federal tax shortfall now that Alberta's federal taxes can't be reallocated to Quebec.

        Conflicts of claim are more difficult because they involve disputes over “sharing the wealth” (as opposed to building wealth together). These arise when a smaller, richer region is called on to transfer wealth to larger, poorer regions within a federation. The obvious example is the way that Alberta and other resource-rich parts of the West have been made to subsidize the rest of Canada through equalization, tax and numerous other net contributions to the federal system.
        Because of the difference in populations, it takes significant transfers from the smaller, richer provinces in order to have a material per capita impact on the more populated poorer regions. Meanwhile the larger, poorer regions (in Canada’s case, Quebec in particular) can control through their political voting power the size of the transfers they wish to extract from the smaller, richer region. In these arrangements, conflict arises when the smaller, richer region feels as if the benefits from being part of a federation are outweighed by the cost of serving as a largely powerless cash cow.

        ...

        Unfortunately Canada, notably, lacks formal institutions that provide small regions like Alberta with proper federal representation, such as an elected and powerful Senate, as exists in the U.S. and Australia. But several actions taken by both federal and provincial governments could still help avoid a looming constitutional crisis arising from conflict of claim. Much of the accommodation will need to occur using federal-provincial co-ordination mechanisms.


        https://business.financialpost.com/o...l-than-quebecs
        Last edited by downtownone; 03-05-2019, 03:28 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by downtownone View Post
          ^the bargaining power would be completely different. No pipelines? Sure, no railway trains cross Alberta then, and no planes fly over it. BC would be completely cut off from the rest of Canada (other than a painful northern route through the wilderness). Not to mention the massive federal tax shortfall now that Alberta's federal taxes can't be reallocated to Quebec.
          There are other railway lines in North America in close proximity to the lower mainland of BC where most of the people, so it wouldn't suffer much. Maybe Prince Rupert would suffer, but then so would Edmonton and Calgary from the loss of east/west rail traffic, so that would be kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

          The Federal Conservatives might be sad to see Alberta's 25 or so reliably Conservative voting seats leave, the Federal Liberals might not mind that part so much. People and places that think they are so indispensable are often in for a rude shock after they carry out their threats.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by downtownone View Post
            ^Alberta would do fine - without those equalization transfers from taxpayers in Alberta to payouts to Quebec, a fund much larger than Norways would have been built up. Easily enough money for a few hundred F35's to protect the borders. Or could join the US (a merger with Montana would be easiest) and at least get two elected senators.

            Why on earth would anyone want to separate from Canada to only end up joining the US?

            Comment


            • #7
              Anyone who thinks a landlocked Alberta separating from Canada is a good thing obviously hasnt thought about the logistics of it all. You think getting a pipeline to tidewaters with out the confederation would happen? Please
              A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by downtownone View Post
                ^Alberta would do fine - without those equalization transfers from taxpayers in Alberta to payouts to Quebec, a fund much larger than Norways would have been built up. Easily enough money for a few hundred F35's to protect the borders. Or could join the US (a merger with Montana would be easiest) and at least get two elected senators.
                Last time I checked, Norway was not landlocked. HUGE difference

                Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

                Comment


                • #9
                  List of Landlocked Countries 2019
                  http://worldpopulationreview.com/cou...ked-countries/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Medwards View Post
                    Anyone who thinks a landlocked Alberta separating from Canada is a good thing obviously hasnt thought about the logistics of it all. You think getting a pipeline to tidewaters with out the confederation would happen? Please

                    While your overall statement is correct...let me edit...


                    You think getting a pipeline to tidewaters, without the joining of other provinces or portions thereof with a coastline, would happen?


                    Separation dies because either BC (or the northern part) would have to join...or the NWT and Yukon... If any or all of that fell into line...then confederation is FUBARed


                    Canada is too sparsely populated. Our problem in Alberta is that we are sparsely populated when compared to the blocks called the Lower Mainland and the Golden Horseshoe.


                    End of line.

                    President and CEO - Airshow.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      If Alberta leaves confederation, Saskatchewan might consider joining as well as Manitoba which has a port, it wouldn't be hard to convince NWT to join either. Think about is as equalization payments spread over a smaller demographic making everyone within more wealthy.
                      Edmonton first, everything else second.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Montana might even consider joining...
                        Edmonton first, everything else second.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          What is the legal path to separation though? I can’t recall a successful secession recently the mess of Brexit comes to mind. Spain has had separation issue with no clear way to achieve it. Before that former Yugoslavia comes to mind, separation through war and genocide... what are our options realistically ( I am not asking is it good or bad, just to know the mechanism)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Last time a state tried leaving the US led to something called the US Civil War.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Snail View Post
                              What is the legal path to separation though? I can’t recall a successful secession recently the mess of Brexit comes to mind. Spain has had separation issue with no clear way to achieve it. Before that former Yugoslavia comes to mind, separation through war and genocide... what are our options realistically ( I am not asking is it good or bad, just to know the mechanism)
                              Quebec has already paved the way, it would just take a fifty percent plus one referendum. Joining the Us would probably be even easier than independence - this article discusses it a bit:

                              http://www.poletical.com/alberta-join-montana.php

                              if Trudeau wins the next federal election I think this talk will heat up even more.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X