February 07, 2019

Rise of Western separatism proves Canada's political elites failed

Ezra LevantRebel Commander

On last night's episode of The Ezra Levant Show, I reported on the findings of an Angus Reid poll that shows a majority of respondents in Alberta and Saskatchewan would consider voting for a separatist party.

I’m not surprised: Sixty per cent of Albertans would favour a western separatist movement. That’s the result of a new opinion poll by Angus Reid.

Here’s their headline:

Decades after Reform’s rise, voters open to a new ‘Western Canada Party’. And by that, they mean a new federal party, to run in Canadian elections, like the old Reform Party did, to promote a western point of view.

Angus Reid says a new pro-western party would immediately be in first place across the west, and would literally get 40 per cent in Alberta. Could be.

Of course, it would depend a lot on the leader; I think a lot of westerners are disappointed in the weak sauce of Andrew Scheer. Maxime Bernier, who calls himself "the Albertan from Beauce," actually has more of a chance that others might think.

Now look at the real question in the Angus Reid survey:

Would you be in favour or opposed to your own province joining such a western separatist movement?

Forty three per cent of BCers and 45 per cent of Manitobans are strongly opposed to the idea, although 35 per cent of BCers are open to the idea, and 36 per cent are open to it in Manitoba — before such a party even is formed.

(And remember, simply having a western separatist party doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll separate. It might just mean you want to negotiate a bit more firmly than rolling over every time. It's worked for Quebec.

(Furthermore, I’m not sure what use the United States of America would have for an independent Quebec. But I’m pretty sure Donald Trump would know what to do with Alberta...)

And Albertans, I think, know this, if you look at these poll results. Again, without even advocating, 60 per cent of Albertans would immediately support such a project — and half of those supporters are “strong”. That’s a landslide, folks.

So what does this all mean?

I think it means that all of the existing political entities have failed the west.

Obviously the Liberals, but the NDP doesn’t much like it either. And the Conservative Party? Well, the stats speak for themselves: People prefer another party to it; they prefer separatism to it. That’s sad.

Of course other institutions have failed, too. The mainstream media is in many ways the worst; but so are the courts — which are the primary means to attack the oil patch and pipelines. People are fed up.

Remember, though:

They called Preston Manning a bigot for standing up for the west. Thirty years later, that playbook still seems to work. Get ready for it again.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2019-02-08 22:03:15 -0500
Huh. According to some posters here I work for the Liberals. That would be a job, wouldn’t it?

(Stay in school kids, you might get a job where the boss doesn’t care if you screw around a bit, as long as the work gets done)
commented 2019-02-08 18:53:29 -0500
“Charred Remains commented 11 hours ago
Wow.. all unknowing Andrew thinks it has an opinion on shale and and a full understanding of solids to liquids and the expensive fracking required to make that happen”
The low cost of fracking is not a secret. The rapid expansion of American production speaks for itself.

“liza Rosie commented 16 hours ago
You wish Andrew. "
What do you disagree with, and why?

“ron joseph commented 17 hours ago
I believe the US would like Alberta for another reason, they would offer to buy the NWT then they have a large land stairway to Alaska.
By the way the US would offer every BC Citizen probably 1 or 2 thousand dollars if they could get it. The HUGE Fraser River empties into the Pacific; it wouldn’t take much to send half of it down to thiristy California so the US Illegals can use it up. "

The NWT doesn’t border Alaska. The Yukon does, but doesn’t border Alberta. Neither territory is Alberta’s to give away. They would have to have their own referenda, there are complications among the largely self-governing Inuit and other Indigenous communities (largely on unceded land) and even then… territorial governments are still largely federally administered , the Feds don’t have to listen.

Water from the Fraser would have to get across the Columbia, a similarly large river which hasn’t been substantially diverted. The days of large interbasin diversions are probably over due to the threat of invasive species anyway. California’s water shortages aren’t due to lack of water but rather poor use of what they do have.
commented 2019-02-08 14:42:41 -0500
Charred Remains — Agree 100%. Even if the US option is one of many, it should be the very last option considered. Once you get in, you don’t get out, you’ll be stuck with the good and the bad; basing a decision of that magnitude on how easily one can transport / sell oil without also carefully considering the overall nature and condition of the US society in which you will have to spend your day-to-day life is myopic.
commented 2019-02-08 04:22:07 -0500
Separation yes. The BNA Act was drafted and designed 151+ years ago, naturally enough to accommodate the needs and goals of the 4 signatory provinces there at the time, and several years before a vast area of “terra incognita” lying somewhere to the west and north of Toronto was purchased to be a part of the new country. The Act has never been updated (although Canada has admitted new provinces), and it has shown little capability in dealing with the growth and demands of a country that has spread out from its original 4 province core and now sees 30-33% of its population living west of the Manitoba / Ontario border. So unless the clueless Parliamentarians actually do something instead of virtue signal on all the usual trendy topics and spend our tax dollars for UN hero cookies, the creaky machinery of Confederation will eventually grind to a halt. The process may well begin as early as next November, but even if there is a change in government the status quo and lack of any sort of regional representation will eventually break things apart. A matter of when, not if.

Joining the US? No thanks. That’s just the same lazy attitude that has made us too reliant on them as a trading partner now; how easy has it been over the past century for the bright lights in industry to choose the lazy path and simply hike a ride on America’s coat tails as it gained economic ascendancy, rather than make a real effort to also try to expand the trade of Canadian goods beyond the USA, and compete more fully in the wider global market?

And if you think 5 or so million folks (Alberta and Saskatchewan) have no voice in a country of 36 million, you can be assured we’d have even less voice in a country of 326 million. (Case in point, Democrat loving California – with more folks than all of Canada, and having a hell of a lot more representation than Alberta and Saskatchewan would ever possess – finds itself as much a helpless bystander to the current federal US administration as does tiny Rhode Island, which also leans towards the Democrats. Not an indictment of anyone, both the Obama and Trump administrations have taken turns screwing Canada in their own time, but just a simple fact: even the biggest state in the union can find itself behind the federal 8 ball should a president decide to exercise the power of his pen.)

All the US would see in the annexation of Alberta / Saskatchewan would be the resources falling into their lap, accompanied by dewy eyed mumblings about Manifest Destiny. The folks actually living here would always be seen as children of a lesser God, the country cousins allowed in to occupy the attic of the house where the self-described cool kids live.

No thanks. Sectors other than the O&G / Mining sector form the vast majority of both provinces’ GDP’s. Even without considering the enormous value added there, and even allowing for a continued discount on the value received from O&G exports to the US, the proceeds would fairly quickly finance an even more diverse and value-added economy within both Alberta and Saskatchewan, because we’d no longer have Ottawa front and center demanding their cut.

And if BC and / or Manitoba and / or the Territories wanted to come along, suddenly we have instant access to tidewater. That would be a complete game changer. I bet we’d even be able to get national infrastructure built…sort of like Canada used to be able to do.
commented 2019-02-08 02:49:22 -0500
Andrew if it is not about Notley and Trudeau then why is there lots of investment in other countries??
commented 2019-02-08 02:46:33 -0500
Andrew you are not in Alberta so you do not get a say, our province , our choice. See how progressive rules work?
commented 2019-02-08 02:45:01 -0500
The actual woes i see are in green scams.
commented 2019-02-08 02:44:17 -0500
Sorry all over Alberta, not just the oilsands.
commented 2019-02-08 02:43:39 -0500
Andrew Stephenson the woes were all Alberta and they did not happen elsewhere. Your BS is pathetic. We know what really happened.
commented 2019-02-08 02:30:19 -0500
The Americans, unlike too many feckless Canadians, recognize that having achieved energy independence, they should preserve that advantage for generations to come… The mid-East, on which Irving Oil and Canada still depends, continues to be volatile… America’s military superiority depends on having guaranteed oil reserves for any contingency…. Besides, they have been covering Canada’s non-performing “butt” in NATO and NORAD for decades, and “Greenie Dreams” notwithstanding, to have guaranteed oil reserves is vital to keeping their and our butts safe… Or is that magic “pixie dust” energy source just around the corner?? Sure would like to buy into that “fantasy” at the ground floor…
commented 2019-02-08 02:28:08 -0500
You wish Andrew.
commented 2019-02-08 01:41:29 -0500
I believe the US would like Alberta for another reason, they would offer to buy the NWT then they have a large land stairway to Alaska.
By the way the US would offer every BC Citizen probably 1 or 2 thousand dollars if they could get it. The HUGE Fraser River empties into the Pacific; it wouldn’t take much to send half of it down to thiristy California so the US Illegals can use it up.
commented 2019-02-08 01:29:20 -0500
Charred Remains commented 15 mins ago
Shale is not a long-term deposit. Meaning shallower returns . more expensive than the oil sands and no where’s near the longevity. "

The problem is, Charred, that it’s gotten so cheap to drill a new shale well that it doesn’t matter if they deplete rapidly. Remember a few years ago when the Saudis flooded the market to try and squeeze out the shale producers? It didn’t. They kept right on drilling even at $35/bbl.

Who did get crushed? The oil sands. People love to blame Trudeau and Notley, but forget that the woes began nearly two years before either – due to shale and the Saudis. Those bitumen plants last a long time … but they’re stupendously expensive. Further, their business model largely dates from a time where they expected scarcity and much higher oil prices than they’re actually getting. These days, that longevity is a downside – having watched what happened to the coal industry (in light of declining demand, a lot of it will never be used) and mindful of the possibility of the same happening to oil, who really wants to spend billions of dollars on a facility that needs sustained high prices for decades to even break even?
commented 2019-02-08 01:04:21 -0500
ps – do those Americans know that the two biggest cities have a Muslim and a possible communist for their respective mayors?
commented 2019-02-08 01:00:13 -0500
“And if you think Americans don’t recognize the 101 percent of possibly having Alberta energy cement it’s current energy independence”

Speaking of energy independence, go take a look at the state of Texas’ wind industry. Alberta has a lot of catching up to do.

The Americans have all the shale oil they could ever need, a better product at half the price of bitumen. It’s hard to articulate just how fabulous the Permian basin really is – so good that it’s undercutting other shale plays, which themselves undercut the oil sands. If America wanted bitumen, they could get it right now without annexing the province. They don’t.

The Democrats don’t want more fossil fuels, and the Republicans don’t want to tip the political balances by bringing in a bunch of people that presently have an openly socialist government and (yes, this has been asked) a 13% approval of the Orange Guy. No political buy in. Perhaps you’d swing it as a territory, but if you think you’re ignored now …

The flights from Calgary to Toronto are pretty much constantly packed as well, and there are way more of those than flights to Texas. What’s your point?
commented 2019-02-08 00:15:51 -0500
I just love it when Ms. Stephenson “sputters” again and agin… The hell they wouldn’t give Alberta statehood!… Alaska was given statehood and is a natural stepping stone to the US mainland… And if you think Americans don’t recognize the 101 percent of possibly having Alberta energy cement it’s current energy independence, then you must be still reading musty old editions or Pravda or Izvestia… By the way “Ms.” the Americans love Alberta, and that is why the Calgary to Houston flights are always full…
commented 2019-02-07 21:22:46 -0500
I’m fully in favor of Western Canada separation. I live in BC, so the appetite for separation isn’t nearly as strong here as it is in the prairie provinces, but there are many in the interior that could be convinced of the advantages of separation. So could many west coast loggers, but the majority of West-Coasters are a bunch of tree-hugging, tofu/granola-eating eco-freaks, just like Trudeau, so they’d never want to separate. That’s good, we could ship them all off to live with Trudeau. I’d certainly be willing to pay for their one-way ticket with my tax dollars.
commented 2019-02-07 21:12:25 -0500
The Americans wouldn’t give Alberta statehood, for the same reason the Republicans put so much effort into blocking statehood for DC or PR – even the Albertan right is downright communist by American standards and it would cost the GOP their tenuous grasp on the Senate.
commented 2019-02-07 21:11:10 -0500
This election support your local Alberta Freedom Alliance candidate. The only choice is Alberta Independence. https://albertafreedomalliance.ca/blog/
commented 2019-02-07 15:19:27 -0500
The Eastern Elites who despised Stephen Harper . . . the only decent PM we have had in the Last 50 Years . . . gave us Justin Trudope.
If a new border was drawn east of the Manitoba border . . . the West would be an instant viable country. The east would sink in their own BS !
commented 2019-02-07 15:06:05 -0500
If the status quo is not upturned, I would absolutely support it. Something has to give.
Equality or no deal Ottawa.