43% of Albertan's and 36% of the West

[Riverwind]

On the other hand when we could finally reach a compromise with murloney, trudeau and his friend put presure to destroy any possibility of compromise.

You make a mistake to assume that meech failed because of Trudeau. The Liberals fought an equally vicious battle over free trade and ended up losing at the ballot box. Meech failed largely because Mulroney had become a widely hated figure in the English Canada and because a few groups (i.e. native groups) felt miffed because they were left out of the process.

[kimmy]

What "compromise" has been offered, other than to shut up and accept the status quo?

There is no compromise on the table because of the separatists in Quebec will shoot down any reasonable proposal by making absurd demands and branding any Quebequer who attempts to make such a compromise as a 'sell-out'. Alberta finds that its desires for reform are ignored because it is impossible to deal with Alberta's concerns as long as the Quebec separatists are poisoning the debate. It is a vicious circle that can only be broken by rejecting seperation as option.

An anology to consider: is it possible to negotiate compromise with terrorists who are willing to blow people up if they don't get what they want? Absolutely not. Seperatists are constitutional terrorists whose positions that easily lead to violence by undermining the integrity of the state.

Ah. Most sensible.

"We will not negotiate with terrorists!" Rather, we shall lavish upon them lucre, grift, economic development grants, contracts, government offices, petting-zoos and monogrammed golf-balls, and special status within Confederation.

That'll certainly keep others from turning to separatism to vent their frustrations!

-k

[kimmy]

what is the status quo?  Being part of a well respected country where your rights are protected and you are given whatever opportunities you choose to accept?

I really don't understand the whole seperatist idea, I mean at least I can see that Quebec has some major differences.... but Alberta??????

Status quo. You know. A busted electoral system that has created the lowest voter turnouts in the democratic world. The "democratic deficit™." A ridiculous senate whose primary role is to provide patronage jobs. A corrupt, inefficient civil service that serves as make-work for Francophones. Grants and contracts awarded without transparency. You know. Stuff that everybody from Preston Manning to Jack Layton has pointed to as needing reform.

I know, I know... "Belinda will fix it!"

-k

[Guest eureka]

Over and over again we hear that Quebec did not sign or agree to "the Constitution." Of course it did both. It did also agree to the repatriation of the Constitution but refuses to sign it for the emotional and political posturing it uses to convince those, like Bakunin, that theyare being victimized again. Just like the whole crappy mythology of victimization from the past.

The best treated minority on God's earth is certainly a distinct society: distinct in its paranoia but not much else.

There is no need to have Quebec sign anything. The Constitution is the federal Constitution and needs only federal agreement and signature. The signatures were asked for as a courtesy and in the spirit of federalism. The only part that did require Provincial agreement was the Charter of Rights since that could have been said to impact Provincial jurisdiction.

And no, Bakunin, I will tell you nothing about myself. Suffice it to say that I have always been a very private person who, at one time in my life, became a very public one in your province. Reluctantly, I might add but coopted because of the stir my writings were causing.

[rbacon]

You keep Yipping about the Constitution. Canada is a Confederation. Look up the word Confederation, not a Federation. In a CON federation each of the Provinces are Sovereign with great Independence. The BNA Act, is a Statute of a foreign country telling a hand picked Governor General how to manage a colony. That is all it is, no Canadian taxpayer or voter ever at anytime in the history of the Confederation of Canada every agreed to any constitutional deal by voting for it, as for the Charter that was written by Chretien for Trudeau and forced on the people without a vote as well. In most Democracies the people decide by a direct vote on such matters, in fact it is part of the UN charter that people should vote for their constitutions. That never happened in Canada. How can a country Canada, tell 3,000,000 people Alberta what we can and cannot do. Especially when that country is not a Democracy. In Canada today, you have one man put up by his Party the Liberals, who was elected by only 30,000 voters, who then proceeds to Appoint the Head of State for 30,000,000 people. This same man elected by 30,000 voters then appints all the Senators and all his friends and supporters as Senators for the 30,000,000, He appoints have of the political system. This same man then appoints all the judges accross the whole land for the 30,000,000 people. He appoints the Heads of State of all the Provinces. And you think we have a moral obligation to maintain that system. We don't even have equal representation in the whipped and chained House of Parliament. The MP's are not allowed to vote freely for the people who elected them, they must also obey this man elected by 30,000 to speak for 30,000,000 people. No if we decide to go nothing you can say or do will change that. And when the rest of the world starts to release what a corrupt and crooked system Canada has they will be amazed as well. For decades Albertans have been asking for Democratic change and TROC finds that amusing. We in Alberta even went to great expense to express our Democratic wish and Right as free people to elect our own Senators and we eelected then with more votes than the crook in Ottawa ever got, and still we are ignored. TROC needs to wake up fast. I see many comments about what will happen to Alberta we will be fine. But that begs the question if you are so concerned why are you not fighting to get Democratic Reform in this country. If you really want to keep this country, this Confederation together what are you doing to demand Democratic Reform in Canada. Besides bitching at those that want reforms or we will form our own country. Be it Quebec, Alberta, BC, Sask, or Manitoba. TROC is causing the destruction of Confederation by their resistance to Democratic Reform and Transparent Government.

[crazymf]

No if we decide to go nothing you can say or do will change that.

Except that 3 million people from Ontario could move here and overvote us again.

[Riverwind]

"We will not negotiate with terrorists!"  Rather, we shall lavish upon them lucre, grift, economic development grants, contracts, government offices, petting-zoos and monogrammed golf-balls, and special status within Confederation.

That'll certainly keep others from turning to separatism to vent their frustrations!

I don't see your point. Did I say that I thought such bribery was appropriate? My point is 'turning to separatism to vent frustratrations' is unacceptable in a democratic state in the same way that 'planting bombs in subways to vent frustrations' is acceptable. The only difference is the bombers deliberately intend to kill people immediately. Where as separatists just consider deaths as a consequence of social unpheaval as an acceptable price to pay in order to prevent old policticians from getting patronage opponents.

[Riverwind]

Status quo. You know. A busted electoral system that has created the lowest voter turnouts in the democratic world. The "democratic deficit." A ridiculous senate whose primary role is to provide patronage jobs. A corrupt, inefficient civil service that serves as make-work for Francophones. Grants and contracts awarded without transparency. You know. Stuff that everybody from Preston Manning to Jack Layton has pointed to as needing reform.

1) The US has a much lower voter turnout than Canada. Does that mean their electoral system is busted? Australia has among the highest voter turn outs yet they have exactly the same system as here. Poor voter turn-out is a measure of the venality of the citizens not the health of the political institutions.

2) California, like Ontario and Alberta put more money into the federal pot is US. In addition, it has the same gripes about a federal gov't that advocates policies that a majority of Californians oppose. California even has its own separatist parties (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiansecessionistparty/). However, you do not see any credible politician in California talking about secession as a viable options because Americans understand that talk of separation has no place in civilized political discourse.

3) The Canadian civil service is among least corrupt in the world (see http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html)

4) Every modern democracy has problems with 'inefficient' bureaucracies that 'lack transparency'. Many large corporations have these problem too. It is not a particularly Canadian problem nor is it going to be solved by separation.

[I miss Reagan]

1) The US has a much lower voter turnout than Canada. Does that mean their electoral system is busted? Australia has among the highest voter turn outs yet they have exactly the same system as here. Poor voter turn-out is a measure of the venality of the citizens not the health of the political institutions.

I'd like to see the numbers on that. If I remember correctly the US always has a higher turnout. And is there not illegal in Australia to not vote?

With respect to California, the individual states have far more power than the individual provinces. Exactly why the US has the system they have, so they wouldn't have an power hoarding government like we have here bullying the different regions around to serve their own purposes.

[Riverwind]

In most Democracies the people decide by a direct vote on such matters, in fact it is part of the UN charter that people should vote for their constitutions.

Where did you get this idea from? Did the Americans vote on their constitution? I don't think so. The UK does not even have a formal constitution. In the last 20 years the political culture has changed to the point where referendums are expected on all major constitutional change - before that time it was perfectly acceptable for a constitution to be approved by legislators. The reality is that if Trudeau had not 'repatriated' the constitution in the 1980s we would still be living under the BNA Act for the foreseeable future because getting 50% of the people and 10 provinces in country to agree on massive package of reforms is impossible.

Does that mean change is impossible? Not at all. Change must be done incrementally and takes a lot of time. There are already movements to change the voting system in some provinces. BC just voted 58% in voter of a PR like system. Eventually, these changes will move to the federal level. My question is 'what is the rush'? Is your personal well being threatened by a few over paid senators?

[rbacon]

Admit it you would prefer to enslave the 3,000,000 people of Alberta rather than address the Democratic Deficit. The polls in the West reflect the desire of the people of the West for Democratic change, so far we have Quebec who wants Independence, a rising tide for Independence amongst the people of Man, Sask, BC and Alberta. Albertans some 43% of them are seriously looking at Independence and that is without a strong Provincial Leadership on this issue. When will you take note and agree to Constitutional Reform when 9 of 10 Provinces are calling for Independence. Or will you continue to to deny that 3,000,000 people in Alberta have Democratic Rights. Or how many million in Man, BC, Sask, and Quebec have Democratic Rights that Trump a document written by one man and forced on us all without a vote by the taxpayer. It is not relevant anymore to quote a document written by one man and forced on all the people without a vote as justification for the continued suppression of our legitimate right to change and reform. You will lose. The facts speak for themselves. Instead of stiffling our Freedom and Liberty our desire and will for Independence is growing year by year and it is spreading now through the West. Wake up and face reality. If TROC will not give us our Rights as Free Men and Women we will take those Rights ourselves. That is not Tyranny what you are saying by calling us terrorists is a lie and that is atyranny. The system you are propping up is a tyranny and a lie. Canada is not a Democracy, and we will have our Freedom and Liberty by UDI if necessary and that will be Justice. As TROC will not change and accept any Reform's whatsoever.

[crazymf]

Hey, maybe you guys can answer this?

The Alberta Separation party website advocates policy and so forth. What I don't see is after we separate, are there more parties allowed, or just them? That could be a problem.

Theoretically speaking of course.

[rbacon]

Any and all parties would be welcome in Alberta after Independence, why would they not be allowed.

[Riverwind]

Admit it you would prefer to enslave the 3,000,000 people of Alberta rather than address the Democratic Deficit.

3 million 'enslaved' people of Alberta: this is complete crap and you know it. I have never said that the status quo is perfectly acceptable and we should just live with it. What I have said is there are acceptable ways to change the status quo and unacceptable ways. Advocating seperation is an unacceptable solution because it undermines the integrity of the state and can and will likely lead to bloodshed.

If your poll figures actually signal a true strong desire for change then there is no reason why the four western premiers could get together and put together proposals for changing the federation. They could even go so far as to put the proposals to a vote in their provinces on these changes. Or better yet. Alberta could start by instituting some serious political reforms like PR at the provincial level.

I am pretty sure the 30% of the Alberta population that votes Liberal or NDP in the federal elections feels exactly the same way you do about the 'democratic deficit' within Alberta. So why don't you spend you energy advocating changing the system Alberta and show the rest of the country how the alternatives work? Your answer is likely "I have no problem with systems that have democratic deficits as long as the people in charge share my political views".

[Riverwind]

1) The US has a much lower voter turnout than Canada. Does that mean their electoral system is busted?

I'd like to see the numbers on that. If I remember correctly the US always has a higher turnout.

Here are the numbers for the US and Canada:

http://www.idea.int/vt/country_view.cfm?CountryCode=CA

http://www.idea.int/vt/country_view.cfm?CountryCode=US

The difference depends on whether you measure by voting age population or registered voter. The percentage of voters registered is much lower in the US.

If you look at results for 2000

USA %of Registered: 63.8%, % of Voting Age: 46.6%

CAN %of Registered: 61.2%, % of Voting Age: 54.6%

[crazymf]

Any and all parties would be welcome in Alberta after Independence, why would they not be allowed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, that was my question. The party website mentions everything else but that in the guidelines. They seem to have all the answers to the present problems, but in reality make no gestures for more parties after the fact.

That seems to be an eternal oppostion attitude with no contingency for actually being in power.

will likely lead to bloodshed.

Sparhawk, I'd move if I were you because there'll no doubt be an amphibious attack on Vancouver from the sea.

[Riverwind]

will likely lead to bloodshed.

Sparhawk, I'd move if I were you because there'll no doubt be an amphibious attack on Vancouver from the sea.

Bloodshed does not mean open warfare: a northern Ireland like scenario is quite likely if the social institutions of the country are disrupted. Denying that possibility is irresponsible.

[Riverwind]

With respect to California, the individual states have far more power than the individual provinces.   Exactly why the US has the system they have, so they wouldn't have an power hoarding government like we have here bullying the different regions around to serve their own purposes.

In practice, US states have considerably less power than Canadian provinces. For example, setting environmental standards in Canada is an area of provincial juristruction- in the US it is a federal jurisdiction. As for federally bullying of the states: it happens in the US too. Look at the No Child Left Behind act - it mandates national standards for education (a state jurisdiction) but does not provide adequate funding (gee - sounds familiar).

In short, many US states have as much reason to gripe about the feds as Canadian provinces but American politicians accept that, no matter the problem, seperation is not an acceptable solution. It is probably because the Americans fought a bloody civil war and learned the hard way. We would not likely end up in a civil war but the economic and social disruptions that would go with any break up would exact a heavy price on all Canadians and leave us all worse off.

[crazymf]

We would not likely end up in a civil war but the economic and social disruptions that would go with any break up would exact a heavy price on all Canadians and leave us all worse off.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't for one minute think that Alberta can separate peacefully without Ottawa expressing their power on us and declaring Martial Law as Trudeau did in Quebec in 1970<>. That moment when our own military marched on us would prove once and for all where the hearts and minds of Albertans and the rest of Canada were.

Bloodshed, a definite possibility. At that point, I would expect Uncle Sam to 'liberate' Alberta for us.

Go from there.....

[rbacon]

Spartalk you are out to lunch. You are not Listening just like TROC. When will you listen when 9 out of 10 Provinces are calling for Independence. The centralized Canada of Trudope is not working. The Independence movement is spreading because of it, soon there will be no Canada. You will be knashing your gums to yourself. Alberta is leaving TROC behind, we have tried for 40 years to peacefully accomodate TROC and it looks like we have said no more according to the poll. This is the people of the West telling TROC one last time to shape up. Bare in mind that Alberta is a Sovereign State already. We have a Prime Minister, we have a Parliament and we have a Head of State. We are already Soveriegn. You TROC have wore out your welcome. Stay home, stay away from Alberta. And for the retarded suggestion that 3,000,000 people will just suddenly up and move to Alberta, don't talk so stupid.

[Riverwind]

Spartalk you are out to lunch. You are not Listening just like TROC.

You are the one who is not listening. People will say anything to a pollster if they are pissed off and there is nothing to lose - so your poll numbers do not really mean much.

However, even if the poll reflects the true feelings of 43% of Albertans it does not make it right. Promoting seperation from a state like Canada - especially any plan that could include a UDI - is no different than terrorism because innocent people could get killed in the name of your political agenda. The so-called 'suffering' of the west at the hands of 'eastern' Canada is insignificant compared to the the life of even one person. But it is clear you want to live in denial and try to convince yourself that there is no way violence could happen as a result of seperation.

That said, I do not believe you need to shut up and accept the status quo. There are many legimate avenues to push for change. I would start but looking at reforming the way Alberta elects it politicians (BC is already way ahead of Alberta on this point). There is a democratic deficit within Alberta because 30% if the population has had no say in how the province has been run for the last 30 years. It seems logical to me that Alberta may want to fix the problem at home before demanding that the federation be fixed immediately.

Alberta is leaving TROC behind, we have tried for 40 years to peacefully accomodate TROC.

40 years in the life of a nation is nothing. Most real nations in the world - England, China, India, France, Russia have a history that hundreds, if not thousands of years. Negotiating change takes time. The world will not come to an end if it takes another 40 years to come to a resolution on these issues.

[Guest eureka]

Democratic Deficit! Oh Dear! Shall we ask Klein to oil the wheels of government to reduce the deficit.

All Provinces are Sovereign. That is they are sovereign in the extent of their own jurisdictions and Canada may be tiring of certain Albertan rebels who are trying to dictate to the nation what they want to change the nation to. They may be tiring of a handful of demagogues and a couple of hundred thousand of ignorant and unschooled louts who follow them slavoshly threatening the country if it does not conform to their wishes.

RBA, your ignorance of everything to do with society and government is sublime: your stupidity is not. I get the impression from your inability to write your amusing posts in readable format that you are still a schoolchild. Try learning a little before you join adult debates.

[Guest eureka]

Not again, IMR. I am quite sure that I have proved beyond your ability to dispute it that the Canadian Provinces are vastly more powerful than the States of the USA.

But go ahead if you like. Start that one up again and I will repeat the proofs. Canada is the most decentralized nation in the world without any possibility of dispute; as I have pointed out time amd time again. Only idiots like the "Separatists" and those like you who simply wish to stir the pot, would even suggest anything different.

[rbacon]

Once again for the slow learners on this site. In Canada today you have one man The Premier of Canada elected by only 30,000 votes did you get your mind around that, ok this one man then appoints HALF of our political system the Senate did you get your mind around that, this one man then appoints youir Head of State the GG. Did you get your head around that. This man then appoints all judges accross the whole country, did you get your mind around that, this man then appoints the Heads of State of all Provinces , did you get your head around that, this man then appoints the head of the national police force the RCMP did you get your head around that, this man then appoints his friends if he has any left to appoint to the heads of hundred of Crown Corps. Did you get your head around that, How in the hell do you nitwits lamebrains find any shred of Democracy is a system like I have just described, are you challenged mentally do you realise what you are defending. You are sick.

[Guest eureka]

Your ignoeance is, as I said earlier, sublime. But sublime only in the sense of its size: there is nothing majestic about it.

The Prime Minister of Canada does not get to do all those things as someone elected by 30,000 people. He gets to do them as the chosen leader of the party with the control of Parliamen: the Party that represents more Canadians than any other.

He also gets to do those things in consultation with Law Societies; with Provincial Premiers; and with his own advisors.

No one is appointed on whim. The Lieutenant Governors of the Provinces are chosen with the approval of the Premiers. Judges are appointed with the advice of Provincial Law Societies and others.

I doubt that you can "get your head around that." I think the blinders on your eyes would interfere with any attempt to focus your gaze elsewhere than on the tracts from your lunatic mentors.