He suffers from the typical Toronto disease of thinking they are the center of the universe. We are supposed to be grateful to be treated like a red headed stepchild by Toronto.
Alberta GTFO?
- Thread starter Serryah
- Start date
Of course the US would get a steep discount. How else are they going to pay the bribes?
err sorry, marketing costs.
Poor you. Poor, poor you. You're so hard-done-by.
The astute observer might ask, given how much you hate him and Toronto, why are you not happy that he ignores you. Would you prefer that he focus his attention on Westernesse, and fix all your problems for you?
Potential Alberta separation referendum question referred to judge for approval
Author of the article:Canadian Press
Canadian Press
Jack Farrell
Published Jul 29, 2025 • 2 minute read
EDMONTON — A potential referendum question on Alberta separating from Canada has been referred to a judge for confirmation that the question doesn’t violate the Constitution.
The proposed question seeks a yes or no answer to: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?”
Alberta’s chief electoral officer Gordon McClure, in a news release Monday, said provincial laws require potential referendum questions to respect more than 30 sections of the Constitution, including the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
McClure’s release doesn’t specify which, if any, specific sections he’s unsure about and a spokesperson for Elections Alberta didn’t provide details in response to questions Monday.
The potential referendum question was submitted to the electoral officer earlier this month by Mitch Sylvestre, an executive with the Alberta Prosperity Project, a non-profit group that has been touring the province promoting independence.
Sylvestre, who didn’t immediately respond to an interview request Monday, has said he thinks interest among Albertans in holding a separation referendum increases with every speaking event his group organizes.
“The more people that hear what the message is, the more people that will be in favour,” he said in an interview last month.
The Alberta Prosperity Project said on social media that McClure’s decision was a “delay tactic” and that the group would respond in court if need be.
The electoral officer’s release says the Court of King’s Bench will schedule a proceeding for the matter and that Sylvestre and the provincial justice minister have been notified of his decision to refer the question to a judge.
A spokesperson for Elections Alberta said that once the question is assessed in court, McClure will have 30 days to determine if the proposed question meets other legislated requirements.
If his question is approved, Sylvestre and the Alberta Prosperity Project would need to collect 177,000 signatures in four months to put the question of Alberta separation on a ballot.
In June, the chief electoral officer approved a competing question that seeks to have Alberta make it official policy that the province will never separate from Canada.
That petition, put forward by former Alberta Progressive Conservative deputy premier Thomas Lukaszuk, was approved before new provincial rules took effect that lowered the threshold for citizen-initiated referendums to get on ballots.
Lukaszuk’s proposal also differs in that it seeks a referendum on a proposed policy — rather than a potential constitutional referendum like Sylvestre’s proposal — and he’ll need to collect nearly 300,000 signatures in 90 days.
The former deputy premier confirmed Monday that signature collection efforts for his proposed policy referendum were expected to begin in the coming days.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Canadian Press
Canadian Press
Jack Farrell
Published Jul 29, 2025 • 2 minute read
EDMONTON — A potential referendum question on Alberta separating from Canada has been referred to a judge for confirmation that the question doesn’t violate the Constitution.
The proposed question seeks a yes or no answer to: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?”
Alberta’s chief electoral officer Gordon McClure, in a news release Monday, said provincial laws require potential referendum questions to respect more than 30 sections of the Constitution, including the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
McClure’s release doesn’t specify which, if any, specific sections he’s unsure about and a spokesperson for Elections Alberta didn’t provide details in response to questions Monday.
The potential referendum question was submitted to the electoral officer earlier this month by Mitch Sylvestre, an executive with the Alberta Prosperity Project, a non-profit group that has been touring the province promoting independence.
Sylvestre, who didn’t immediately respond to an interview request Monday, has said he thinks interest among Albertans in holding a separation referendum increases with every speaking event his group organizes.
“The more people that hear what the message is, the more people that will be in favour,” he said in an interview last month.
The Alberta Prosperity Project said on social media that McClure’s decision was a “delay tactic” and that the group would respond in court if need be.
The electoral officer’s release says the Court of King’s Bench will schedule a proceeding for the matter and that Sylvestre and the provincial justice minister have been notified of his decision to refer the question to a judge.
A spokesperson for Elections Alberta said that once the question is assessed in court, McClure will have 30 days to determine if the proposed question meets other legislated requirements.
If his question is approved, Sylvestre and the Alberta Prosperity Project would need to collect 177,000 signatures in four months to put the question of Alberta separation on a ballot.
In June, the chief electoral officer approved a competing question that seeks to have Alberta make it official policy that the province will never separate from Canada.
That petition, put forward by former Alberta Progressive Conservative deputy premier Thomas Lukaszuk, was approved before new provincial rules took effect that lowered the threshold for citizen-initiated referendums to get on ballots.
Lukaszuk’s proposal also differs in that it seeks a referendum on a proposed policy — rather than a potential constitutional referendum like Sylvestre’s proposal — and he’ll need to collect nearly 300,000 signatures in 90 days.
The former deputy premier confirmed Monday that signature collection efforts for his proposed policy referendum were expected to begin in the coming days.
Potential Alberta separation referendum question referred to judge for approval
The potential referendum question was submitted to the electoral officer earlier this month by Mitch Sylvestre.
Huh! I wonder if Quebec had to have the court's ok?Potential Alberta separation referendum question referred to judge for approval
Author of the article:Canadian Press
Canadian Press
Jack Farrell
Published Jul 29, 2025 • 2 minute read
EDMONTON — A potential referendum question on Alberta separating from Canada has been referred to a judge for confirmation that the question doesn’t violate the Constitution.
The proposed question seeks a yes or no answer to: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?”
Alberta’s chief electoral officer Gordon McClure, in a news release Monday, said provincial laws require potential referendum questions to respect more than 30 sections of the Constitution, including the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
McClure’s release doesn’t specify which, if any, specific sections he’s unsure about and a spokesperson for Elections Alberta didn’t provide details in response to questions Monday.
The potential referendum question was submitted to the electoral officer earlier this month by Mitch Sylvestre, an executive with the Alberta Prosperity Project, a non-profit group that has been touring the province promoting independence.
Sylvestre, who didn’t immediately respond to an interview request Monday, has said he thinks interest among Albertans in holding a separation referendum increases with every speaking event his group organizes.
“The more people that hear what the message is, the more people that will be in favour,” he said in an interview last month.
The Alberta Prosperity Project said on social media that McClure’s decision was a “delay tactic” and that the group would respond in court if need be.
The electoral officer’s release says the Court of King’s Bench will schedule a proceeding for the matter and that Sylvestre and the provincial justice minister have been notified of his decision to refer the question to a judge.
A spokesperson for Elections Alberta said that once the question is assessed in court, McClure will have 30 days to determine if the proposed question meets other legislated requirements.
If his question is approved, Sylvestre and the Alberta Prosperity Project would need to collect 177,000 signatures in four months to put the question of Alberta separation on a ballot.
In June, the chief electoral officer approved a competing question that seeks to have Alberta make it official policy that the province will never separate from Canada.
That petition, put forward by former Alberta Progressive Conservative deputy premier Thomas Lukaszuk, was approved before new provincial rules took effect that lowered the threshold for citizen-initiated referendums to get on ballots.
Lukaszuk’s proposal also differs in that it seeks a referendum on a proposed policy — rather than a potential constitutional referendum like Sylvestre’s proposal — and he’ll need to collect nearly 300,000 signatures in 90 days.
The former deputy premier confirmed Monday that signature collection efforts for his proposed policy referendum were expected to begin in the coming days.
Potential Alberta separation referendum question referred to judge for approval
The potential referendum question was submitted to the electoral officer earlier this month by Mitch Sylvestre.
Alberta's separation question, unlike Quebec's, is crystal clear
Author of the article:Lorrie Goldstein
Published Jul 30, 2025 • 3 minute read
Whatever one thinks of Alberta’s separation movement, the referendum question it seeks to pose to Albertans is a vast improvement over those confronting voters in the 1995 and 1980 Quebec referenda on separation.
Proposed by Mitch Sylvestre, chair of the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project, it seeks a “YES” or “NO” answer to the question: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?”
That would appear to satisfy the first requirement of the federal Clarity Act passed by Parliament in 2000, incorporating the legal advice of the Supreme Court of Canada, that the question on separation must be “clear” to those voting on it.
Particularly so when compared to the question posed to Quebecers in the 1995 Quebec referendum on separation. It read: “Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership, within the scope of the Bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on 12 June 1995?”
While Quebecers are astute followers of politics, understanding this question required knowing, as explained by The Canadian Encyclopedia online, that “the bill” referred to Quebec’s Bill 1, An Act Respecting the Future of Quebec, which included a declaration of sovereignty in its preamble, while “the agreement signed on 12 June 1995” referenced an accord between the Parti Quebecois and the Action democratic du Quebec (ADQ) party, ratified by then-Quebec premier Jacques Parizeau, then-BQ leader Lucien Bouchard and then-ADQ leader Mario Dumont.
The question posed to Quebecers in the first separation referendum in 1980 was even more complex. It read: “The Government of Quebec has made public its proposal to negotiate a new agreement with the rest of Canada, based on the equality of nations; this agreement would enable Quebec to acquire the exclusive power to make its laws, levy its taxes and establish relations abroad — in other words, sovereignty — and at the same time to maintain with Canada an economic association including a common currency; any change in political status resulting from these negotiations will only be implemented with popular approval through another referendum; on these terms, do you give the Government of Quebec the mandate to negotiate the proposed agreement between Quebec and Canada?”
The “NO” side, opposed to separation, won the 1995 referendum by the narrowest of margins — 50.58% to 49.42% for the “YES” side — a winning margin of a mere 54,288 votes out of 4,671,008 valid ballots cast, with a registered voter turnout of 93.52%.
The 1980 Quebec referendum on separation failed by a much wider margin, with 59.56% voting “NO” to 40.44% for the “YES” side — a winning margin of 702,139 votes out of 3,673,843 valid ballots cast, with a registered voter turnout of 85.6%.
In the wake of those votes and, in particular, given the razor-thin vote for the “NO” side in the 1995 Quebec referendum, the 2000 federal Clarity Act specified that in addition to a “clear question,” a “clear majority” of voters was required to decide the issue, without explaining what a clear majority meant.
The proposed referendum question in Alberta still has several legal and political hurdles to clear and faces a competing referendum question asking: “Do you agree that Alberta should remain in Canada?”
That said, it would be hard to fault Alberta’s proposed question on separation for a lack of clarity.
torontosun.com
Author of the article:Lorrie Goldstein
Published Jul 30, 2025 • 3 minute read
Whatever one thinks of Alberta’s separation movement, the referendum question it seeks to pose to Albertans is a vast improvement over those confronting voters in the 1995 and 1980 Quebec referenda on separation.
Proposed by Mitch Sylvestre, chair of the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project, it seeks a “YES” or “NO” answer to the question: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?”
That would appear to satisfy the first requirement of the federal Clarity Act passed by Parliament in 2000, incorporating the legal advice of the Supreme Court of Canada, that the question on separation must be “clear” to those voting on it.
Particularly so when compared to the question posed to Quebecers in the 1995 Quebec referendum on separation. It read: “Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership, within the scope of the Bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on 12 June 1995?”
While Quebecers are astute followers of politics, understanding this question required knowing, as explained by The Canadian Encyclopedia online, that “the bill” referred to Quebec’s Bill 1, An Act Respecting the Future of Quebec, which included a declaration of sovereignty in its preamble, while “the agreement signed on 12 June 1995” referenced an accord between the Parti Quebecois and the Action democratic du Quebec (ADQ) party, ratified by then-Quebec premier Jacques Parizeau, then-BQ leader Lucien Bouchard and then-ADQ leader Mario Dumont.
The question posed to Quebecers in the first separation referendum in 1980 was even more complex. It read: “The Government of Quebec has made public its proposal to negotiate a new agreement with the rest of Canada, based on the equality of nations; this agreement would enable Quebec to acquire the exclusive power to make its laws, levy its taxes and establish relations abroad — in other words, sovereignty — and at the same time to maintain with Canada an economic association including a common currency; any change in political status resulting from these negotiations will only be implemented with popular approval through another referendum; on these terms, do you give the Government of Quebec the mandate to negotiate the proposed agreement between Quebec and Canada?”
The “NO” side, opposed to separation, won the 1995 referendum by the narrowest of margins — 50.58% to 49.42% for the “YES” side — a winning margin of a mere 54,288 votes out of 4,671,008 valid ballots cast, with a registered voter turnout of 93.52%.
The 1980 Quebec referendum on separation failed by a much wider margin, with 59.56% voting “NO” to 40.44% for the “YES” side — a winning margin of 702,139 votes out of 3,673,843 valid ballots cast, with a registered voter turnout of 85.6%.
In the wake of those votes and, in particular, given the razor-thin vote for the “NO” side in the 1995 Quebec referendum, the 2000 federal Clarity Act specified that in addition to a “clear question,” a “clear majority” of voters was required to decide the issue, without explaining what a clear majority meant.
The proposed referendum question in Alberta still has several legal and political hurdles to clear and faces a competing referendum question asking: “Do you agree that Alberta should remain in Canada?”
That said, it would be hard to fault Alberta’s proposed question on separation for a lack of clarity.
GOLDSTEIN: Alberta's separation question, unlike Quebec's, is crystal clear
Whatever one thinks of Alberta’s separation movement, the referendum question it seeks to pose is a vast improvement from Quebec's past.
The point was to make sure the question is worded correctly for the legal beagles to approve if the separatists win, so no one can claim it was an improper question.
The only way it will work is if at least the northern half of BC decides to join them. If the lower mainland is not permitted to vote on the split, there is a strong likelihood it would succeed.
Last edited:
You are forgetting Vancouver harbour as opposed to Prince Rupert . The infrastructure is already here . Any separation needs the cooperation of B.C. , Saskatchewan, Alberta , and the Yukon to have any chance of success . Yes We have the watermellons in Victoria and downtown Vancouver . But they really are the minority .
Kitamat LNG was built because the land was available. Likewise in Pr.Rupert. This is where any new facilities are built because the closedminded in the Lower Mainland have made it impossible for any major new port development. Even most of the vehicles coming from Asia land in Nanaimo and are transshipped as required. There is also the matter of Eby supporting the tanker ban on the North Coast, which has pissed off most of Northern BC.
In short, BC can be split in two or three provinces.
The lower mainland is like its own island. We’ve got kids outside Vernon, & friends outside Williams Lake, and their opinions and political persuasions are not like the lower mainland.
It's South Coast now. It depends on the city within Metro or the Valley and ethnicity of the voter.