THE PIPELINE: All Madness on the Western Front

本站添加: 2026-06-02

[00:00:05][music] [music] [music] >> Good day and welcome. I'm Derek Fildebrandt, publisher of the Western Standard and you're watching the pipeline. Today is May 27th, 2026.

[00:00:32]I've got most of the usual crowd here.

[00:00:35]We've got Western Standard news editor Dave Naylor.

[00:00:39]>> Good day.

[00:00:40]>> Senior Alberta columnist Cory Morgan.

[00:00:41]>> Good day.

[00:00:42]>> And filling in haphazardly for Nigel Hannaford is one of our reporters here, Dave Eichenick.

[00:00:50]>> Hey everybody.

[00:00:51]>> Or Dent.

[00:00:52]>> Dent.

[00:00:53]>> Dent. You got the name You got that name in the morning newsroom meeting here.

[00:00:57]That could be a parting shot. You can That could be your parting shot. You can tell them about Dent.

[00:01:01]>> I guess we could.

[00:01:02]>> name.

[00:01:02]>> Sure, why not?

[00:01:03]>> Okay, there you go.

[00:01:04]All right.

[00:01:06]Today is all Alberta all the time. All madness on the Western front.

[00:01:12]It's all about independence and fallout around it.

[00:01:18]You know, Mark Carney saying 50% plus one is not a clear majority for independence creating waves even in Quebec. This is all coming from a question from one of our reporters in Ottawa.

[00:01:32]Smith leadership is is that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith's leadership now on the line as a lot of people in the independence camp are unhappy with the wording of this referendum to have a referendum business. And And But what we're going to start with No, no, we'll go to that later.

[00:01:50]But Wab Kinew I like our headline on this. Wab rocks the canoe.

[00:01:56]Hey. Hey.

[00:01:58]You can't see Cory Morgan face palming it. Come on, I'm getting that face palm again there, hey. Oh.

[00:02:03]>> It loses the authenticity once it's there.

[00:02:06]>> But slob rocks the canoe.

[00:02:08]>> That's terrible.

[00:02:09]>> That's a That's a good one. That's a good one.

[00:02:12]I think I'm all tanned. I've I've been working I've been working in the sun for a few days. I think I uh Yeah. Okay. Um So, we're going to start. Um Dave, our our Parliament Hill reporter, uh Wally Tam Tam, uh asked Mark Carney a question uh on Parliament Hill, I think uh just yesterday.

[00:02:35]Um Yeah, cuz there's a lot of question around uh the Clarity Act. You know, a clear majority to a clear question. You know, we've all heard that a million times before. It's no longer a clear question, and there's some debate around why that is now. Uh the Smith government says, "Well, it's these silly injunctions requiring that Indigenous consultation has to happen before you even ask the question, which seems absurd." And they're saying, "Well, we just don't want yet another injunction. We want a question on the ballot. People want this question answered."

[00:03:05]Uh no one more than Thomas Lukaszuk. Um Uh and so, we're going with this because this kind of preempts that kind of injunction. Others are saying that no, that only those injunctions only applied to citizens initiative uh referendum, not to government ones.

[00:03:21]It's kind of a legal argument at this point, and we can get into that maybe in a bit, but um Either way, it's not a clear question now.

[00:03:29]Traditionally, I always thought a clear majority was more than half, 50% plus one.

[00:03:36]It's extremely rare in Canada that a poll addition is a at least a provincial federal government has ever been elected with 50% plus one of the vote. It's happened, but it's extremely extremely rare. Uh so, our reporter on Parliament Hill uh puts the question to Mark Carney and Mark Carney's answers uh uh might surprise some people including Quebec.

[00:03:57]>> Yeah, what a delightful name, eh? Tim Tam.

[00:04:00]>> Sounds like >> Wally Tim Tam.

[00:04:02]>> Is it uh Tim Tam's a Australian uh >> Yeah, just kidding.

[00:04:04]>> Yeah.

[00:04:04]>> Oh, but just kidding.

[00:04:05]>> Just kidding. Yeah.

[00:04:06]>> So, Wally uh talked to the Prime Minister in a scrum and asked him uh you know what uh does what what precludes a majority?

[00:04:15]What does a majority mean? And Carney responded that it is not 50% plus one and then gave a a word salad answer to why he thinks out and you know number of people that didn't vote uh all that sort of stuff. So, but I'm like you, Derek. I always thought majority wins.

[00:04:34]Um but you know, is is 50% plus one enough to to separate a a province whether it be Quebec or or or Alberta? Um it would seem to me I don't know. I mean, I would I would think for a you would need a stronger a stronger vote to to be able to move forward with independence than just 50% plus one.

[00:05:00]>> Well, the I I I get the principle of that. The problem is it then becomes anything other than 50% plus one, it then becomes arbitrary. Is it 50% plus 1%? Plus 2%?

[00:05:15]Plus another 30 Do you need 33%? Like what At what point is it? Uh this is the problem. Is it it then becomes arbitrary. Is what then is a clear majority if it's not 50% plus one?

[00:05:25]Uh funny enough, he uh and the Liberal Party argued that that Quebec by-election it was separated by a single vote. They argued that that single vote was enough. Um and in that case it certainly was not because there was all sorts of problems with the balloting so that there was no actual margin.

[00:05:44]I would agree that if the literal difference was a single vote.

[00:05:49]And you know, there's always a little bit of discr- You have to have some margin of error for discrepancy in elections. You know, there's some people voted who shouldn't have voted. Some people were sent to the wrong balloting station.

[00:05:59]I agree, you have to have a little margin of error. So, not a single vote, but more or less the principle. It's got to be 50% plus one. Um Corey, it also raises the interesting question because this is not a simple yes-no referendum like should Alberta become independent?

[00:06:15]It is it's more of an A/B question. It's not yes-no, it's A/B. It's should Alberta remain a province of Canada or should Alberta uh begin the consultation process towards a binding referendum on independence. So, more or less.

[00:06:29]So, that raises the question then. If 50% plus one is not a clear majority, but it's not a yes-no question, what if the federalists don't get a clear majority? What if it's 50% plus one to stay in Canada?

[00:06:41]Uh what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[00:06:45]>> Well, pretty much. I mean, it it's it's a hard to define this whole thing.

[00:06:50]I mean, that the bottom line is though I got to admit the ones trying to change the status quo should perhaps have a bit if there's going to be a different bar uh airing on the side of that. If it literally was an election of 50% only one, then maybe you're going to air towards what was there. But, what I find interesting is how quickly they forgot because there was an exchange in the House of Commons only on May 8th with a parliamentary secretary secretary for whatever. Carney wasn't in and the block kept pushing and she responded twice outright saying 50% plus one is the bar.

[00:07:21]Then, it was that block member kept pushing that to get a distinctive answer and both times literally outright said 50% plus one. So, Carney is in conflict with his own parliamentary secretary secretary on this one.

[00:07:33]And that's the thing to remember is the block pushing all this, not uh probably because he's a federalist. But, if you guys are saying that you understand that you're telling Quebec that that's where the bar is going to be, too. And they're not going to take that very well or lightly. So, >> Yeah.

[00:07:48]>> there's much more to this than just these these things that Kenney's putting out.

[00:07:52]He'd better watch the line he's walking.

[00:07:54]They're not afraid of Alberta, but you can certainly inspire a province that's on the brink of electing a Parti Québécois government to uh uh you know, elect them with a stronger mandate.

[00:08:04]>> It just just adds to the confusion of the whole thing, right? We've got a confusing question. We we got to we don't really don't know what it means.

[00:08:11]And then now we don't know what a a victory would mean. Is it, you know, as Derek said, is it 56%? Is it 52%?

[00:08:19]It's just all adding to the confusion.

[00:08:21]>> And the question is garbage. I mean, it is.

[00:08:23]>> I don't care at all much.

[00:08:24]>> Well, we'll we'll get into the the muckiness. We'll we'll we'll we'll get a little further in the muckiness of the question in a moment, but I want to talk a little bit about the Bloc.

[00:08:30]Uh is one of the This is one of these times where I'm really jealous of the Quebecers. Uh and and we do this to ourselves. I mean, the Conservatives, you know, are the super dominant party in Alberta cuz they tend to represent They're they're at least the least hostile to Western aspirations.

[00:08:47]Actually, Conservative MPs are obviously pro- Alberta. Um but they're they're shackled by the national organization of the party from truly representing Alberta in many ways because they're trying to win votes in in Quebec, in Ontario, in the BC Lower Mainland, in the Atlantic. You know, that's why you're you will never see a Conservative MP stand up and say, "Why do we have twice the population of all four Atlantic provinces, but half but half the senators of just uh Nova Scotia?"

[00:09:15]You would never see that because then you're going to get in trouble and lose uh voters in Nova Scotia. So, that's the kind of one of the advantages the Bloc has. But there was a I don't know her name, but uh some Bloc lady uh MP was going on about this.

[00:09:30]Um the Clarity Act is controversial in Quebec and always has been and um for a few reasons. I think there's probably pretty broad agreement that we should have clear majority, although again, we don't necessarily agree what is clear majority, but more or less agreement on the principle of a clear majority and a clear question. Quebecers are uh they're they're actually not sure about that cuz they've had two unclear questions. The 1981 was really unclear.

[00:09:58]Again, we'll talk about that, the two-stage referendum thing.

[00:10:00]Um but then after it's like, yeah, you then you need the United States consent of all the other provinces and everything. Uh but the the Bloc MP was going on about how this is a matter for people in that province to decide. The government of that province decides the question and the people decide the answer and it's not for Ottawa to to that decide if it was legitimate or not. And the Bloc has been hammering on uh about that hard. So, this is this is making huge waves uh in Quebec right now. Um I don't know, maybe you want to uh uh we have two Daves. So, you're Dent.

[00:10:33]Dent, that's why you got the name cuz we already have two Daves. Uh but maybe you you you you can go on about the the role that the Bloc is playing in this. Oddly enough kind of being the only ones in the House of Commons standing up for at least the right of Albertans to decide this.

[00:10:49]>> Well, yeah, I think it is kind of odd, but I mean, this is what the uh Parti Québécois leader just came out and said that, you know, um Kearney's uh comments about the whole 50 plus one were out of line. And basically was just saying that um Danielle Smith was just doing her job as premier for putting that on the October ballot.

[00:11:05]I really don't know when we talk about a clear majority or like what the question even is in terms of like the history of the Quebec referendums and this one.

[00:11:12]Like, they go on about the Clarity Act and what have you, but I mean, it seems to me just odd in general how we couldn't just put a question on Quebec referendum or an Alberta referendum that basically just says, "Would you like Alberta to stay part of Canada? Yes, no."

[00:11:26]How difficult is that really basic?

[00:11:28]>> Well, no, well, that question I think still would accomplish even less because that's just saying I'd like to break up with you. That's not saying I'm going to break up with you or we are breaking up.

[00:11:38]That's just saying I don't I'm not happy with our relationship.

[00:11:42]>> Yeah, I see.

[00:11:42]>> So there's so there's no point there's no point in that. I think it's there's a point in having an AB question. I I like the idea of AB rather than yes no.

[00:11:50]>> Yes, but it needs to be kind >> But yes, but what you do is you phrase it as should Alberta remain a part of Canada province of Canada or should it become an independent country? Not should we then begin the process of it?

[00:11:59]>> Yeah.

[00:12:00]>> So uh So we'll get into this question. So you as I said um Smith government is arguing that hey look this will just get another injunction against it because we haven't done this pre-consultation stuff.

[00:12:14]Uh and we don't want yet another injunction. So that's why we're going this weird route. Um and then and then it's uh the other side saying no no that those court rulings were only applying to citizens initiative. They were not applying to a government sponsored referendum question.

[00:12:31]You know I I don't know. I I've seen pretty compelling but mutually contradictory information on both sides.

[00:12:37]I I don't know.

[00:12:39]Corey maybe you've got something to add to that.

[00:12:41]>> I mean well the the way I would put it is I think the judge's decision is wrong and I don't think consultation should apply to these questions whether it's petitioned or set by the premier. But I think when you see precedent in a court saying that principle needs to be applied to the petitioning, I don't see how another judge would come around and say it's become any different because the government has put the question forth. They're going to apply the same bloody thing and say now it's been set we need some sort of bar of consultation. And until they feel satisfied they've seen a process or something they'll throw another injunction on it. So I'm I'm inclined to believe the premier here I in that I think it's an undemocratic wrong decision but we're going to be stuck with these undemocratic wrong decisions until either it finishes a full appeal or some sort of >> Well, who's going to take the new question to court?

[00:13:28]>> Well, to court?

[00:13:29]>> Native First Nations.

[00:13:30]>> Yeah, possibly. Probably. Yeah.

[00:13:31]>> Okay, so >> They probably will. Certainly.

[00:13:32]>> So, and what and what happens if they they >> They're going to do everything they can do.

[00:13:35]>> Yeah.

[00:13:36]>> So, then another judge shuts down this question, and does that kill the referendum entirely?

[00:13:42]>> Well, I guess presumably what could happen, if you go through the appeals and all that, either gets thrown out or part of it. I think that's sort of part of the way Smith phrased that question as it is, is beginning the process then to do it within the finds of the law.

[00:13:56]You would start something you would call a consultation process. You'd say, "Look, we're looking to hold the question. Here's a bunch of public meetings with a bunch of chiefs. Here's some Tim Hortons and donuts. Let's get together, talk it all out, express what we want to do." And then we know it'll never be enough, but at least they'll >> said on your show it would never be enough.

[00:14:13]>> No.

[00:14:13]>> Because somebody will always complain.

[00:14:14]>> But at least you could go to a judge and say, "Well, look, we tried. We did what we could. We did put a process in. We did communicate with leaders in the and you know, legal scholars. You can always find some to stand on every side who would say, "This doesn't impact treaty rights." But there's there's no clear path. That's that's the the thing we're certainly seeing right now for sure.

[00:14:33]There's no easy way to get a yes or no question on that ballot now.

[00:14:38]>> Um if for the But if you were going to if this bizarre pre consultation before you even ask the question, if that was a thing that was going to be held upheld in courts, and it would be crazy. And for all of you conservative federalists who are happy that this happened, uh this is just applying the duty to consult, um which in principle isn't a bad thing. It's actually a good thing that you know, indigenous groups should be consulted if it you know, if it affects their treaty rights.

[00:15:08]>> As long as it's not consent. Yes.

[00:15:09]>> Yeah, it's not consent. It's not a veto, but duty to consult. In its earlier principles, this I think it's a good thing. It's it's it's it's their natural right. But, um that was has that's been taken for things like pipelines and whatnot. And now, if the duty consult is now applied before you even consider to do something, that means you can't even literally draft a pipe theoretically it would mean you couldn't present a proposal to a government to build a pipeline or to build a mine or drill an oil well without first consulting. Like you literally have to put the wagon before the horse here. So, be careful with what you're cheering for with this kind of court precedent. Um but I don't know where I stand on this issue. I'm still developing my thoughts around this two-tier I I think it is absurd to have a referendum to have a referendum.

[00:15:58]But I'm going to put something forward here which maybe strengthens the case for it. Remember, Quebec has had two sort of independence referendums. The second one which, you know, we really remember better in 1995 talked about sovereignty-association and it was muddled. The 1981 put forward by the René Lévesque PQ government was even more muddled.

[00:16:21]Let me read this for you. If everyone could just bear with me for a moment.

[00:16:25]The government of Quebec This is a weird Okay. 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 to make its laws, levy its taxes, and establish relations abroad. In other words, sovereignty. At the same time, to maintain with Canada an economic association including 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?

[00:17:10]So, Quebec had a referendum to have a referendum. It was saying it kind of fleshed out what they want as the end goal, which was independence, but still an economic union sort of, but quasi-independent sort of. They That's what they use the term sovereignty, not independence.

[00:17:27]Uh but it was a referendum to hold a referendum.

[00:17:30]And in all honesty, you know, there would have to be an enabling at the end. Like so, say we just had a straight referendum on independence. And then we go through a Clarity Act process.

[00:17:42]Uh who And there's different ways that that could happen. But ultimately, there would now then need to be some kind of instrument declaring independence. So, it could even even a straight independence referendum that was successful this October could theoretically result in another referendum anyway. This might just be in a weird way a way of it's just a softer way of maybe putting it. Cuz even Quebec had a two-stage It was that That's a referendum to hold a referendum, and they lost.

[00:18:12]>> Well, and and and it I'm sorry, doesn't it seem to me that that now, they've got all the things they were asking for?

[00:18:19]>> Yes.

[00:18:20]>> They're nominal, yeah.

[00:18:20]>> But uh well, well, not 100%. Like they don't have They have quasi-embassies abroad.

[00:18:26]>> got They've got their immigration control, uh which is a huge one.

[00:18:31]>> It's partial immigration.

[00:18:32]>> It's what Premier Smith is after.

[00:18:35]Uh that, you know, uh police con- police controls and stuff like that. So, it seems to me by holding this referendum, they created uh a political or >> Well, you're talking about that's the knife to the throat strategy.

[00:18:48]So, they they look, they got most of what they want there, but they don't have their own, you know, there's no Quebec army and navy, and they don't have formal embassies abroad, even though they have attachés to most countries that they're interested in those embassies, etc. They got most of what they want. Actually, they get better because they get to keep all the money from Alberta that's going there. So, it they got better than the what they were really asking for.

[00:19:09]Um but but but, anyway, my point is here that uh Okay, I'm not sure I I generally don't like a referendum to hold a referendum, but it actually practically speaking it may have been inevitable anyway. So, this is a way of maybe just starting the ball rolling.

[00:19:25]I'm I'm So, I'm not trying to make excuses for what they're doing here cuz I I think it is silly.

[00:19:30]But, it actually kind of might line up with what the reality of the situation is.

[00:19:33]>> Another reality, and Keith Wilson kind of laid it out, too. I mean, he said the quiet part out loud. I mean, there's been a lot of independence talk for a year now more than we've ever seen in our lives.

[00:19:41]>> Uh-huh.

[00:19:41]>> And the bar where the support for solid independence hasn't budged. It's been sitting around that 30-ish percent zone despite all the ground organization, despite all the debate, everything else, it hasn't moved. Uh the winning conditions I mean, Quebec's always talked about that. They're not having another one till they get the winning conditions. Well, I don't think we have them.

[00:20:03]And this question might be more winnable than a binary up and down like they were talking about. Maybe we weren't in a position anyways. This could be a blessing in disguise.

[00:20:11]Campaign on this, you can win a lot of people on the fence who want to use it for leverage, who want to send a message because they know it's non-binding, but they you can start that process and mechanism. And then, yeah, it might lead to another referendum. The next referendum you're going to be a heck of a lot better prepared.

[00:20:25]>> But, that one would be the final one.

[00:20:27]>> That would be the >> So, the the case I'm making is that constitutionally and in the reality of the politics is we probably would have two referendums anyway.

[00:20:36]>> Yeah.

[00:20:36]>> Yeah. It's kind of a dry run for the real thing then really in essence.

[00:20:39]>> Yeah.

[00:20:40]>> Yeah.

[00:20:41]So, yeah, I don't know. I don't mean it as excuse making because it is all floppy and flimsy and it's weird.

[00:20:47]>> It is weird.

[00:20:48]>> But, but here's the weird thing, one of the weird things is unlike the Quebec independence movement, Alberta's Quebec independence movement has always been clear, we don't want a weaselly question. We want a straight up or down.

[00:21:00]Independence or status quo. That's it.

[00:21:02]Whereas Quebec has always been, you know, they put a whole paragraph on a ballot for God sakes. That's That's a weird We never liked that. We and and Canadians generally were rightfully contemptuous of these weird Quebec questions designed to try and get a bigger better vote. Um but it's uh the federal courts that have said Alberta's not allowed to have a clear question. Uh essentially Alberta's not allowed to comply with the Clarity Act.

[00:21:30]>> That's what a whole bunch of this debate has really come down to though is that we're fighting to whether or not we're even allowed to ask the damn question.

[00:21:36]You know, that was never a question of Quebec. It was never a question whether or not they could have a referendum.

[00:21:40]They could question whether or not the referendum was valid with the question they asked and a lot of other things, but what's happening right now is they're pulling out all the stops to say we can't even have the referendum. And they're putting the roadblocks in that way. I mean, we're even hearing now about the indigenous guys are getting up to challenge this weird mushy middle question we've got going on.

[00:22:03]Is it going to be allowed even to ever have that question asked and lose it or win it?

[00:22:08]Or not. That's the debate that's happening in Alberta.

[00:22:10]>> Well, let's lay the blame where it belongs. It's in the courts.

[00:22:13]All right, you've got an act uh judicial activism and uh that are now stopping the will of the people and I don't think that was the intent >> I was just going to say, don't you think that's just going to make more people angry and maybe get on the pro-independent side then? Because the fact they won't even let you have a question.

[00:22:29]>> Possibly. It's part of the case to make.

[00:22:30]And I mean, it's really There's lots of people theorizing on what happened and how we got here. My political theory on what Premier Smith was hoping to accomplish was building some leverage. I don't think she's a secessionist. I don't think she ever was. But you get that question out there, you get that ball rolling, you let them petition for it. It wasn't her, it was the process. So, we're disrespecting that process and then she would hope that it would come in with 25 or 30% support in the fall and she's got a whole heck of a lot of leverage then to start twisting arms for pipelines, for things where she can say, "Look, if you don't want that to turn to 50 the next time they get a chance, we need this, this, this, and this." You know, I suspect that's where she wanted to go, but all that's kind of fallen apart.

[00:23:12]>> Yeah.

[00:23:13]Yeah. Um well, this raises an interesting point here.

[00:23:18]Um most countries that have declared independence did not do so through referenda. Uh they normally did throw so through some form of a vote in the legislature. Uh Singapore, 1965, no referendum.

[00:23:33]It was the parliament. Kosovo.

[00:23:36]Here's an interesting example, the United States, the Continental Congress.

[00:23:39]They didn't have a referendum in the 13 colonies. Their delegates from the from the colonial 13 colony legislatures in sent to the Continental Congress, they declared independence. Bangladesh, Rhodesia, and then most of the Soviet breakaway republics. So, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Moldova, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, and Russia itself. They didn't have Uh cuz technically Russia separated from the Soviet Union. They were like the last one to do it.

[00:24:11]>> They didn't have.

[00:24:12]>> Uh did actually No, maybe Belarus never did. They really liked the Soviet I think Belarus maybe stuck around.

[00:24:17]>> tied to the hip.

[00:24:17]>> Yeah, but they never had referenda. And so this is raising the interesting prospect then that if they will not allow Albertans to have a clear vote on a clear question on independence do we then default to what is actually the historical model?

[00:24:37]And the Alberta legislature simply votes itself into independence if that's its wish.

[00:24:43]Cuz that's the way it's pretty much always been done.

[00:24:45]>> I It has, but I mean, it's the precedent's been set in Canada to put it to the people.

[00:24:49]>> But if they don't allow >> If they don't allow it I would >> Then then that leaves the only That's the only route.

[00:24:54]>> Well, no, there's another route, which is a real dangerous one. And uh that's something I've talked about in the past too with if you close off the bottle and don't allow a democratic mechanism and I don't want or suggest anybody do it. But I think and I've said it before the part of the reason that the FLQ vanished finally after murdering people and setting bombs is because a democratic route opened up because René Lévesque said, "We can do this through a referendum. We can do this peacefully. We can get out of the federation." And the the the extremists settled down or at least stopped that aspect of it.

[00:25:27]>> kidnapping and killing.

[00:25:28]>> Exactly. And it never resurfaced again.

[00:25:31]But if you suddenly start telling provinces like go back and Alberta that you can't even entertain the question.

[00:25:38]They're you know, when you're talking about millions of people, unfortunately, all it takes is a handful of the real crazed extreme, somebody might do something really stupid. I I I think there's a another level of irresponsibility in trying to shut down the ability to peacefully do this.

[00:25:51]>> Mhm.

[00:25:52]>> Uh I know what you're saying with the European thing, but that was sort of a It was a little different too cuz those countries were all already defined. I mean they'd had some degree of independence and they kind of got sucked into the Soviet bloc.

[00:26:01]>> of them most of them had not. Some of them had been given like Ukraine had never been independent except for a few months at the end of the First World War after the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. Ukraine had never existed as an independent country.

[00:26:13]There were people there, but how you define Ukraine and if it was >> lines. I mean I I was still including Poland or or uh Kazakhstan. I mean a lot of the things that these were >> of people had not been probably defined nation states on their own ever.

[00:26:26]>> And I mean it's only been in the last hundred and some years where we have better defined what nation states are too. I mean those borders were were mushy. But I just think it's it's we're getting into dangerous turf if we take away the mechanism that we brought about.

[00:26:38]>> Yeah, but this is the safest democratic way to go cuz if you don't, then I guess there are two other options. One is a legislature declares itself, which is the most common in the kind of west and the free world and you know, somewhat democratic world. Uh and then the other one is revolutionary, which nobody wants to go down, but if you close off those legitimate democratic mechanisms, that leaves that as the only one, and no one wants to go there.

[00:27:04]>> And that's what Fabio's been after, right? He wants to vote in the legislature, even though he wiffle-waffles and changes his mind, but he would be happy with a vote in the legislature.

[00:27:13]>> Well, then I'm sure he could go the other way. The legislature could vote and declare independence. If it could, why >> If it was truly landing just in the the maps of the legislature, though, then the legislature needs a very strong mandate somehow from the people to have brought it in. Yeah, that lends towards kind of what Jeff Rath and Mitch Sylvester talk about, well, we've got to take over the government if we want this to happen.

[00:27:33]>> Great pivot. Okay, Boris, that's That's not even a pivot, that's a segway.

[00:27:37]Okay. Uh oh, and you know, I'm and I'm coming to you first on that, Corey. So, >> Cuz we chip in on >> Hey, you're the best-selling Canadian author of these stuff, right?

[00:27:47]>> on Amazon best-seller list.

[00:27:49]>> So, um I mean, we all know the history.

[00:27:54]Uh the Alberta premier's job, especially as a conservative, is the least secure job in Canada. No one No Alberta con- >> I Oh, sorry, in Canada, yes. I was going to say the Hezbollah guys, they would have a bit more in But you did say in Canada.

[00:28:09]>> Are you saying that the Alberta premier is the Hezbollah of Canada?

[00:28:12]>> No, that's not what I'm saying.

[00:28:15]>> That's what I heard. That's what I heard.

[00:28:18]Um So, uh like no Alberta conservative premier has finished single term since Ralph Klein in 2004.

[00:28:26]Our longest-serving premier has been Rachel Notley, because she just she at least was elected and served out a term.

[00:28:33]She's the longest-lasting one we've had.

[00:28:35]That is crazy. Um And, you know, uh the last time, uh you know, it was Jason Kenney, comes in, uses a lot of the same rhetoric, uh you know, very anti-Ottawa. We're going to hold a referendum on on independence, but on on the state of Uh he does that, zilch happens, just crickets from Ottawa. He blows up his own base, even says he wants a new one during during COVID.

[00:29:03]And he's out still trying to you know, redeem himself here. But, um Smith has been on track to be the first conservative since 2004 and Ralph Klein to finish a term.

[00:29:17]Uh I think the money is still pretty good that she will.

[00:29:22]But, this is the first time where there's at least some small cracks in it. You know, people have called for her at her last leadership review uh you know, for people to vote against her. They got annihilated. She got like 93%. She spiked the ball. That was a dominating dominating review. Um but now that we've got this convoluted question to ask the question, um some people in the independence movement are saying, "Okay, she's betrayed us and she's got to go."

[00:29:54]Um they want to use the same mechanism to force a leadership review an unscheduled leadership review as was used against Kenny. You get I think roughly 23 24 constituency associations to pass a motion uh uh requesting one, then you essentially get essentially a recall vote on the leader.

[00:30:11]Uh Corey, how we'll get into how it is advisable or not this is in a bit. But, what's your take on how serious a challenge that is right now to her leadership?

[00:30:22]>> Well, things are so volatile, nothing should be taken for granted right now. I mean, we we sit so much in unprecedented waters in this last couple of years. I I won't say anything is impossible.

[00:30:31]>> It's Alberta.

[00:30:31]>> By any means, yeah, as you said, the precedent's there. It just seems to be a curse for premiers for the last couple of decades. Uh at the same time, one of the things though she might have shown a little in a recent poll, but it might not be a difference between Smith and Kenny. Smith sitting pretty good in the polls.

[00:30:47]>> Yeah, Kenny was >> Kenny was lined up to have been annihilated in a general election. So, a lot of the party loyal at that point would be looking at, well, if I want to keep my job, we've got to get rid of this. And we're not seeing that so much with Smith. So, the organization to try and take her out, I think, is serious and and uh they they know how to do it and they've done it before. So, I mean, it could cause enough disruption even just to lead to the end of her term. It has to be taken seriously. But I don't know if the existing circumstances are there to make it as possible as they may think it is cuz there's not as many people fearing for their jobs as MLAs and so on within her [clears throat] caucus right now as there was in in Jason Kenny's circumstance.

[00:31:25]>> Yeah, and also with Jason Kenny, uh there was kind of two big things. The The media focused on one of the real things that took him out, which was his uh you know, from our perspective, overreaction and over authoritarianism as it as it involved COVID. That was a huge one, of course. But also, you know, a lot of people were kind of the same people with the overlap of the Venn diagram here, but they uh it was also he was perceived as weak on Ottawa. He came in with all this anti-Ottawa rhetoric, and then it ended up all being meaningless bluster. Uh so, that was a major motivating factor against him as well.

[00:31:59]I don't think Danielle is perceived as weak on Ottawa. Although, you know, she has been seen as cozy a bit with Carney over the MOU and whatnot. And there's a lot of very fair and realistic skepticism about, you know, are we selling the farm about that? I I kind of tend to think we are now.

[00:32:16]But um she hasn't generated a mass right-wing populist revolt against her the way Kenny did with COVID uh lockdowns and mandates. Like, there simply aren't hundreds of thousands of people who've been fired from their jobs because of something Danielle Smith did, people who have been arrested for going to church. That kind of ground swell simply doesn't exist. Um but you know, the independence movement is big. Uh it's it's I hate to say it's not It's sort of organized but I mean it's It's It's It's herds of It's perhaps they're surely right. Yeah, it's never been particularly organized.

[00:32:55]Um but I did There's no There's isn't that big ground swell of support of people who've been personally harmed by her. Uh I don't know if I'll put it to you this way Corey, is this really to get her out or is this maybe to scare her into changing the question?

[00:33:12]>> Uh I just to disclose, I spent my last weekend in Saskatchewan with Mitch Sylvester, the two of us on uh speaking uh engagements. You know, we had separate rooms so our discussion was still only limited. But no, I think he he's genuinely furious enough that he wants the premier replaced. Uh the other principal in the Alberta Prosperity Project has probably wanted Smith replaced for years if you look at his past type of rhetoric. He's just He has a particular beef with the premier. So, they are serious. They really want her out. Uh I think some who would be supportive of them would just much prefer that she just change that question and then they would back off. Like if they could see this fine, just give us that darn question and then we'll lay off. So, they they feel that that would be a route to go. But how do you put the pressure on without starting the gears, I guess they feel of uh in you know, bringing about an SGM.

[00:34:06]Something that's been been telling is that this question's been out for a week now. Groups are getting going. They're getting organized. They're campaigning. And the Alberta Prosperity Project, which is now the primary group again, hasn't updated their website in 4 months. Like they they Whatever they're doing, it's internal right now.

[00:34:24]And uh >> Yeah, I think the the problem is you've got a battle at the top between two two gentlemen who have huge egos, delusions of grandeur, and they're head-butting each other all the time, and they're more concerned about what's going on in the circle around them than they are getting their message out on on independence. Um So, they they They've got to figure it out. I mean, you you you talked about it on your show. They haven't even updated their their website. There's no There doesn't appear to be a clear leader in the group.

[00:35:01]Um They need to stuff out.

[00:35:03]>> Well, yeah, I mean, I understand if you're doing a bunch of internal battles or whatever going on, but at least I mean, you got the resources, I imagine.

[00:35:09]You got a large group. Just Just pay your webmaster and just say, "Throw a few press releases on this thing. Knock the dust off it. Let's put out a couple of statements."

[00:35:17]>> Um I mean, even if I I again, I don't know legally is Smith and company correct here that like this is just the best question that we can get away with without another injunction stopping it or those saying no, that doesn't apply if the government just puts the question on I don't know. Um but launching a two front war here where you're fighting a referendum on one side against the federalists are better organized, they're better funded, they've got bigger names attached to them, and and like them or not, they're viewed as credible, noteworthy people. Um And they're smart. They're They're They're attacking at multiple angles. You've got the left-wing campaign with uh with Nenshi, uh which isn't even really a federalist campaign. It's just a pro-independence anti-UCP campaign at this point. But then you also got another kind of center-left one with Thomas Lukaszuk. And then you've got Jason Kenney's group uh with some other kind of conservative federalists.

[00:36:15]And then there's just kind of this hodgepodge on the national Alberta nationalist side.

[00:36:20]Um And then And it's already an uphill climb.

[00:36:24]The best polls are 35 38% is the very very best polls we've ever seen. So, kind of 30 to 38%. So, you're already on a huge uphill climb to win this thing.

[00:36:36]The others the federalists are better funded, better organized, more recognizable people as spokesman.

[00:36:42]Um and then the side that it already is fighting an uphill war proposes uh a kind of Schlieffen Plan here. And uh Danielle Smith is France, saying you're quickly knock out Danielle Smith, then run a leadership race, ostensibly and try to win that. So, actually maybe it's three-front. So, you have to take out Danielle Smith, you've got to win a leadership race, and I don't know who the Nationals candidate is for premier at that point. You got to win that, uh then somehow unify the party all before October 19th.

[00:37:14]Um so, you have left you probably won't even have that done by October 19th. The referendum comes and goes before that actually happens.

[00:37:22]Um and then but even if it was done, even if they had a they'll put on a candidate a blitz leadership race, and you get that done, you've left no time and no resources for actually fighting the referendum. In the meantime, you got like three or four big, organized, well-funded federalist camps, which are the World War I who are you going to review here?

[00:37:40]>> You're going to use your analogy. Yeah, you're giving the Eastern Front four free months of organization knowing that you're going to be coming in. So, you know, what do you think's going to happen when you start that campaign? They've already built the wall. You're up in the creek.

[00:37:52]>> Yeah, and there's no guarantee you defeat France in a in a few weeks, right? Like it's >> Smith stronger than France was in World War I.

[00:37:59]>> Yeah, a lot stronger. So, it's it's it's fighting a two or more-front war with no time to do it.

[00:38:08]So, even if you are really angry at Smith here, and you think she's betrayed the Alberta nationalists from having the right to have their referendum, uh I don't see plausibly how that fixes things. I think what you'd do is like you you just you throw everything into the referendum. You might hate it, but you throw everything into it.

[00:38:28]Win, lose, or draw, cuz 50% plus one is a draw, I guess. Um then you reassess, you know, was Smith fair to us? And then you could decide where to go with that. Um but but this I don't know.

[00:38:43]This just seems to be terrible strategically.

[00:38:47]>> This seems to be emotionally driven rather than maybe a rational political move or something.

[00:38:50]>> Yeah, it's >> And that's the whole problem.

[00:38:54]>> Yeah, exactly.

[00:38:54]>> They're they're too emotional.

[00:38:57]You you got to be rational.

[00:38:58]>> there on CBC.

[00:38:59]>> Okay.

[00:38:59]>> Yeah.

[00:39:00]See, I'm on truce. I'm trying to bite my tongue on a lot of stuff here.

[00:39:03]>> I'm about one shot >> I haven't even said his name yet.

[00:39:06]>> Well, we don't have a lot of We're nearing the end here, but uh maybe we'll get into uh the federalist camps.

[00:39:13]There There's a few I I don't remember all of their names, but there's I forget What was the NDP one called?

[00:39:19]What Whatever. There's an There's an Nenshi one.

[00:39:21]>> Yeah, there's the the NDP one.

[00:39:23]>> Yeah.

[00:39:23]>> Yeah. Uh there's Forever Canada, Thomas >> Forever just released one today.

[00:39:26]>> Oh, there's another one.

[00:39:27]>> Our friend Stephen Carter.

[00:39:28]>> Okay. So, they're launching a bunch of these so they can all spend up to the maximum on advertising. Like this is what it's And they're all going to work kind of in conjunction in conjunction together, but separately cuz they're trying to appeal to different crowds. You got The NDP one is really just trying to build lists and raise money for the NDP.

[00:39:45]Nenshi does not seem to actually be trying to convince people to stay in Canada. He's trying to convince people that This is all bad. Danielle Smith's bad for allowing this to happen. You should vote for me.

[00:39:53]But it's going to allow them to spend money and build lists and organization here and whatnot. Thomas You got all of these different groups. Um cuz there's it's not like Quebec where you had the yes side and the no side.

[00:40:04]Here you've got on on the federalist side or no side, for lack of a better term.

[00:40:09]Uh Jason Kenney like Nenshi cannot appeal to a moderate conservative voter who's angry at Ottawa >> and maybe thinking about voting for independence cuz as soon as Nenshi says, "Don't do that." They're going to say, "F you, I'm voting against the purple man."

[00:40:24]So, he he can't be the right guy. Same with Jason Kenney saying, "Yes, you know, Ottawa may have been mean to us, but this is not the way to do it." A new Democrat, well, they're still going to vote to stay in Canada, but they're not going to be happy about Kenney as their spokesman. So, they've got multiple campaigns going after different groups. Whereas, the independent side, it's maybe vaguely one, but it's run haphazardly, and it can't decide if the federalists are the enemy or if Danielle Smith is.

[00:40:53]>> And but don't forget, Derek, that Danielle Smith has said she's going to spend the summer crisscrossing Alberta to encourage people to stay to stay in Canada.

[00:41:02]>> That infuriated the independents.

[00:41:03]>> Yeah, that would be a bad move on her part, I think.

[00:41:07]That would not be smart for her leadership.

[00:41:08]>> Why?

[00:41:09]>> Um, it's essentially day the it's a de facto agreement of day taunt. She'll allow a vote, but she'll just let the people decide. She says she'll vote to stay, but if she actively gets involved in campaigning, she is then seen as the enemy of the independent side.

[00:41:24]>> The other people will see her as the what has to be taken out versus winning a yes.

[00:41:29]>> Yeah.

[00:41:29]>> Yeah, but as we've discussed, there's no time for that.

[00:41:32]Not enough >> No, but that's what I mean is enough of them need to realize there's not enough time, and if Smith takes that those realizing >> If she gives them a reason, then.

[00:41:40]>> Yeah, then then it's not just to upset folks with a handful of chips on their shoulder they might actually make a case to their membership.

[00:41:47]We'll see. A lot's going to happen I think in these next two or three weeks for them to figure out what they're doing.

[00:41:51]>> Yeah. Okay, you know what? That was great. I kind of like this pipeline where we're not just rushing through 15-minute segments on a few different things, but we're we're getting more into it. We can't do that every week cuz we often don't have this much material on a essentially a single topic. Uh, but we did this week. So, that works better. I like this.

[00:42:06]>> So, we're not getting to wob the canoe?

[00:42:08]Your great headline?

[00:42:09]>> Oh, yeah.

[00:42:10]>> headline we don't get to?

[00:42:11]>> Wab rocks the canoe. Well, you know, uh many of you saw, you know, he was kind of grandstanding at the Western Premiers Conference, very very undiplomatically, but probably good politically for people he's trying to reach, uh you know, calling out Danielle Smith saying, "I don't know, you know, do do his thing."

[00:42:26]But, the most important thing is we wrote a great headline.

[00:42:30]That's the takeaway. Okay, Dave, you get the first parting shot.

[00:42:34]>> Uh it was a year or so ago, uh uh President uh Dimwit stood with the German Chancellor and said there's not a business case to be made for us.

[00:42:44]>> Dimwit.

[00:42:44]>> Prime Minister Dimwit. Uh not a business case to be made for selling LNG to uh Germany. Uh flash forward to today, they've announced a big LNG plant in uh uh BC that will export uh LNG to Germany.

[00:43:01]Uh the sad thing for us is now they're going to have to transport it down south under South America and back up. Whereas, if we only had a pipeline to the East Coast.

[00:43:12]>> Probably no Panama Canal.

[00:43:14]>> Uh some probably some of the ships are too heavy.

[00:43:16]>> for that.

[00:43:16]>> They're too wide and they have to go down south. But, if only we had a pipeline and Germany could pick up their uh LNG on the East Coast, sail it across the Atlantic, they'd have it a hell of a lot quicker.

[00:43:28]>> All right.

[00:43:28]>> Thanks, President Prime Minister Twit.

[00:43:31]>> Corey.

[00:43:32]>> I'll just be quick. Just to remind folks, Mark Carney had a hot mic moment and I love hot mic moments. And apparently he told Gregor Robertson after a conference what he had said to him and said along the lines of this is so stupid, she there was an off-ramp, why didn't they take it? He's saying, "Oh, it was just something I said to about Robertson." But, it didn't make any sense. No, he'd been cornered on the independence question. He was clearly referring to Danielle Smith saying she's basically being stupid and didn't take an off-ramp. You get to see the true politicians once in a while when the mic's hot and they're not paying attention.

[00:44:00]>> Hot mic, that sounds like a good name for a show.

[00:44:02]Really. Term that would go on the Urban Dictionary.

[00:44:05]>> [laughter] >> Okay. Yeah, someone about a starfish I'm sure.

[00:44:11]>> Yep, there we go. Let's let's note that one, John. Okay, dent.

[00:44:15]>> Oh, well, this is kind of a cool one.

[00:44:17]There's this guy called Dusty Freezen and he just apparently broke a world record driving off a local waterfall in his boat which is called Dent, his river boat. He set a record at some Lundbreck Falls, I believe, down at Crowsnest Pass. Apparently, it was 29 ft. We're just watching the video right now on YouTube or I mean on Twitter and it's got over a a million views. So, this is some pretty cool stuff right here. Yeah, 1.4 million.

[00:44:38]>> And how did you get your name uh this news meeting here today? We're talking the name of the boat. He's like, "Why's it called Dent?" I said, "I don't know cuz he flies off of waterfalls with it."

[00:44:47]>> This is actually pretty cool, yeah. It's it's pretty cool. Although, look at like I'm not saying this is nothing. Like this this this is quite a drop.

[00:44:54]>> 29 ft it says.

[00:44:56]>> I'm kind of surprised that would be the world record. Like I feel like there's guys dumber than that.

[00:45:01]>> Yeah.

[00:45:01]>> Well, unfortunately, this is the sort of thing that will encourage more to be done with >> Go to the next video and we'll find out why 30 ft is the limit.

[00:45:07]>> We've had people go off Niagara Falls.

[00:45:09]>> Did we Did we put Alberta man in the headline? Cuz if not, that's a miss.

[00:45:14]Is the story not out?

[00:45:15]>> No, not yet.

[00:45:15]>> Okay, well, well, okay, this is a great screw Florida man. Move over Florida man. Alberta man's coming through.

[00:45:23]>> Is he from Alberta?

[00:45:24]>> This seems like a guy from Florida who >> Yeah, it is actually, yeah. He works in the oil patch here from what I've seen, so no surprise there.

[00:45:31]>> Well, those river boats are definitely guys in the oil patch like >> Okay.

[00:45:36]Mine is kind of an advertisement.

[00:45:40]The Western Standard is finally launched its store, 6 and 1/2 years in the making.

[00:45:44]We launched it I think late last week.

[00:45:46]It's blown up since. A lot of a lot of anticipation cuz we've been waiting to do this for years and just never really got around to it. There's all sorts of great stuff, but going with the news, this is how quickly we're acting on the news cycle. Now, not only are we doing video and written news content and analysis when the news breaks on something like Steven Guilbeault saying he's resigning from Parliament, we've got shirts.

[00:46:10]Throw the shirts here. Let's put it up here. Bam.

[00:46:13]Um hats, all sorts of things. Uh I really love this one. Everyone knows how much Steven Guilbeault loved Alberta oil and gas, and Saskatchewan oil and gas, how great he was uh for uh for the human race here. So, uh we quickly turned around. We've got the Steven Guilbeault jumpsuit collection up. Uh so, uh kudos to him. Oh, you you you can see William right right there.

[00:46:36]Oh, is that Is that William? No. No, that's Josh talking. William, there's William's office right back there. Uh he turned around right quick, uh created the Steven Guilbeault jumpsuit collection. Great swag. Go on there. Uh the profit margin's very small. It's mostly the cost of production and shipping, and this the small little profit margin we make goes into supporting operations in the newsroom here. So, check it out. Get your Ste- Steven Guilbeault uh jumpsuit collection items today.

[00:47:05]That's it for me.

[00:47:07]Dave, Corey, Dent, and uh John on production, and all of you, thank you for joining us today. If you're not yet a member uh subscriber for the Western Standard, go to westernstandard.news, click on subscribe. It's $100 a year, or just $10 a month for unlimited access to all Western Standard content, supporting the work we do, and keeping yourself informed. Thank you very much, and God bless.

[00:47:34]>> [music] [music] [music]