Premier Smith has ‘been driving the bus the whole time’ on separation: Alberta NDP Leader

Añadido: 2026-05-22

[00:00:00]did request an interview with Premier Smith ahead of her address. She was however unavailable. Nahed Ni is Alberta's NDP leader. Hi Mr. Nanchi, welcome back to the show. Thanks for making the time.

[00:00:12]>> Thanks Vashi. Always a pleasure.

[00:00:13]>> Is it your expectation, Mr. Nanchi, that the premier will add a tenth question on separation in one way or the other to the October referendum tonight that she'll make that announcement tonight?

[00:00:25]>> Yes, absolutely. See, the interesting thing here is that for a year, almost two years now, the premier's been playing this very strange game, as though she's an innocent bystander to all of this. And the separatists are forcing her hand. Uh, in reality, she's been driving the bus the whole time. The separatists are the ones who got her elected. We always knew that there would be a quid proquo. We always knew that she owed them something. And what they she owes them is a referendum question.

[00:00:51]So when the courts threw out their question for the second time last week, she just doesn't want to take responsibility for this being the government's question. So she's now trying to pin it on the pro-Canada forces, the forever Canadian forces. But Albertans see right through that. They know this is the premier paying back the separatists, throwing us into an unneeded, divisive, and costly referendum, and she's going to have to pay the political price. I >> I've listened to your critique frequently over the past number of years about exactly that. essentially saying that that the premier is motivated by this cause and and she certainly, you know, owes something politically to it.

[00:01:29]I I guess my primary challenge to that would be and I I've certainly asked her many tough questions about that as well, but you know why would she have embarked on the process to arrive at theou with the federal government conceded stuff for example on the industrial carbon price for the end result or even arrived at thatou if in fact she did want to break up the country like that doesn't really make sense.

[00:01:51]>> Um I'm not suggesting that she necessarily wants to break up the country. I am suggesting that in order for her to be the premier, in order for her to have won the leadership of the UCP, she had to make a deal with the separatists.

[00:02:04]They're the ones who got her elected.

[00:02:06]And she's following exactly the script of a guy you may remember as she called David Cameron. He provoked a referendum in Britain, the Brexit referendum, fully saying, "This will never pass, but it'll give me leverage to make a better deal with the EU." And he made the same deal with his right-wing, and we know how that turned out. And now Nigel Farage, the guy he tried to tried to subdue and all of that is likely to be the next prime minister of the UK. So this is the road that she has embarked upon. And Albertans deserve to know that this referendum is going to cost anywhere between 50 and hundred million dollars.

[00:02:42]It's going to be terribly divisive. Uh it's going to freeze investment. And speaking of theou, who's going to invest billions of dollars in building a pipeline if they don't know what country that pipeline is in or if it has to cross a national border? So, I'm not suggesting her strategy is a good one.

[00:02:59]It certainly is not a good one. It's a dangerous one, but it's been very clear for some time that that's been her strategy. I >> I certainly do understand the the point you're making about investor uncertainty and what it might do to to to that climate. And that was the genesis of my line of questioning to her o over the weekend. her response and she said this frequently is is mostly centered on the idea that this is yes a minority of Albertans in the neighborhood depending on the poll of 20 to 30%. But but I if you just tell them they can't express themselves if you do not give them an opportunity to be heard it does nothing to erase the sentiment in in the movement. Does she have a point there?

[00:03:41]>> No. Because the number of people who support separatism hasn't gone up. It hasn't gone up at all despite the microphone she's given them, despite the money and the empowerment that she has given them, despite their sense of entitlement. In fact, it was higher in the Wexit years than it was now. And every other premier of Alberta has seemed to be able to manage this without giving these folks a microphone. And I'd say quite simply, if they want to express themselves, then form a true separatist party, run an election, and see how you do. You know, in Quebec, the only governments that would put forth a referendum were governments who ran in an election saying they were going to have a referendum. Premier Smith did exactly the opposite. She duped a bunch of Albertans into in saying that the free Alberta strategy is not her. She's not going to do any of these things. And then she did all of these things. So if folks want an expression, the ballot box is an expression, not coddling by this premier. But do you think that that message that the genesis of what you just said actually addresses why they want to separate? And I'm not trying to necessarily, you know, give the ones who are on the far end of the spectrum more credence than than they're entitled to, but I get emails all the time from people who live, for example, and work in Edmonton, our firefighters, work in the finan literally thinking of the emails I've received in the last week, uh, you know, work in the financial services sector, somebody who lived in Red Deer who sent in something and it was like, I'm not crazy, but I really believe in this. Like I if you deliver the message you just did to them, what do you think that does?

[00:05:15]>> Well, let's put it this way. When you look at what the separatists are saying now, they're not happy about theou giving Danielle Smith the ability to appoint federal judges will not satisfy them. The fact is that the premier and her inner circle have started a fire.

[00:05:30]And as I often say, the arsonist waves the right to call the fire department.

[00:05:34]So, they've started a fire under people and they have no idea how to control it.

[00:05:40]Do I have a better idea of how to control it? I'm not sure. But I do think that going down this divisive path, getting people angrier and angrier and focusing on a politics of anger and division will never serve you in the long term. And it may take a long time for that to burn out. But building a politics that's based on don't trust anyone, don't trust judges, don't trust institutions, certainly don't trust Ottawa is not a way to build an enduring future in Alberta. And you know, no poll has shown that the support for separatism is above 25 27% at the most. So the vast majority of Albertans are tired of this garbage and they want a government that focuses on the economy and the cost of living and healthcare and education and we just don't have that right now. I take that point, but 25% isn't a small number.

[00:06:27]Don't you, with great respect, Mr. Neni, need a better argument about how to address it.

[00:06:33]>> Let's see how we do because I think the real argument is there's lots of head arguments here. We know, for example, I happen to be uh sitting here in your studio in Montreal today and we know that although separatism has never succeeded in Quebec, we've had 60 years of economic males here. 350 plus head offices left Quebec. Many of them ended up in Calgary. Most ended up in Toronto.

[00:06:57]And I can make those head arguments and those economic arguments all day. But ultimately, we also have to make heart arguments. You know, this is a big complicated country. We don't always get everything right. But Albertans are proud Canadians. I'm a proud Canadian and a proud Albertan. And Albertans believe in fighting to make things better, not in taking our toys and running away. Now, the premier has empowered a group of people to speak much more loudly than they ever have before, but ultimately we've got to be able to figure this out together. And as I always remind folks, I saw a survey recently that said 30% of Texans are in favor of seceding from the United States. But you don't see the governor of Texas empowering those people at the expense of everyone else.

[00:07:40]>> Is it though at the expense of everyone else right now? I mean, again, I I take the analogy with Texas, but if it's a consistent quarter of Albertans who feel like their interests are not reflected by the country as a whole, once again, like when you say, I don't necessarily have a better argument. Don't you need one if you want to be premier?

[00:08:01]>> I would say let's help the country work.

[00:08:03]So, let's talk let's go back to theou.

[00:08:06]Theou that the premier signed is precisely the deal that Rachel Notley had with the feds. So, seven wasted years of fighting with the feds to get us back exactly to where we were seven years ago. Zero miles of pipeline built in that time. We could have finished two or three pipelines in that time, but that wasn't convenient for the government. And right now, we have a system where the health care system is collapsing. The education system is collapsing. This government is not interested in the nuts and bolts of just running the government. Um, and that's what people talk to me about every day.

[00:08:41]Every survey shows that for the average Albertan, separatism is number eight, number nine, number 10 on their list of concerns. They're worried about the cost of living, the economy, about public services like healthcare and education.

[00:08:53]And this government, frankly, is ignoring those things and hoping that they can distract from their record by focusing people on separatism, on these other anti-immigrant referenda, blaming immigrants for everything. And Albertans are sick of it, I think. and they've told me over and over again that they deserve better and my job is to show them that they do have a better alternative.

[00:09:14]>> Just one quick final question, Mr. Ninci, it's not exactly the same deal. I remember covering the deal that so-called grand bargain between Rachel Notley and Justin Trudeau. It conceded a lot more on the price on carbon and it also conceded a cap on emission. Well, it also conceded a cap on emissions and that's one of the big fights over the last seven years. It's it's not a perfect analogy.

[00:09:36]Well, it's not perfect, but maybe we've saved $20 a ton on the carbon tax, but there's still a carbon tax. Maybe there's not a hard cap on emissions, which I always was opposed to anyway.

[00:09:46]But we certainly, the prime minister said yesterday that the pathways project, the carbon sequestration is absolutely required. So, there may not be a hard cap, but he clearly is saying that the emissions need to go down significantly. So, I would argue to you that the difference in those is window dressing. In reality, if the UCP government when they took power had just worked with the system they were under, we would have had an extra pipeline or two built by now. Okay, I've got to leave it on that note. Thanks for your time as always, Mr. Ni. Appreciate it.

[00:10:16]Thank