Politalk.ca

The french will shut down France if you hint that the retirement age may change.

A few people milling about on a weekend doesn't send much of a message because they know people can't afford to miss work to send a real message.

Shut the place down, and they will notice.

Two years out. Let’s check in on the Republic of Alberta.

The loonie is gone. They’re running on a managed float tied loosely to the USD because their own currency tanked the moment bond markets realized a landlocked petro state with no navy, no central bank infrastructure, and one export corridor controlled by a foreign country isn’t exactly a AAA credit risk.

Speaking of credit ratings. Alberta left Confederation carrying its share of federal debt, somewhere in the neighbourhood of $100 billion CAD depending on the separation terms, plus its own provincial debt on top of that. New country, no credit history, commodity dependent revenue, and an active constitutional dispute with Indigenous nations over land title. Moody’s and S&P were not kind. Junk adjacent ratings mean Alberta is borrowing at rates that would make a payday loan blush. Every point of interest above what they’d have paid as a Canadian province is money not going to schools, hospitals, or the infrastructure they need to not be completely at the mercy of two foreign governments for market access.

That pipeline to the coast they were promised? Still a negotiation. BC didn’t suddenly become generous just because Alberta left Confederation. If anything, BC is enjoying the leverage. Every barrel heading west now comes with a transit fee and a smile.

The Americans? They love it. A weakened, isolated Alberta is a dependent Alberta. Trump-era energy policy already treated Canadian oil as a bargaining chip. Now there’s no Ottawa to push back. It’s just Calgary and Washington, and Calgary is not winning that negotiation.

Indigenous nations holding unceded territory under Treaties 6, 7, and 8 did not recognize the separation. Why would they? Their treaty relationship is with the Crown, not the province. That legal fight is ongoing, expensive, and has already frozen development on a significant chunk of the province.

Equalization is gone, sure. So is the fiscal stabilization program. So is federal infrastructure money. So is CPP portability for the 40% of Albertans who weren’t born there and are quietly updating their resumes.

Danielle Smith is still talking. Nobody’s really listening anymore.

Two years out, the people who sold this dream are either in government collecting a paycheque or on X telling you it just needs more time.

It always just needs more time.

Why Preston Manning says sticking to 'status quo' in face of Alberta separation is 'extremely unwise'
Why He Thinks the Status Quo Is Dangerous
1. Alberta’s grievances are long‑standing and unresolved
Manning notes that Western alienation has existed for decades — from the 1980s anger that helped create the Reform Party to today’s separatist sentiment. He warns that ignoring these grievances or assuming they will fade is unrealistic.

2. Simply defeating the referendum won’t make the anger disappear
He argues that even if Albertans vote to remain in Canada (which he personally supports), the underlying issues will still be there. A “remain” vote cannot be treated as an endorsement of the current federal system.

3. Federalists must offer a positive vision for change
Manning says the “remain” side must propose reforms that give Alberta more autonomy within Canada — what he calls “pushing the sovereignty option within the federation.”
This means exploring new arrangements that address Alberta’s sense of unfair treatment.

4. The Quebec 1995 referendum taught him that complacency is fatal
He recalls arguing with then–Prime Minister Jean Chrétien in 1995, warning that federalists needed to show Quebecers how Canada would change if they stayed. He sees Alberta’s situation as similar: ignoring the need for reform is a mistake.

What Manning is and is not saying
He is saying:
He will vote to remain in Canada.

Remaining must come with meaningful reforms.

Alberta should pursue greater sovereignty inside the federation, not separation.

Federalists must answer the question: “Remain and do what?”

He is not saying:
That separation is desirable.

That the status quo is acceptable.

That Alberta’s anger is illegitimate.