Wexit: The Reluctant Rebellion

Priming the Pumps of Discontent

This book is not meant to be the ultimate handbook to the issues facing Western Canada, nor a definitive guide to all the options available to the inhabitants of the West. This book is a cursory presentation, a primer of the history that has brought us to this point of dissatisfaction and the grievances and options being floated at the minute. It is meant to help those in the West get a handle on many of the issues, both historic and contemporary, and perhaps give Easterners a better understanding of the plight faced by their western brothers and sisters.

This book also focuses primarily on Alberta, this is not to negate or minimize the effects on other western provinces, primarily the prairies, it is only that Alberta has suffered, in my opinion, the harshest injustices and misunderstanding. Alberta has, 43 out of the last 50 years, more consistently than any other province, contributed to Canadian coffers while being accused of greed and whininess’; helped our neighbours in other provinces yet the contribution has been expected, ignored or accused of being stingy; opened our arms to anyone willing to work and yet we are accused of being xenophobic; and have innovated best practices for ethical, clean energy extraction while being vilified for killing the planet and denying climate change.

I hope this book sparks the conversation and encourages Canadians from coast to coast to coast to take a closer look at the way region is pitted against region in the running of our beautiful country. Further, that our fellow citizens will consider the changes that need to be made so that we can create a fair and equitable society, now and in the future. For more information, please visit www.thereluctantrebellion.com

Prelude to A Kiss-Off?

The North Saskatchewan River runs through Edmonton and on nice days it is deceptively calm. The placid looking waters hide the fast-moving undercurrent that flows dangerously just beneath the surface.

This is a perfect metaphor for the atmosphere I witnessed in Edmonton before the 2019 federal election – it was almost too quiet in the city as if the citizens were holding their collective breath, waiting to see what the East would do.

This is not the first time the West has faced this predicament. Far too many times in their history the people have waited for the outcome of a federal election in hopes that it would bring relief from the burdens they quietly suffered. In Alberta, stories have often been told by neighbours who, when pulling up to their polling station after work, ready to do their civic duty, heard on the radio as they opened their car door, that the election was already over, and their vote didn’t matter.

Imagine, sitting in your car, the door open, one foot on the ground and the cool wind sweeping over you as you contemplate whether you should bother turning off the engine. You know it does not really matter if you walk into that building, and stand in line to mark your X. Whoever wins in your district will have little power if any and your concerns, the concerns of your neighbours will ultimately fall on deaf ears as others dictate from afar. Is this democracy? Is this a fair and equal society when entire regions are ignored by their own Government? Worse yet, when taxes are extracted by a far-off government regardless of your local economic downturn and if you dare complain, that same government and the national press paint you and your neighbours as the villain in the story.

Do not get me wrong, Westerner’s love Canada and being Canadian still means something tangible here. We love travelling around the country, embracing the symbols that mean Canada, drinking our double doubles, eating Timbits and listening to the old radio show, The Vinyl Café, relating to those stories as much as any Canadian. In fact, you will not hear the National Anthem sung with any more vigour than at an Oiler’s game in Edmonton during the playoffs, where fans nearly blast the roof off with enthusiastic voices. The work ethic is alive and well and most who have suffered job losses over the last few years still search the want ads and consider frequently whether they should give up on prairie life and go to greener pastures or wait this one out as well. Westerners are proud Canadians, they love this land and feel a deep connection to it with all their hearts, but sometimes they cannot help but feel that love is unrequited, as if they just aren’t really a part of it.

The West has a boom-and-bust economy. It changes with weather patterns, international markets, technological advances, yet most importantly it is influenced by political policies that they have no control over and no say in. They are captives of an unfair system where the balance of power is often levied against them for arbitrary reasons based on fashion and jealousy rather than logic and reason, let alone fair play. In recent years Westerners have been vilified, falsely accused of being climate deniers while pioneering environmental protection, including instituting the first carbon tax in 2006. They have been accused of whining about their economic plight while still enjoying the largest GDP in Canada. Yet jobs are lost by the tens of thousands. Meanwhile Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, breaks ethic rules for a few thousand jobs at one company in Quebec, insisting he will do anything to save jobs, but what jobs? The companies leaving Western Canada, the investments drying up, are those not lost jobs in his books? Why are they not worth acknowledging let alone saving?

Westerners are painted as knuckle dragging Neanderthals and yet it’s the west that has historically been the progressives in Canada. It was the west’s Famous Five (active from the 1880s with the ultimate victory of the ‘Peoples Case’ in 1929) that forced the women’s vote in Canada. It was also home to John Ware (1845 - 1905) the first Black cattleman and rancher in Canada. It is also the birthplace of Canadian Universal Healthcare through the work of Tommy Douglas (1904 – 1986). So how can such a socially enlightened people be characterized as backward rednecks when they clearly are not?

~~~

On that fateful October evening, the fears of the West were realized, and the tenuous situation the peoples of the western provinces found themselves in no longer seemed tenable.

But this story didn’t start because of oil prices or bad economic policies forced through by the Trudeau Liberals, as many in the East want to believe - it started 114 years earlier under another Liberal Prime Minister, fearful of Quebec and Ontario having to share power with a province called Buffalo.

PART ONE:

PUCKERING UP

“Hear my soul speak:

The very instant that I saw you did

My heart fly to your service…” (The Tempest, Act III, scene i)

Chapter One: Love’s First Blush

“There's no love like the first.”

~ Nicholas Sparks

Canada came together in parts. Piece by piece, the country was knitted together to form one whole; however, power was maintained by an eastern core, not interested in reflecting the vast diversity that makes up Canada.

In the beginning, North America was peopled by those now known as the Indian or Aboriginal people. In Canada these “First Nations People” were made up of several different groups that lived across the continent. Their tribal groups had names like Blackfoot, Cree, Assiniboine, Mohawk and many others. When Europeans came to North America these peoples had their own distinct social, economic, legal and political structures. They traded among themselves and were often involved in conflict between various tribal groups. Many traded with and guided the first Europeans and taught them about this abundant land.

The Area that is now Quebec was claimed by French explorers and was part of the age of exploration where Europeans sailed out into the oceans looking for treasures that they could extract, bring back to Europe and make their fortunes. Canada was rich with valuable resources, including land which was of interest to the British as much as the commodities the country supplied.

Settlement began in earnest in the early 1600s. Both English and French Europeans came to make their homes in this lush land. Communities sprung up as land was claimed by various people and with enthusiasm, they made their homes here.

Jacques Cartier (1491 - 1557) mistakenly understood this land to be called Kanata, which means village in Ojibway, and so we now call our home Canada. This village of Canada had been visited by different explorers throughout time, including Vikings, but had never been permanently settled by Europeans until the 1400s.

The French explorers came to Canada as traders. It took them quite a while to decide to settle here partially because of the harsh conditions. They set up trade routes into the west and established business relationships with the Indian people.

In 1763, King George III (1738 – 1820) in The Royal Proclamation laid out the land mass distributions and rules for the treatment and protection of the Indians as well as other newly acquired lands and populations, after Britain won the 7 years war (1756 – ‘63). It also established a unique agreement, that Quebec, having been acquired by Britain after the French were defeated at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham (1759) would continue living under their pre-established civil laws, so long as they did not violate British law. Criminal law would be under British common law. Therefore, to this day, Quebec has a different system of civil laws than the rest of Canada. Quebec uses codified law based on the Napoleonic Code, whereas the rest of Canada use common law based on the British system. Our Criminal Code is under Federal jurisdiction because of this unique arrangement. This arrangement also enshrines protections for the Francophone culture and language.

The Anglophones are by far the largest population in Canada. They came here with the distinct purpose of settlement and settle they did. They moved quickly across the large continent and set up homesteads, towns, and cities bringing families and farming knowledge to the fertile lands. They left poverty, religious persecution, and civil unrest in the hopes of making a better life for themselves.

Chapter Two: The Dance Begins

“Hand in hand, on the edge of the sand, they danced by the light of the moon.”

~Edward Lear

In 1867 The Parliament of Britain under Queen Victoria (1819 - 1901) signed the British North America Act (BNA) which is the foundational document of the Canadian Constitution. This constitution included four provinces, Upper Canada which became Ontario, Lower Canada became Quebec and two maritime provinces, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick. Thus, the Dominion of Canada was born.

All of this came about thanks to the tireless efforts of the first Prime Minister of Canada, Sir John A. MacDonald (1815 – ‘91). MacDonald’s vision to bind the country together by way of a railroad from sea to sea drove him to secure the lands under the banner of dominion. In 1869 the territory known as Rupert’s Land was bought from the Hudson’s Bay Company for $1.5 million (approximately $29 million in today’s dollars). The HBC was pressured by Queen Victoria to sell the land to the fledgling country despite interest from America to buy at a higher price. To solidify its claim to the area, Ottawa sent the newly formed Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) out west. Rupert’s Land became the North West Territories and secured as part of Canada.

In regard to the people living on the lands at this time, Sir John A MacDonald said, "All these poor people know is that Canada has bought the country from the Hudson's Bay Company and that they are handed over like a flock of sheep to us.". These words are haunting today considering some of the attitudes toward the western prairies. An attitude that the people are as much chattel as the land itself – voluntary serfs to serve their masters in the east.

The cross Canada railroad was built between 1881 and 1885, bringing highspeed, compared to horse drawn carriages, passenger traffic to the west and much needed resources to the east. The completion of the railroad was also part of the agreement that brought British Columbia into the Confederacy in 1871. The railroad was significant for tying the country together and moving imported and domestic goods, resources manufactured products and people from coast to coast more efficiently than was possible prior to its building.

In 1897 Canada changed the way the Northwest Territories were administered, and they created an executive council granting responsible government. Political leaders such as Sir Fredrick William Haultain (1857 – 1942) began to push for full provincial status and in 1905 their goal was achieved with compromises. The Early to mid 1900s were filled with excitement and desperation, war and peace, courage and frustration. It was the ending of the Victorian era and the beginning of a new century. States were still joining America, new inventions, discoveries, and advancements were changing daily life and the future seemed so bright that it is hard to believe the difficulties to come.

This was also the time that the seeds of trouble (and opportunity) were planted in the Prairies. Alberta and Saskatchewan were carved out of the North West Territories and formed into two provinces instead of the desired one. The prairies were also treated markedly different than other joining provinces, having to give up some of the privileges afforded to others in an attempt to access the benefit of being partners in confederation.

In 1905, Haultain and James Hamilton Ross (1856 – 1932), another member of the Territorial legislature drew up a bill to unify the administrative districts of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Assiniboia and Athabasca into one large western province that would be named Buffalo. After meeting with Prime Minister Wilfred Laurier (1841 – 1919) and much negotiation, it was decided that the proposed province would be too big to administer, although it is rumoured that one of Laurier’s reasons for not wanting so large a province was because he was concerned it would come to rival Ontario and Quebec for power, and so, in September 1905 the territory was split into the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan.

The other stipulation for gaining provincehood, Ottawa held federal prerogative over both provinces crown lands and natural resources. This measure was also applied as a condition for Manitoba’s admission dating back to 1870 which stands in conspicuous contrast to the formula applied for the “Founding Four”, Prince Edward Island and British Columbia upon their establishment as provinces.

To add insult to injury, Prime Minister Laurier appointed Liberal Premiers instead of the favoured Conservatives like Haultain. There were also some who believed that electoral jerrymandering was used to ensure Liberal victories for upcoming elections.

Part of the reason for this desire to control the west may have been the attitude of the people who were deemed as being too much like their rebellious cousins from the south; independent, self-reliant, and individualistic. Their attitude was counter to that of the east which has often been referred to as a “Garrison Mentality: This Garrison Mentality is marked by a fear of expansive emptiness, an anti-American sentiment and a metaphorical building of walls to keep them safe. Essentially the idea of these two conflicting perspectives is one of fear of these wide open, wild spaces and the other, that of the prairies, embracing it with awe and genuine adoration.

Some of the reasons the Federal government gave in keeping control of crown lands and natural resources, was that unlike earlier provinces, the prairies had never owned the lands. This would prove to be a point of contention for several decades.

WWI broke out in 1914 and Canada put its internal differences aside. Britain came calling on all her colonies to fight and Canada earned a very respectable reputation for courage, bravery, and heart. As a team we fought so well, that larger, more prosperous countries like the United States were in awe. Upon the return of the troops, the Spanish Flu had broken out and in addition to the approximately 67,000 who died in WWI, Canada lost another 55,000, this was devastating to a country of less than 8 million. To put this into perspective for modern context, with a similar population size, it would be like losing approximately 100,000 people in The Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area alone.

It was in the aftermath of this great loss of life that a group of western women known as ‘The Famous Five’ as part of the suffragette movement pleaded the ‘Persons Case’; Emily Murphy (1868-1933), Irene Parlby (1868-1965), Nellie McClung (1873-1951), Louise McKinney (1868-1931) and Henrietta Edwards (1849-1931) initially lost the case in 1928 however, the Privy council overturned the ruling in 1929 allowing women to become senators and ensuring the national women’s right to vote as “persons” under the law.

Before the Great War, wheat and other grains were sold on the open market, however farmers were becoming suspicious of the trading practises of large firms dominating the market. In 1912 The board of Grain Commissioners was only responsible for grading of wheat and in 1915 the government seized control of production for the war effort.

During this time, the Soldiers of the Soil or S.O.S. was created. This program encouraged youth aged 15 - 19, mostly boys to volunteer as farm labourers while the fighting aged men were away. The program was very successful and led to Canada’s ability to feed the nation and send supplies abroad.

When the war ended farmers were concerned that the prices of wheat and other grains would drop and insisted that the government boards formed during the war were maintained. This was the case in 1919 – ‘20, after that the open market was re-instated. The farmers were so impressed with the way the war time boards ran, they created co-operative, farmer owned boards of their own.

While the Famous Five were fighting for their rights, Alberta Premier, John Edward Brownlee (1883-1961), fought hard to gain control of Prairie resources. He introduced legislation that taxed all federally controlled mineral extractions forcing a constitutional crisis. The Federal government finally relented and gave the prairies control in 1930. Almost immediately, Ottawa began a relentless assault of trying to control the way Alberta and the west could manage those resources, attempting to own without actual ownership.

The Great Depression (1929 – ‘33) hit the prairies hard. The world had been rocked by devastating financial losses coupled with the dustbowl of the Midwest. These crises hit Canada relentlessly. The grain cooperatives, once thriving began to suffer and eventually went bankrupt.

The Federal Government formed The Canadian Wheat Board in 1935 to alleviate the pressures of the farmers effected by the Great Depression. The Canadian Wheat Board or CWB, is somewhat of a misnomer as it was only western farmers who were put under its control. Ontario, the second largest wheat grower in Canada, established its own co-operative boards.

In 1943 membership in the wheat board became compulsory for western grain growers. With legal consequences if they tried to sell outside of the CWB’s single desk system.

In 1939 Canada entered World War II of her own volition. This is the first international conflict that Canada was part of outside of Royal Prerogative.

Once again Canada fought with honour, supplied food and equipment to the war effort and paid for it all by the sweat and efforts of a united citizenry. The industrial production during the war effort was awe inspiring. Canada built planes, tanks, and ships, sending them overseas to help her allies fight against the Axis Powers of Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Japan.

With WWII finally over in 1945, the surviving men came home and went back to building Canada. Greater discovery and development in Alberta would reveal the true size of the provinces oil and gas reserves. When Leduc #1 came in on February 13th, 1947 it ignited additional exploration and a booming economy.

Of course, success in the West always brings intense interest from the Laurentians and in 1956 Louis St. Laurent’s Laurentian Government passed the Federal Pipeline Act.

“Life is like an old vinyl record in which we can’t escape the grooves. Groundhog’s day on a massive scale – always a little different yet always the same. That’s what history teaches, not necessarily stuck on repeat but definitely echoing into the future.”

~Gilly Davis

The relatively peaceful and prosperous 1950s gave way to civil unrest in the 1960s. In Quebec, the Front de libération du Quebec or FLQ, a militant, French separatist movement began a wave of violent insurrection that came to a head during the October Crisis of 1970.

The FLQ was a Marxist organization that felt that corporations and the federal government were victimizing the workers. Their manifesto that was read during the hostage negotiations was a kind of carbon copy of the Communist Manifesto.

The rest of the country watched in horror as bombings, terror and kidnappings forced a new Prime Minister to bring in the War Measures Act, the only time such a move has ever been done in peace times.

This Act, created at the beginning of WWI, states “it shall only be enforced during war, invasion or insurrections real or apprehended” and gave extra powers and military support to Quebec in the hopes of stopping the violence and bring the FLQ and their supporters to heel. In 1970s Canada, violence to gain political control would not be tolerated. 

Chapter Three: Pierre’s Poisonous Pucker

"Dead. The words fall from my tongue and linger there like poison. A slow death hanging from my lips. I shake the thought away and swallow, but I can still taste the remnants in the back of my throat. It's sour and I gag a little as tears swell behind my eyes.”

~Celia McMahon

Pierre Elliot Trudeau (1919 – 2000) was a polarizing figure. You either loved him or you hated him, but you couldn’t be indifferent. He was a tough, no-nonsense negotiator, willing to bring in the military to stop the separatist movement and the FLQ terrorists from gaining the upper hand in Quebec. He was also a socialist and communist sympathizer, defying his American allies by not only building relations with Cuban revolutionary, Fidel Castro (1926 – 2016) but also with communist China’s Mao Zedong (1893 – 1976).

His own moves to strip away local political powers centralizing them in Ottawa has been a major factor in the frustration and division between the provinces. Trudeau is widely believed to have had a deep disdain for the west, enacting policies to cripple the economy and seize control over its most powerful industry, winning him the moniker of “The Father of Western Alienation.”, although, as we have seen, he wasn’t the first to marginalize the west.

His policies moving away from historic allegiance and alignment with the United States and more towards the USSR caused Canada to lose its footing, bringing the country close to bankruptcy by the time he left office (1982 – 1984).

Trudeau spent WWII as a student first at the Université de Montréal studying law from 1940 –’43, a year articling and then from 1944 – ’47 at Harvard doing a master’s in political economy. He decided to continue work on his dissertation based on Marxism, Communism and Christianity in France.

He continued his studies in a decimated Paris and then did a term at the London School of Economics. His study of socialism and Marxist communism was fueled by the intellectual thinkers of this time. Writers like George Orwell wrote of the fashionable ideas of socialism within the elite classes of the era.

After his studies, Pierre became a backpacker, travelling to parts of the world that few Westerners had experienced, Eastern Europe, the Middle and Far East. Many of the places he visited were in the early stages of implementing communism.

History shows us that on the surface, the early days of communism can look altruistic, but it has never gone well in the mid to long-term. Trudeau most likely did not see the tens of millions killed in the application of communist rule.

When he returned from his world travels, Trudeau became an activist in Montreal fighting for workers rights and eventually began teaching law at the Université de Montreal. He also spent a short stint working for the Privy council in Ottawa.

In 1965 The Liberal party were looking for Quebecers to run in the upcoming federal election, the 46-year-old Trudeau and two others were approached. Trudeau’s activism was a concern but one the Liberals believed they could overcome. Each of the three men did win their seats.

In 1967 Trudeau became Minister for Justice and when Lester B. Pearson (1897 – 1972) retired as Prime Minister, Trudeau threw his hat into the ring and won handily with the hope of many for a new, fresh approach to politics.

Planting a Butterfly Kiss

In 1968, the impish Pierre Elliot Trudeau was elected as Prime Minister of Canada as Trudeaumania swept the country. He was a youthful, intellectually inclined bachelor whose infamous pirouette behind the queen in 1977 was the perfect symbol of the free love generation. A generation marked by rebellion against traditional institutions like the nuclear family, moral values, race relations and gender roles.

Pierre Trudeau was charming, well dressed in his signature lapel red rose, a free spirit whose sometimes outlandish behaviour was both admired and despised. His socialistic ideals and dabbling in communism were largely ignored by the public as the iron curtain of the cold war was gaining strength.

In 1969, the first signs of his contempt for western concerns were shown when he visited Saskatchewan. At a meeting with a group of farmers who were protesting the Canadian Wheat Board, he asked the rhetorical and dismissive question, “Why should I sell your wheat?"

Civil unrest flared as the civil rights and anti-Vietnam war movements became more militant in the United States. Canada proved it was not immune to this growing activist violence when a Quebec separatist movement, the FLQ, began bombing campaigns throughout the 1960s. The FLQ, brought the violence to a head in 1970 with what was deemed ‘The October Crisis’, two factions of the group independently kidnapped two men: British Diplomat, James Cross and Quebec Labour Minister, Pierre Laporte (1921 – ‘70).

This was the first crisis the new Prime Minister would face, and it proved him to be a strong opponent to terrorism in Canada. Criticized for bringing in the war measures act to combat the pernicious foe, he quickly, within three months, decimated the FLQ and was justified in his actions when Pierre Laporte was murdered in captivity. Fortunately, James Cross was released but not until after his kidnappers were flown to Cuba and their freedom from facing justice in Canada.

The separatist movement in Quebec has never gone back to these militant practises, proving that most Canadians prefer a peaceful and law-abiding avenue to having their grievances heard.

Trudeau married Margaret Sinclair in the spring of 1971 and the pair had their first son, future Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that Christmas, two brothers followed in short order.

In 1973 the Energy crisis hit due to the oil embargo brought on by a series of Arab-Israelis conflicts in the Middle East. During the Yom Kippur War, America took Israel’s side in the battle and the Arabs’ recourse was an oil embargo. Oil exports from the Middle East were cut and prices rose by 70%. This caused high inflation and a shortage of oil supplies worldwide. Discussions in North America about oil conservation and independence began in earnest and the oil industry in Alberta took off like a rocket.

However, although Alberta has the third largest oil reserves in the world, in the 1970s, development of those reserves was just getting started. Canada as a whole is not energy self-sufficient and during this price shock it caused problems.

While Alberta wanted to get a fair market price for its oil, the rest of the country was paying high prices on imports. The thing that must be remembered here is that oil is a commodity that effects every aspect of the supply chain. Without reasonably priced fuel, industry, and modern life grind to a standstill. So, while Alberta reaped the benefit of the oil shock, the rest of the country suffered the consequences of it.

In the 1972 election, Pierre Trudeau had returned to power with a minority government. He had to work with the NDP under David Lewis (1904 – ‘81) to maintain power. Under the theory of economic nationalism, which calls for state intervention over other market mechanisms, the Liberals and NDP worked together to create Petro Canada which came to fruition through an Act of parliament in 1975.

In January 1976 Petro Canada began operations with a $1.5 Billion start up fund and easy access to more capitol if needed. The justification for this crown corporation was for the Federal government to gain a footing in the oil industry and ensure domestic supplies throughout the country.

Trudeau felt that the big players in the oil sands, mostly American companies were gearing supply to the United States to the detriment of Canadians. In Alberta it was seen as a way to discourage scarce foreign investment due to the unfair advantage Petro Canada had through unlimited government backing.

To the minds of Albertans, Petro Canada was a euphemism for ‘Pierre Elliot Trudeau Rips Off Canada’, meaning that the use of government funds to do what private investment was already doing would only cost all of Canada in the end.

In 1979 the second oil shock ensued bringing with it a new phenomenon called stagflation, which is when there is persistent high inflation combined with high unemployment and stagnant demand in a country’s economy. This was brought on by more unrest in OPEC countries.

Pierre Trudeau saw this crisis as an opportunity to justify further federal intervention into Alberta’s provincial affairs and in 1980 the National Energy Program was put into place.

Despite Alberta’s hard-won fight for control of its natural resources, The National Energy Program (NEP) would subjugate and pillage Alberta’s energy wealth. It has been estimated that the NEP cost Alberta between $50 - 100 billion. This is why the National Energy Program has been one of, if not the biggest factor in creating the deep resentment in Alberta toward Ottawa.

The official argument was that the program would reduce Canada’s dependence on foreign oil imports, give Canada, through Petro Canada and other initiatives, control over oil development and supply, and redistribute the proceeds of Alberta’s energy wealth to benefit all Canadians. Another initiative nested within the NEP was the Petroleum Incentives Program that paid up to 80% for the exploration costs accrued by Canadian companies operating in federally controlled lands. Albertans perceived this as an attempt to pilfer scarce capital that might otherwise have been invested in its oil fields.

Also included in the NEP was the introduction of new federal taxes on the energy industry. Tax rates were increased on exports and corporate revenue from oil and gas activity.

All of these new schemes cost Alberta, not only by seizing revenue, but also by actively discouraging private investment in Alberta by creating direct competition between the government and private companies. It also created a climate of regulatory uncertainty by introducing tectonic shifts in national energy policy.

Alberta’s Premier Peter Lougheed hit back by putting the brakes on the development of the oil sands, reducing the province’s oil production thereby thwarting the proceeds Trudeau hoped to reap. A legal challenge was heard before the Supreme Court and it was ruled that the federal government had, in fact overstepped its bounds in taxing provincially controlled oil and gas wells. Slowly but surely the NEP started to fall apart until it finally died in 1984.

The election of 1979 ushered in the short relief of conservative Joe Clark’s minority government but early in 1980 he lost a non-confidence vote and Trudeau was returned to power.

1980 also saw the first Quebec referendum on separation under Rene Levesque (1922 – ‘87). Pierre Trudeau’s statement in parliament was that the referendum question was not clear, and he would not negotiate with Quebec as a sovereign country but only as a province within Canada regardless of any outcome of the referendum.

Pierre Trudeau turned his attentions to patriating the constitution. During the struggle to get agreement between the provinces, Quebec was betrayed in what would come to be known as ‘The Night of the Long Knives’.

Rene Levesque’s statement, “I have been stabbed in the back during the night by a bunch of carpetbaggers,” reflects the division that was created by Trudeau’s force of will get his own way at any cost.

Only Premiers Bill Davis (1929 -) of Ontario and Richard Hatfield (1931 – ‘91) of New Brunswick supported Trudeau. The other premiers formed an alliance against him and became known as the ‘Gang of Eight’. Trudeau had threatened the Premiers that he would go forward with or without them, however; the supreme court ruled that although Trudeau could do it, he should get substantial agreement from the premiers. Trudeau plotted to break the ‘Gang of Eight’ by presenting the following proposal:

"Why don’t we get patriation first, nobody can object to that-then give ourselves two years to solve our problems over the amending formula and the charter, and failing that, consult the people in a referendum?"

Levesque took the bait and while mulling it over the ‘Gang of Eight’ crumbled in a series of overnight negotiations which led to them signing the reformed constitution.

It has been argued, by Ted Morton and others, that the Constitution Act of 1982 transfers powers from elected politicians to the judiciary – essentially centralizing power and compromising democracy. Many of the issues with this constitution have never been resolved and considering the difficulty with the amending formula, it is unlikely that they will be.

This Act also brought another of the most divisive pieces of legislation, entrenching equalization into the constitution.

Equalization was brought into effect in 1957 as a means to mitigate regional poverty. In theory, it sounds altruistic but in practice, it sews division, creates dependence, and weakens those it is meant to help, often being called a poverty trap by economic thinkers. It is set up to punish and discourage drive, ambition, innovation, independence and ultimately, unity.

The NEP coupled with Equalization and transfer payments, rips the wealth that Alberta has acquired through their own hard work and innovation sending it out to the rest of the country. Contrary to the rhetoric of the East, the west does not mind sharing, but only if it is fair and reasonable. When other provinces are booming, and Alberta is hurting yet forced to continue to give to the booming provinces, that is where resentment is born.

During Trudeau’s reign he saw that the west was becoming too prosperous, prosperity brings power, a concept his son, Justin would comment on before he became Prime Minister, and that power had to be controlled, just as Laurier had attempted when disallowing the one province of Buffalo.

Another egregious event in the furthering of western alienation came during a train trip through Salmon Arm, B.C. in August of 1982. Pierre Trudeau raised the middle finger to a group of protesters badly effected by his policies toward the west. This action was dubbed the “Salmon Arm Salute” and came as he passed on a luxury train car with his three sons, while many in the west suffered unemployment, bankruptcies, and the loss of their homes.

By 1984 Pierre Elliot Trudeau could see that in the upcoming election the Liberals, due to their bad economic policies and worse social policies, would lose. After a “long walk in the snow” he decided to retire from politics.

During his time in office Trudeau’s policies fostered disunity in Canada. Although he is not the only leader from the east who has voiced his mistrust and disdain for the west, he is certainly the one who fostered the rising separatist movement, one that has never gone away.

He left Alberta devastated, no different than it is today, with families falling apart, bankruptcies, out of control drug and alcohol abuse, rampant suicides, and homelessness. All this while funnelling money out of the western provinces, mocking, and demonizing the people who live and work here.

Fortunately, the west wasn’t the only region that felt betrayed and hope came in the largest Conservative majority in Canadian history.

Chapter Four: Unreciprocated Tough Love

“What an unrequited love it is, this thirst! But is it love, when it is unrequited?”

~Eleanor Catton

Brian Mulroney (1939 -) of the Progressive Conservative party was elected Prime Minister in the largest landslide victory in Canadian history; this, in response to the years of Pierre Trudeau’s divisive management of the country that left it financially unstable, internationally misaligned, and socially frustrated. The storm clouds may have receded upon the hopeful victory of Mulroney, but they were further seeded under his tenure due to his insensitivity to the problems and impotence in getting the necessary constitutional reforms.

After the Quebec Referendum in 1980, the sovereignty movement took a step back, but it was still bubbling close to the surface. Quebecers were licking wounds and devising a new plan that would solve the problems of Rene Leveque’s try at Quebec independence. This plan would take over a decade to bring to fruition. Meanwhile, western alienation was assuaged by a new party with a strong voice demanding that the “West Wants In!” Corruption at the highest levels of government and yet more marginalization of the West would usher in the new millennium.

Despite great hope, Mulroney and the Progressive Conservative party left the West unsatisfied. The general frustration with the federal government gave rise to Preston Manning’s (1942 -) Reform Party in 1987.

The Reform Party was a nationalist-populist party formed in 1987 stressing spending restraint and democratic reforms. It emphasized rights and responsibilities of the individual and recognition of the equality and uniqueness of each citizen and the province in which they live.

They called for a decentralized government, returning powers to the provinces, reforming the senate, and ensuring smaller government by privatizing some services. The party’s momentum grew throughout the 90s.

The main pillars of the party as laid out in their 1988 Blue Book are as follows:

Constitutional Reform: through; establishment of a Triple E Senate (elected, equal and effective), entrenchment of property rights, public referenda on constitutional change, right of the territories to full provincial status, and a rejection of the Meech Lake Accord 1987, Mulroney’s first attempt at constitutional reform, giving Quebec the “Distinct Society” status.

Bread and Butter Plank: Market driven economic policies, regional fairness tests on federal programs and spending, national and international free trade, privatization of Petro Canada and Canada Post, banking reforms, federal spending and MP pension reforms, Labour and management relations, balanced budget.

People Plank: free and recorded votes in the House of Commons, referenda and plebiscites on moral and social issues, lessoning of party discipline and pressure groups, target social spending to those who need it most, mobilization of private social spending, strong system of criminal justice, official languages and immigration approach.

Green Plank: a vision of Canada rooted in “Our Land” and environment, commitment to sustainable economic development, no economic development without regard to long-term environmental costs and implications, no environmental regulations without regard to economic costs and social implications.

The Reform party quickly grew in popularity in the west but didn’t get much traction in the east primarily because it was seen as a west-centric party.

The Meech Lake Accord was a hotly contested attempt at bringing Quebec on board with the constitution as they never signed on to the Canada Constitution Act of 1982.

Part of the bargain was for Quebec to gain special status within Canada – this only sowed further division in the country and brought Pierre Trudeau back into the debate as he argued against it. The Meech Lake Accord 1987 failed to gain consent and Mulroney was sent back to the drawing board.

In 1988 the U.S. Canada Free Trade agreement, FTA, was signed, but not until Mulroney’s chief negotiator, Simon Reisman (1919 – 2008) used western energy to bring the American’s back to the negotiating table when discussions broke down in 1987.

The end result of this was the energy proportionality clause which compelled Canada to offer the U.S. first access to our oil and gas at the same price that it could be sold within Canada. This clause had both good and bad ramifications, but once again, Western natural resources were used as a bargaining chip as if owned and controlled by the Federal Government.

Once again Brian Mulroney took a stab at constitutional reform to bring his home province, Quebec onboard. The Charlottetown Accord 1992 failed and would be his final attempt.

This was also the year that Mexico joined the U.S. and Canada in the North American Free Trade agreement or NAFTA. In conjunction with NAFTA and for reasons not well communicated to the public, the federal goods and services tax, GST, was introduced – Mulroney explains it as a tax change due to an old manufacturing tax, but the people of Canada saw it only as yet another tax grab.

Mulroney became highly unpopular and stepped down. Kim Campbell (1947-) became leader and the first female Prime Minister in Canadian history.

In Alberta, Don Getty stepped down as premier and it was Ralph to the rescue! Alberta’s economy was still recovering after the Trudeau years and the injuries incurred by the NEP in conjunction with lower world oil prices.

Ralph Klein (1942 – 2013) was elected Premier of Alberta in 1992. He had been a journalist and then a popular Mayor of Calgary. He was a typical Albertan; Wild, fun-loving, practical, and irreverent. He would become known for his “shoot, shovel, and shut up” statement regarding the U.S. beef ban that occurred when a cow in Alberta had been found to have mad cow disease.

Klein also refused to apologize for his lewd joke at the expense of former Conservative MP Belinda Stronach - "Belinda roasted me as a Conservative, but of course now she's a Liberal. and I wasn't surprised that she crossed over; I don't think she ever did have a Conservative bone in her body... well, except for one." (Referring to Peter MacKay, her former boyfriend, who was a serving member of the Conservative Party of Canada at the time.)

He was also criticized for saying he would use “cowboy techniques” to protect Calgarians from “bums and creeps” migrating to Calgary in the early 1980s. At the time, crime in Calgary was rampant and mostly committed by non-Albertans. He was chastised by the press for his “anti-Eastern” sentiments, yet he stated emphatically that he never said Easterners, saying that anyone who has skills and wants to work are welcome, but with troublemakers he will “kick ass” and “get them out of town”.

Klein entered provincial politics and quickly became premier, implementing austerity programs to get Alberta out of debt and restore the “Alberta Advantage”.

Jean Chretien (1934 -) and the Liberals replace the much-despised Progressive Conservative Party of Canada in 1993.

Chretien is the epitome of a career politician working as a lawyer only until elected as MP in 1963 at the age of 29. During the 1970s and 80s he had become Pierre Trudeau’s enforcer, getting things done to move the Trudeau agenda forward. One such occasion was his involvement in ‘The Night of the Long Knives’ where Chretien was instrumental in brokering the deal behind Rene Levesque’s back.

He was also appointed minister of energy, mines and resources in 1982 and charged with enforcing the National Energy Program. This appointment made him a hated figure in Alberta.

His constant battles with Alberta Premiers, Peter Lougheed, and later and more significantly, Ralph Klein led to his attitude that provincial politicians “are petty people only interested in their own province at the expense of the nation”. This animosity toward the provinces led to several disparaging statements and policies, like his “tough love for Alberta” and an off the cuff statement that going to the west was like going to a foreign country, further alienating Western Canada.

Perhaps Chretien’s most egregious assault on those outside of Ontario and Quebec was in passing the 1996 Regional Veto Act. This gives Quebec veto over any constitutional change, something that was strenuously fought against when Pierre Trudeau patriated the constitution in 1982. This act divides the country into five regional blocks: British Columbia, The Prairies, Ontario, Quebec, and the Maritimes. For any constitutional amendment to be introduced into the house, it must have approval by Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia and at least two of the Maritime provinces with 50 percent of the region’s population and at least two of the Prairies with 50 percent of the regions population. Although this Act could and should be legally challenged, it has been kept on the books due to its political favourability in Quebec. Essentially, it would be political suicide for any party to challenge it as they would most likely lose seats in the richly endowed Quebec region.

1995 – The Quebec Referendum Un Bisou Au Revoir:

The Quebec referendum, which bore The Quebec Reference 1998, The Clarity Act and in Quebec “An Act respecting the exercise of the fundamental rights and prerogatives of the Québec people and the Québec State" or Bill 99, is significant for any secession movement in Canada.

This referendum has laid the groundwork for any province or region seeking independence from the Canadian Federation and has shed a light on international laws regarding divisions of nations.

We have to go back a little way to set the scene of the 1995 Referendum. The Bloc Quebecois arose out of the frustration in Quebec that had also given rise to the FLQ. After the October crisis of 1970, Quebec sovereigntists took a step back and created a better organized political movement.

In 1980 this movement, headed by Rene Levesque, then Premier, went to the people of Quebec to decide their future within or without Canada.

The biggest concern at the time was the perceived phasing out of the French language in Quebec and the disparity in opportunities for those who only spoke French. What they wanted was constitutional reforms and a new relationship with the rest of Canada which would preserve French language and culture.

A referendum was launched with a 5-week campaign to entice Quebecois to vote on a “Sovereignty Association” and begin negotiations with Canada for the desired changes and potentially a removal of Quebec from the federation if an agreement with Ottawa could not be reached.

Levesque lost with only 40% in his favour. Throughout the campaign, then Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau had promised that if the federation won, he would immediately start work on constitutional change. As discussed previously, this led to the patriation of the constitution but also the betrayal of Rene Levesque and the people of Quebec in the process.

In a short and eloquent speech after losing the referendum, Levesque passionately stated “Jusqu a la prochaine fois” (until next time).

One of Levesque’s underlings, Jacque Parizeau (1930 – 2015), became the leader of the Bloc in 1994 with the promise to run another referendum on sovereignty.

Parizeau had been quietly planning this second run for over a decade and now was his chance. He planned to the detail everything that would need to be in place if the “YES” side were to win. He was intent on Quebec separation seeing the province as no longer having a place within Canada.

His intense energy rubbed some the wrong way and to help ease the concerns of the people, Lucien Bouchard (1938 -), leader of the federal bloc Quebecois was enlisted.

Bouchard quickly became a kind of messianic figure having recently survived the flesh-eating disease. His miraculous recovery made him somewhat of a beloved and living folk legend. Having Bouchard onside created a frenzy with packed stadiums of people wanting to see the man who lived.

On the “NO” side was Jean Chretien, then Prime Minister and a fellow Quebecer. He and his Liberal ministers put together a campaign to encourage Quebecers to remain within Canada. It was not going well for them and so they decided to create a spectacle of the love Canada had for Quebec. Cheap flights and busses were used to bring people from all across Canada to Quebec for a massive rally the day before the vote. Even with such an extravagant show of solidarity the “NO” side won by a squeak.

Parizeau’s speech after the loss was crushing for many. He was incensed over what he considered external interference by the federal government saying that the loss was due to “l’argent et des votes ethniques” (money and ethnic voters). With those unfortunate words he condemned the movement to being seen as nothing more than a racially motivated enterprise.

Parizeau had determined to step down as leader of the party if the “NO” side won and did so the very next day. The defeat has had a chilling effect on the movement ever since and no new referendum has been called or planned since. There are still both federal and provincial Bloc parties, but the sense, at least from outside Quebec, is that there is no longer any real interest in leaving the country.

This entire episode should be a warning to all those interested in separation from the confederation of Canada. It isn’t as straightforward as might be thought, there are processes involved and if you get it wrong, say the wrong thing, or miss the threats of outside influence, not only will the movement be badly damaged, but it could also be dead in the water.

The outcome of the Quebec Referendum was highly damaging to Quebec’s reputation across Canada but there were also some gains. The pathway, at least in legal terms, was examined more closely than it had ever been looked at before. These legal findings are significant and show the fragility of the Canadian concept.

The Quebec Reference 1998:

The Governor in Council submitted the request for an advisory opinion on the following three specific questions:

1. Under the Constitution of Canada, can the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally?

2. Does international law give the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec the right to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally? In this regard, is there a right to self determination under international law that would give the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec the right to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally?

3. In the event of a conflict between domestic and international law on the right of the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally, which would take precedence in Canada?

Finding - Quebec cannot secede from Canada unilaterally; however, a clear vote on a clear question to secede in a referendum should lead to negotiations between Quebec and the rest of Canada for secession. However, above all, secession would require a constitutional amendment.

Right to secede under Canadian law

The court addressed the three questions in order. First, they stated that, under the Canadian Constitution (and with Quebec being a party to it since its inception), unilateral secession was not legal. However, should a referendum decide in favour of independence, the rest of Canada "would have no basis to deny the right of the government of Quebec to pursue secession." Negotiations would have to follow to define the terms under which Quebec would gain independence, should it maintain that goal. In this section of the judgement, they stated that the Constitution is made up of written and unwritten principles (based on text, historical context, and previous constitutional jurisprudence) and that there are four fundamental tenets of the Canadian constitution. Those four interrelated and equally important principles or values are:

Federalism – the principle that seeks to “reconcile diversity with unity” by giving federal authority over only those issues of common interest amongst culturally diverse and politically independent provinces. The purpose of Canada's federalism is not only to create a loose association amongst provinces, but a true national unity.

Democracy – the principle that seeks to promote participation in effective representative self-government, which respects and responds to all voices in a marketplace of ideas.

Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law – the principles that protect citizens from state actions by forcing governments to act under the rule of law, the constitution of Canada being the supreme law. The constitution's entrenched protections of minorities ensure that the country does not operate simply on majority rule and enable a true democracy in which minority voices are fairly considered.

Protection of Minorities – the principle that guides the other principles, but one which is also independent and fundamental because of its uniqueness to Canada relative to other federal, constitutional democracies.

They held that these pieces cannot be viewed independently but all interact as part of the Constitutional framework of Canada.

Although the Clarity Act gives somewhat of a framework, it does not define what constitutes a clear question or what would be considered a clear majority. These two factors would have to be approved by a potentially hostile House of Parliament.

According to Chantal Heber’s book ‘The Morning After: The 1995 Quebec Referendum and the Day That Almost Was’, Saskatchewan Premier, Roy Romanow (1939 -) was preparing a possible Saskatchewan referendum for independence, among other options, if the “YES” side had have won.

Irvin Studin of Global Brief has mused that if one domino in Canada’s federation were to secede, others would soon follow due to the precarious balance of power within the nation. All of these are points to ponder moving forward.

Tensions were high in the aftermath of the 1995 Quebec referendum and subsequent frustrations in the west began to bubble up once more.

Chretien’s Liberal attacks on the west, primarily Alberta and Premier Ralph Klein, during the 2000 election created fierce animosity between the east and the west. In response, a group of prominent western citizens sent an open letter to Premier Klein as a way of voicing their concerns formally:

Hon. Ralph Klein,

Premier of Alberta,

Edmonton

Dear Premier Klein,

During and since the recent federal election, we have been among a large number of Albertans discussing the future of our province. We were not dismayed by the outcome of the election so much as by the strategy employed by the current federal government to secure its re-election. In our view, the Chrétien government undertook a series of attacks not merely designed to defeat its partisan opponents, but to marginalize Alberta and Albertans within Canada’s political system.

One well-documented incident was the attack against Alberta’s health care system. To your credit, you vehemently protested the unprecedented attack ads that the federal government launched against Alberta’s policies—policies the Prime Minister had previously found no fault with.

However, while your protest was necessary and appreciated by Albertans, we believe that it is not enough to respond only with protests. If the government in Ottawa concludes that Alberta is a soft target, we will be subjected to much worse than dishonest television ads. The Prime Minister has already signalled as much by announcing his so called “tough love” campaign for the West.

We believe the time has come for Albertans to take greater charge of our own future. This means resuming control of the powers that we possess under the constitution of Canada but that we have allowed the federal government to exercise. Intelligent use of these powers will help Alberta build a prosperous future in spite of a misguided and increasingly hostile government in Ottawa.

Under the heading of the “Alberta Agenda,” we propose that our province move forward on the following fronts:

Withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan to create an Alberta Pension Plan offering the same benefits at lower cost while giving Alberta control over the investment fund. Pensions are a provincial responsibility under section 94A of the Constitution Act, 1867; and the legislation setting up the Canada Pension Plan permits a province to run its own plan, as Quebec has done from the beginning. If Quebec can do it, why not Alberta?

Collect our own revenue from personal income tax, as we already do for corporate income tax. Now that your government has made the historic innovation of the single-rate personal income tax, there is no reason to have Ottawa collect our revenue. Any incremental cost of collecting our own personal income tax would be far outweighed by the policy flexibility that Alberta would gain, as Quebec’s experience has shown.

Start preparing now to let the contract with the RCMP run out in 2112 and create an Alberta Provincial Police Force. Alberta is a major province. Like the other major provinces of Ontario and Quebec, we should have our own provincial police force. We have no doubt that Alberta can run a more efficient and effective police force than Ottawa can—one that will not be misused as a laboratory for experiments in social engineering.

Resume provincial responsibility for health-care policy. If Ottawa objects to provincial policy, fight in the courts. If we lose, we can afford the financial penalties that Ottawa may try to impose under the Canada Health Act. Albertans deserve better than the long waiting periods and technological backwardness that are rapidly coming to characterize Canadian medicine. Alberta should also argue that each province should raise its own revenue for health care—i.e., replace Canada Health and Social Transfer cash with tax points, as Quebec has argued for many years. Poorer provinces would continue to rely on Equalization to ensure they have adequate revenues.

Use section 88 of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Quebec Secession Reference to force Senate reform back onto the national agenda. Our reading of that decision is that the federal government and other provinces must seriously consider a proposal for constitutional reform endorsed by “a clear majority on a clear question” in a provincial referendum. You acted decisively once before to hold a senatorial election. Now is the time to drive the issue further.

All of these steps can be taken using the constitutional powers that Alberta now possesses. In addition, we believe it is imperative for you to take all possible political and legal measures to reduce the financial drain on Alberta caused by Canada’s tax-and-transfer system. The most recent Alberta Treasury estimates are that Albertans transfer $2,600 per capita annually to other Canadians, for a total outflow from our province approaching $8 billion a year. The same federal politicians who accuse us of not sharing their “Canadian values” have no compunction about appropriating our Canadian dollars to buy votes elsewhere in the country.

Mr. Premier, we acknowledge the constructive reforms that your government made in the 1990s—balancing the budget, paying down the provincial debt, privatizing government services, getting Albertans off welfare and into jobs, introducing a single-rate tax, pulling government out of the business of subsidizing business, and many other beneficial changes. But no government can rest on its laurels. As economic slowdown, and perhaps even recession, threatens North America, the government in Ottawa will be tempted to take advantage of Alberta’s prosperity, to redistribute income from Alberta to residents of other provinces in order to keep itself in power. It is imperative to take the initiative, to build firewalls around Alberta, to limit the extent to which an aggressive and hostile federal government can encroach upon legitimate provincial jurisdiction.

Once Alberta’s position is secured, only our imagination will limit the prospects for extending the reform agenda that your government undertook eight years ago. To cite only a few examples, lower taxes will unleash the energies of the private sector, easing conditions for Charter Schools will help individual freedom and improve public education, and greater use of the referendum and initiative will bring Albertans into closer touch with their own government.

The precondition for the success of this Alberta Agenda is the exercise of all our legitimate provincial jurisdictions under the constitution of Canada. Starting to act now will secure the future for all Albertans.

Sincerely yours,

Stephen HARPER, President, National Citizens’ Coalition; Tom FLANAGAN, professor of political science and former Director of Research, Reform Party of Canada; Ted MORTON, professor of political science and Alberta Senator-elect; Rainer KNOPFF, professor of political science; Andrew CROOKS, Chairman, Canadian Taxpayers Federation; Ken BOESSENKOOL, former policy advisor to Stockwell Day, Treasurer of Alberta. This letter represents the personal views of its authors and not those of any organizations with which they are or have been connected.

This letter points out many of the grievances and fears of the western provinces, specifically Alberta, that still exist today. Eastern politicians have often used the west to win the more abundant seats allocated in the east, by painting the west as the ‘problem’ only they can subdue for the betterment of all of Canada. Encapsulating this disdain was the statement by Liberal Sen. Keith Davey, Pierre Trudeau’s 1980 campaign manager, “Screw the West, we’ll take the rest!” This divisiveness undermines unity and demoralizes an entire region of the country. This game that is continually being played actually hurts the entire country, fracturing the Canadian identity into small parts instead of one cohesive whole. Pierre Elliot Trudeau may have begun the significant damage to the fabric of the country, but the Chretien government did plenty of harm as well.

Liberal infighting forced the resignation of Jean Chretien and former finance minister, Paul Martin (1938 -) took over as Liberal leader. Shortly thereafter, the Sponsorship Scandal, or Ad-Scam, came to light. Over $100 million dollars had been spent on a program that funnelled money to the liberal party coffers through ad companies in Quebec.

The Liberal government program was supposed to promote federal government initiatives and investment in the province of Quebec. It was meant to encourage federalism in the province still shaken by the ’95 referendum.

The program ran from 1996 – 2004, which is when the anomalies were discovered. Misdirection and misuse of public funds directed toward Liberal linked organizations where little to no work was actually produced but donations were made to the liberal party from these same companies, basically laundering tax money into the Liberal party coffers.

The Federal Auditor General who discovered the problems, Sheila Fraser (1950 -) said, "I think this is such a blatant misuse of public funds that it is shocking. I am actually appalled by what we've found.”

Paul Martin won the general election in 2004 and in 2006 a confidence vote forced another Federal election which he lost.

During the Chretien-Martin years, Liberals were given somewhat of a freeride politically as the right-of-centre parties had fractured and were in disarray with the rise of the Reform Party and the unpopularity of the Progressive Conservative Party after the Mulroney years.

A Unite the Right movement began in 1996 and culminated in 2003 under the leadership of Stephen Harper, one of the founding members of the Reform Party and signatory of the Firewall Letter.

There was much controversy and disagreements between the two parties, however they did realize that they would never be able to win a general election without uniting.

After many machinations and negotiations, the new Conservative Party of Canada was formed but not until Progressive Conservative leader, Peter MacKay (1965 -) secured a weighted ballot system for voting within the party.

The voting system within the Conservative Party of Canada is set up as follows; each Electoral District Association (EDA) correlates to each of the ridings and therefore seats in the House of Commons and is given 100 points regardless of how many members are in that EDA. What this means is that one member does not equal one vote. Further, it means that the west is once again marginalized as small membership EDAs in the East have more power per vote than those large member EDAs in the west.

In practice it works like this – say you have two leadership candidates, CA and CB. The race comes down to three ridings – Calgary – Nose Hill, York Centre and Gatineau. Nose Hill has 10,000 members, York has 50 and Gatineau has 5, which isn’t far from the truth in Canada today. Nose Hill’s 10,000 members all vote CA, but York and Gatineau’s combined 55 members all like CB – who wins? In this case the 55 members outvote the 10,000 all because of the way the votes are weighted, giving CB the win.

Peter MacKay said of this system that “the Maritimes, Quebec and Nunavut need to have a voice.” To this I must ask the obvious question, what about the west? There does not seem to be the same kind of concern in the West’s favour.

In 2006, Stephen Harper (1959 -), leader of the new Conservative Party of Canada (CPC), founding member of the Reform Party and signatory of the original “Firewall Letter”, was elected Prime Minister with a minority government.

Part Two:

Butterfly Kisses

“The flapping of a butterfly’s wings in the Amazon can cause a tornado in Texas”, or so the saying goes. Everything is interconnected, and something that seems small at the time can lead to a massive unforeseen consequence later. This is the reason sensible economists believe in small, incremental changes and waiting for outcomes before implementing another small change.

Chapter Five: Falling in Love Again

The greatest act of courage is not falling in love But, despite everything, falling in love again.

~Robin Wayne Bailey

For nine years, Stephen Harper, a trained economist, conservative and Albertan ran the ship of Canada. He successfully guided the country through ‘The Great Recession’ (2007 – ’09), being one of the fastest countries in the G7 to recover.

For the West, Harper was a relief from much of the historic pain, but it was also the beginning of a subtle campaign to malign the West through the characterization of Harper as a meanspirited, cold, and aloof personality.

In 2010, then Liberal MP, Justin Trudeau was interviewed by Tele-Quebec, in which he said,

“Canada isn’t doing well right now because it’s Albertans who control our community and socio-democratic agenda”.

He later stated that he used “Alberta” as shorthand for Stephen Harper; however, the disparaging of the West did not stop there. Echoes from the past showing that Justin Trudeau, like many who came before him, would not be a uniter of the country, but a divisive force with an Eastern elitist, sneering contempt for the west.

Harper’s tenure was marked by inertia due to confidence votes which led to elections and more Conservative minority governments.

In 2011 the CPC won their first majority government, but the struggle was not over. In 2014 the Supreme Court of Canada was deemed ‘Policy Maker of the Year’ by the MacDonald-Laurier Institute, as they overthrew case after case as Harper’s CPC attempted to honour their electoral mandate, proving that our system is broken.

We can elect a governing party, giving them a mandate, but when they try to put forward that mandate, the judiciary overrules them and therefor the people. This is not democracy; it is an oligarchy of judges making decisions without consent of the citizenry or consequences for ignoring the will of the people.

Harper’s stern almost robotic ways were mocked by the media yet his stalwart disposition and training in economics helped him manage the vast country bringing order out from the chaos of past decades.

Divisiveness across the country declined and the economy was showing an upward trajectory. However, Harper was not perfect. He did not create the reforms in Canada that the West so desperately needed. His approach was to make incremental changes over time, balancing action with reaction in the marketplace and society as a whole. Prudent, perhaps, but for the West it would prove to be insufficient to protect us from what was to come.

In the book “Moment of Truth”, Preston Manning claims that the West did not give Harper a clear mandate while in office. I would argue that the Reform Blue Book and the infamous “Firewall Letter” of 2000 were the expected mandate as nothing had changed in the West. I understand the difficulties in honouring that mandate due to minority government standings and dealing with a Supreme Court that does not answer to the people, but there was a mandate.

Unfortunately, Harper’s staunch security concerns in response to terrorism both abroad and at home, made him unpopular and in the 2015 election he was defeated by a young, fresh face preaching sunny ways.

Chapter Six: The Tempting Trudeau

“The only way to get rid of temptation is to yield to it.”

~ Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

Justin Trudeau started off life with the potential of becoming a much-loved tragic hero. He was born on Christmas day, 1971, to privilege yet also into an unfortunate coupling. His parents sad romance was plagued with controversy, reports of abuse, and made up of starkly conflicting personalities. Perhaps the seeds of chaos were planted right from the start, before the Prince of Papillion was conceived, before he emerged from his chrysalis, and flapped his wings creating the tsunami that has engulfed Canada since his election in 2015.

Pierre Elliot Trudeau was Prime Minister of Canada when he secretly wed socialite Margaret Sinclair (1948 -) 30 years his junior. He was a serious intellectual, she a free-spirited flower child. What drew them together is a mystery, but it was the undoing of them both, and their three sons were caught in the whirlwind of their ill-fated adventure.

Barely nine months after his parents appeared honeymooning at a ski lodge in British Columbia, Justin Pierre James Trudeau entered the world. Considering the popularity of the Prime Minister and the constant musings by journalists on his social life, it was stunning that the couple were able to carry on their clandestine affair.

Justin’s arrival embodied a kind of hope for the future of a country just coming of age and establishing its place in the world. The ‘October Crisis’ was over, the turbulence of the ‘60s appeared sated, and the world was looking to a bright future the people envisioned for themselves.

By 1977, when 4-year-old Justin’s parents officially separated, the tide had completely turned. In 1973 the oil embargo had gripped the world and Canada felt the pressure. With the West being rich in oil and the East still purchasing the high-priced resource from overseas, conflict was inevitable. In 1974 Pierre had won a minority government and working with the NDP, created Petro Canada in 1975, seen in Alberta as an assault on the West.

Pierre maintained custody of his three sons, and it would seem that Justin didn’t see much of his troubled mother for a number of years.

In 1979, Pierre and his sons lived like vagabonds when the Liberals lost the house to the Conservatives. The family could not move into Stornoway, home of the official opposition leader, due to flood damage. At first the family went on an extended vacation in Nova Scotia, then the boys were sent to their grandparents in British Columbia, and finally, at the beginning of the school year, they began living on the top floor of Stornoway. Only at the beginning of 1980, when Pierre returned as Prime Minister, did life settle down, as they moved back to 24 Sussex, official residence of the Prime Minister of Canada.

Justin would have been about 8 years old when he was travelling with his father and two brothers through Salmon Arm, British Columbia on that infamous luxury train car. He would have been at an age where he would have some understanding of the protests happening outside the car and what the middle finger his father raised at the people meant. Could this have planted a seed in a young boy’s subconscious mind?

When Justin was 10, he moved to Cormier House in Montreal with his father and brothers. It was 1984, his father retired from politics at the age of 65 and his parents divorced. His mother quickly remarried, choosing to remain with her new husband in Ottawa. At this point the spotlight began to dim on the Trudeau’s but it never completely went out.

During the Meech Lake (1987) and Charlottetown (1992) Accords, Pierre Trudeau made his voice heard, arguing against both amendment packages to the constitution. In 1990 Justin Trudeau argued nationalism in a televised high school debate. This was just five years before the 1995 Quebec Referendum and his views were the minority in his high school.

Justin acquired a BA in Literature from McGill University, and a Bachelor of Education from the University of British Columbia. He continued living in British Columbia taking on substitute teaching jobs.

In 1998 Justin’s youngest brother Michel Trudeau (1975-98) died in a heart-breaking avalanche incident, this tragedy threw the family back into the spotlight and the fledgling teacher faced the invasion of media into his personal life once more.

The toll of his brother’s death devastated the health of his father and flung his mother into new battles with her well documented mental health challenges. Margaret Sinclair Kemper divorced her second husband in 1999 and Pierre died in September 2000.

Justin attended a music festival and fundraiser for avalanche victims the month before his father’s death. The event which has become known as the ‘Kokanee Grope’ since it resurfaced after Trudeau became Prime Minister, has then 26-year-old Justin accused of groping a young female reporter. A day after the accusations, he made the following statement,

“If I had known you were reporting for a national paper, I never would have been so forward”.

Putting aside the self-declared feminists zero tolerance policy for sexual harassment, what appears most offensive is the ‘class’ of the journalist. Trudeau seems to be saying that if she had been a small-town reporter for some backwoods paper, it would have been fine to grope her?

In October of 2000, Justin Trudeau poignantly read his father’s eulogy. The speech was delivered so eloquently that it gave rise to speculation of a career in politics for the young Trudeau, not yet 30 years old at the time. The speech, although printed below is available to watch on YouTube and is worth the viewing. The delivery shows an able orator with dramatic flair.

"Friends, Romans, countrymen.

I was about six years old when I went on my first official

trip. I was going with my father and my grandpa Sinclair up to the North Pole.

It was a very glamorous destination. But the best thing about it is that I was going to be spending lots of time with my dad because in Ottawa he just worked so hard.

One day, we were in Alert, Canada's northernmost point, a scientific military installation that seemed to consist entirely of low shed-like buildings and warehouses.

Let's be honest. I was six. There were no brothers around to play with and I was getting a little bored because dad still somehow had a lot of work to do.

I remember a frozen, windswept Arctic afternoon when I was bundled up into a Jeep and hustled out on a special top-secret mission. I figured I was finally going to be let in on the reason of this high-security Arctic base.

I was exactly right.

We drove slowly through and past the buildings, all of them very grey and windy. We rounded a corner and came upon a red one. We stopped. I got out of the Jeep and started to crunch across towards the front door. I was told, no, to the window.

So, I clamoured over the snowbank, was boosted up to the window, rubbed my sleeve against the frosty glass to see inside and as my eyes adjusted to the gloom, I saw a figure, hunched over one of many worktables that seemed very cluttered. He was wearing a red suit with that furry white trim.

And that's when I understood just how powerful and wonderful my father was.

Pierre Elliott Trudeau. The very words convey so many things to so many people. Statesman, intellectual, professor, adversary, outdoorsman, lawyer, journalist, author, prime minister.

But more than anything, to me, he was dad.

And what a dad. He loved us with the passion and the devotion that encompassed his life. He taught us to believe in ourselves, to stand up for ourselves, to know ourselves and to accept responsibility for ourselves.

We knew we were the luckiest kids in the world. And we had done nothing to actually deserve it.

It was instead something that we would have to spend the rest of our lives to work very hard to live up to.

He gave us a lot of tools. We were taught to take nothing for granted. He doted on us but didn't indulge.

Many people say he didn't suffer fools gladly, but I'll have you know he had infinite patience with us.

He encouraged us to push ourselves, to test limits, to challenge anyone and anything.

There were certain basic principles that could never be compromised.

As I guess it is for most kids, in Grade 3, it was always a real treat to visit my dad at work.

As on previous visits this particular occasion included a lunch at the parliamentary restaurant which always seemed to be terribly important and full of serious people that I didn't recognize.

But at eight, I was becoming politically aware. And I recognized one whom I knew to be one of my father's chief rivals.

Thinking of pleasing my father, I told a joke about him -- a generic, silly little grade school thing.

My father looked at me sternly with that look I would learn to know so well, and said: `Justin, never attack the individual. We can be in total disagreement with someone without denigrating them as a consequence.'

Saying that, he stood up and took me by the hand and brought me over to introduce me to this man. He was a nice man who was eating there with his daughter, a nice-looking blond girl a little younger than I was.

He spoke to me in a friendly manner for a bit and it was at that point that I understood that having opinions that are different from those of another does not preclude one being deserving of respect as an individual.

Because simple tolerance, mere tolerance, is not enough. We need genuine and deep respect for each and every human being not withstanding their thoughts, their values, their beliefs, their origins. That’s what my father demanded of his sons and that’s what he demanded of his country.

He demanded this out of a sense of love: love of his sons, love of his country and that's why we love him so. And it's for this that we so love the letters, the flowers, the dignity of the crowds, and we say to him, farewell.

All that to thank him for having loved us so much.

My father's fundamental belief never came from a textbook. It stemmed from his deep love for and faith in all Canadians and over the past few days, with every card, every rose, every tear, every wave and every pirouette, you returned his love.

It means the world to Sacha and me.

Thank you.

We have gathered from coast to coast to coast, from one ocean to another, united in our grief, to say goodbye.

But this is not the end. He left politics in '84. But he came back for Meech. He came back for Charlottetown. He came back to remind us of who we are and what we're all capable of.

But he won't be coming back anymore. It's all up to us, all of us, now.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep. He has kept his promises and earned his sleep.

Je t'aime Papa."

In the years following his father’s death, Trudeau seemed lost and trying to find some direction. In 2002 he moved back to Montreal from Vancouver. He began an engineering degree at Ecole Polytechnique du Montreal then dropped out and entered McGill University to pursue a master’s in environmental geology only to drop out of that program as well.

In 2003 Trudeau met Sophie Gregoire; she had been a childhood friend of deceased brother Michel’s. The couple married in 2005.

This is about the time that Trudeau began a lucrative public speaking career. In 2007 he tried his hand at acting, starring in the CBC miniseries “The Great War”.

Politics, however, came calling and in 2008 at the age of 34, Justin Trudeau ran for and won a seat in the riding of Papineau for the Liberal Party of Canada.

Great expectations and scrutiny were part and parcel of his entrance into the game of politics. Unfortunately, his performance as a fledgling MP was less than stellar, often fumbling and stuttering his speeches in the House of Commons, looking like an ill-prepared boy trying to fill the lofty shoes of his father.

It was also found that he had continued to work as a public speaker, taking fees from charities and schoolboards while an MP. Although not technically unethical, taking money from these types of organizations feels a little vulgar for a man who paints himself as some kind of Robin Hood come virtuous white knight.

This episode does, however, expose at this early stage in his political career, Trudeau was not only aware of possible ethics violations but also acutely aware of the appearance of wrongdoing when he stated,

“We made sure it was all set up because I didn’t want to get into trouble.”

It looks a bit odd that just a couple of years later it would not occur to him that trips to the Aga Khan’s island would not have the appearance of misconduct.

In 2011, Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada crushed Michael Ignatieff’s (1947 -) Liberal party, pushing them into third place after Jack Layton’s (1950-2011) NDP.

Shortly after the loss Ignatieff stated that he would not continue as leader. The wording of this is very important as it states in the Liberal Party Constitution that a leadership race must be held within 5 months of the leader’s resignation. The party didn’t want to go through another leadership race so soon after the last one in 2008, so they made an amendment to their constitution allowing for the race to be finalized in 2013.

Another interesting aspect of this leadership race was the inclusion of “supporters” votes. This allows Canadians who are not paid members or members of another political party to vote for the Liberal leadership after affirming that they “support the Liberal Party of Canada.”

On October 12, 2012, Justin Trudeau began his bid for the leadership of the Liberal Party. He was supported by numerous Liberal politicians from various levels of government, and some interesting prominent individuals including the now infamous Gerald Butts and Craig Kielburger.

At the time of his leadership bid, Trudeau endorsed the takeover of the Canadian oil and gas company Nexen by the Hong Kong based CNOOC Limited. He was opposed to the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines but was in favour of using existing pipelines to transport diluted bitumen to New Brunswick. He supported the Keystone XL Pipeline and export projects, criticizing NDP leader Tom Mulcair (1954 -) for opposing it.

Trudeau was announced leader on April 14th, 2013 in a landslide victory.

As leader of the official opposition, Trudeau began campaigning for the upcoming federal election early. At the Petroleum Club in Calgary he stated,

“Mr. Harper built on a political movement that put the concerns of Western Canadians at the center of our national political life. The West got in and regardless of who forms the next government it will remain in.”

In the same speech he laid out his desire to work with the provinces, acknowledged the regional differences and sounded like a champion for the oil sands on the international stage. He said all the right things, but it soon became clear that he didn’t mean any of them.

Part Three:

Kiss of the Prince of Papillon – Chaos in Canada

“In chaos theory, the’ butterfly effect’ is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a later state. The term’ butterfly effect’ is closely associated with the work of Edward Lorenz.”

Wikipedia.org

Chapter Seven: Tenderly Trudeau 2.0

“I did then what I knew how to do. Now that I know better, I do better.”

~ Maya Angelou

Election night 2015 and the country is electric from the ‘Sunny Ways’ campaign strategy of the handsome, charismatic, 41-year-old Justin Trudeau. The world recession of 2008-09 had brought a dampening of spirits especially under the austere management of former economist Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Harper implemented policies to dampen the effects of the recession and they worked, but they weren’t fun. He was seen by many as mean, secretive, and an intolerant control freak. Justin Trudeau, on the other hand, was a light warm breeze after the lean times prudently and successfully managed by Harper.

Knowing that a son is influenced by the man who raises him, there were, of course, some skeptics. Over time it certainly would seem that Justin has many of the same communistic and dictatorial leanings of his father, even stating that he admires the “basic dictatorship of China”; unfortunately, Justin lacks the elegance, subtlety, and decorum of his father.

With Harper having lost popularity, the mainstream media bias and Justin Trudeau’s good looks and charm offensive – the Liberals won a large majority on October 19th, 2015.

Cracks in the polished veneer soon began to show as the newly crowned prince’s duplicitous cloak was shed and the truth of his character and his true designs slowly revealed themselves.

Within his first mandate as Prime Minister, Trudeau abandoned his campaign trail ideals, turning his back on Premiers and Aboriginal Chiefs, forcing his own Carbon tax, shutting down market access for energy and insisting on a “my way or the highway” centralization of government. His most noble of promises, to get clean drinking water on reserves and reform the electoral system, making it fairer, were shallowly excused away. History was repeating itself but with a promising prince charming at the helm.

It has always puzzled me that Justin Trudeau, as Prime Minister has never moved back into his childhood home. For the majority of his early years, birth to age 10, he lived at 24 Sussex.

He has managed to do extensive repairs and upgrades on the Prime Minister’s summer home, Harrington Lake, but has made no effort in regard to the official residence, preferring to live at a cottage on the Lieutenant Governor’s estate called, Rideau Cottage. There were outrageous demands for upgrades to Sussex Drive, costing more than a brand-new executive palace! Were these genuine demands or a ruse to prevent him from having to face his troubled childhood?

I often wonder if the pain of his turbulent childhood is just too much for him to face. After all the ghosts of the past still lurk there, and the memories might come flooding back to haunt him. Certainly, memories of his father’s time as Prime Minister have come to haunt the West since Justin took office. We should have known better.

Unfortunately, unlike Maya Angelou, Justin Trudeau has proven that he knew better, when he committed ethics violations, pushed his ideological policies, pitted citizen against citizen, and embarrassed the people of Canada through his own vapid and distasteful displays of hypocrisy. Tragically, it seems that Canadians have been slow to realize the full extent of the damage Justin Trudeau has been responsible for over the course of his tenure.

The 42nd parliament sat briefly in December and resumed the following January. Barely into his first year as Prime Minister, Trudeau’s public behaviour changed. No longer the humble, earnest charmer, his arrogant, entitled attitude became known. In May of 2016 he elbowed a fellow member of parliament and pulled another by the arm due to his impatience with a vote in the House of Commons. This was also when he put the hammer down on those accused of sexual misconduct while telling the Canadian public that his own groping incident was simply “remembered differently”.

Trudeau has a way of making his mistakes everyone else’s fault. He has a way of deflecting his bad behaviour by blaming our ‘corrupt society’ for his ‘innocent’ lapse in good judgement.

We have come to learn that the Christmas after Trudeau won Liberal leadership, his family was treated to a trip to the Aga Khan’s island in 2014, and this Christmas “gift” was repeated after his win as Prime Minister in 2016. Given that Trudeau knew, as a minister that the appearance of ethic violations for his speaking gigs may cause problems, it really is hard to fathom how a trip to the island of a man actively soliciting the government would not….

These trips, in 2017 would earn Trudeau his first of several ethics’ violations – the first Prime Minister in Canadian history to be charged in this way.

Trudeau’s excuses weren’t holding water but with a fawning media and an impotent official opposition after Stephen Harper left politics, the oily Prime Minister escaped with a slap on the wrist but without the decency to be embarrassed enough to change his ways.

Meanwhile, in Alberta, an orange wave flooded a province tired of the arrogance and splitting of the conservative party. In May of 2015, Rachel Notley and the NDP were sworn in as the governing party. Immediately, things began to worsen for Alberta.

Trudeau announced that provinces unwilling to impose their own carbon tax on citizens would have a federal one enforced, this was in stark contrast to his speech at the Petroleum Club before his election and ignored the fact that Alberta had already implemented Canada’s first carbon tax, but on heavy emitters instead of citizens. It didn’t matter to Trudeau; he wanted every citizen in Canada to feel the pain of this tax on everything.

Notley, attempting to work within the federal framework to ensure pipeline approvals, unilaterally enacted Alberta’s own carbon tax. Her prostration of Alberta did not, in fact get one pipeline approval, instead it was a steady and growing fight with Ottawa that she seemed all too eager to lose.

Trudeau says that he will “phase out” the Oil Sands to fulfill his green vision for Canada. He has done his best, mostly through stall tactics which have ultimately led to the cancellation of many beneficial projects. He has also put through inequitable legislation, which does not apply to foreign imports and ignores toxic dumping in other provinces. Many of these approaches have not only hurt the West, but they have also had direct impacts on the prosperity of the Maritimes as well. For example, the Northern Gateway Pipeline would not only benefit Western oil producers, but also New Brunswick oil refiners, an abundance of jobs that could be created and the sustainable supply of oil within Canada – the promise of energy self-sufficiency for the country lost because of ideological illogical ideas.

It appears that Trudeau’s environmental fervor comes in the form of do as I say, not as I do. His high flying, jet-setting lifestyle with countless vanity trips around the world would make Al Gore and David Suzuki blush. It all amounts to empty virtue signaling at the expense of every citizen of Canada, forced to live by rules he refuses to live by himself and funded from our taxes, not his trust fund. I guess it is a nice job if you can get it.

Actions speak louder than words and Justin Trudeau’s actions are screaming hypocrisy and classism. I wonder where the Oscar Wilde “Portrait of Justin Trudeau” is hidden? I’m betting it’s a pretty hideous sketch.

Phasing out the Alberta Oil Sands seems to be only part of Trudeau’s plan for Alberta. His Freudian slip at the 150th birthday celebrations, omitting Alberta from his list of provinces and territories across the country may be the real harbinger for his greater scheme.

Scandal after scandal plagued the Trudeau Liberals leading up to the 2019 election, including yet another ethics investigation into the SNC-Lavalin debacle. Rumours of Trudeau’s mistreatment of female MPs circulated as Jody Wilson Raybould was put through the Liberal Media microscope, searching for character flaws that did not exist. Jane Philpot, who stood behind Raybould was quickly removed from the party and yet another female MP, Celina Caesar-Chavannes left due to the way she was treated. The self-declared feminist PM who insisted on a gender based rather than merit-based cabinet, couldn’t hide his misogynistic ways any longer.

International trips became national embarrassments as Trudeau; invited convicted terrorist Jaspal Atwal to India, dressed in Bollywood garb and danced in an epic display of insensitivity and inappropriate cultural appropriation; complained and gossiped on a hot mic to other world leaders; and had more interest in showing off his socks than getting down to business, confusing names and flags of dignitaries and so much more. Trudeau was looking more and more like a pretender with every public excursion.

Justin told a Military Veteran in an Edmonton Townhall that Vetrans are asking too much in regard to their wellbeing after fighting to defend our country, while simultaneously giving vast amounts of money to any and every foreign fancy that comes to his attention. This was crystalized when an American late night talk show host tweeted out a charity fundraiser and Trudeau, without permission from parliament, committed Canadian taxpayers to millions of dollars in a donation.

All-in-all, Justin Trudeau’s first term in office was rocked by controversy after controversy, bad behaviour followed by worse behaviour and yet the mainstream media said nothing. Teflon Trudeau was the new moniker for a man who seemed to get away with everything. Going into the next election cycle it was hoped that Trudeau would finally reap the fruit of his arrogant disregard for Canadians. The new leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, Andrew Scheer (1979) looked to be a shoo-in, yet divisions within the party led to an offshoot new party and the milquetoast delivery of less than stellar policy options turned an empty netter into a distant dream.

Chapter Eight: Toxic Trudeau 2.0

“Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing.”

~ Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

Trudeau’s tasteless behaviour continued when he dropped the writ for the 2019 election on the 18th anniversary of 9/11. His insensitivity infuriated many and continued when multiple images of him in ‘black and brown face’ began to appear in the foreign media and then at home. Once again Justin blamed the greater society for his own lack of decorum and doesn’t know how many times, he has donned the make-up.

If that was not enough scandal and controversy, Trudeau added insult to injury by enlisting two planes for campaign purposes, once again bringing into question his true ideas on the environment. Then he not only refused to participate in any more than two debates – one French and one English but attempted to block independent journalists from covering any of his political stumping events. Regardless of how anyone feels about independent journalism, it is a freedom we enjoy in Canada and any ostracizing of it is a slippery slope we do not want to go down.

There were other instances in regard to censorship. A collection of ‘Trudeau’s Crimes’ were posted online by a popular vlogger named Adam Daniel Mezei in late 2018. Frustrated by what he saw his government doing, he collected his audience’s complaints about the Liberal governments bad behaviour. When Mr. Mezei started posting these ‘crimes’ on twitter his account was permanently suspended.

This begs the question, why would a social media giant suspend the account of someone criticizing the Prime Minister? Does he not have the right to voice his opinions? Has the Liberal government already instituted censorship on the citizens of Canada?

Mark Paralovos, another well known vlogger, also had his account suspended for several days despite his candidacy for the People’s Party of Canada. His suspension directly violates election standards and yet he had to fight to get his account unlocked. This cost precious time in the run up to election day.

The Liberal party have been talking about and attempting to implement; controlled speech in the form of gender neutralization, censored speech in the form of blasphemy and hate speech laws, and internet censorship since before they got into power. It was a back of the table issue, and yet it has been implemented in one form or fashion since the beginning.

Freedom of Expression is one of our Charter Rights and one of the most fundamental of human rights. If we cannot speak, we cannot think and if we cannot think, we cannot grow and evolve as humans. This brings me back to the environmental ‘crisis’ – how do we fix a thing if it cannot be discussed fulsomely? No science is never ‘settled’ and yet we are forced to agree with this notion because to question any aspect of it is tantamount to blasphemy. This is dangerous.

As the world was busy hyperventilating over foreign interference in elections, Canada invited an influential, foreign, environmental activist to speak in Edmonton, supporting the platform policies of several of the parties.

Greta Thunberg is a girl from Sweden who has been one of the staunchest and most exploited voices of the environmental frenzy that has grown over the past few years.

Born January 3, 2003 in Stockholm, Sweden, she says that she first heard of climate change when she was 8 years old. At that time, she spiraled into a depression which led to a significant weight loss and eventual diagnosis of Asperger Syndrome, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and Selective Mutism.

In August of 2018, her activism began when she skipped school to protest outside the Swedish Parliament in an attempt to get the government to take more significant action on climate change.

During a time of acute sensitivity over foreign interference, primarily Russian, Greta came to Edmonton, Alberta as a special/celebrity guest for an environmental rally.

She encouraged other children to skip school to join her on her march and the kids were encouraged to do so by their teachers as well. The rally was hosted by an Aboriginal group, but it was clear that the people who attended came only to see Greta.

Attendees at the rally included members of the “United We Roll” campaign. An Alberta based movement that has been labelled “white supremacist”, “racist”, “xenophobic”, etc.… while stating their intent is to call attention to the devastating effects the Liberal policies have had on their industry. They are Western Canadians trying desperately to be heard above the noise of false accusations, a hate filled and ill-informed narrative that is unwilling to so much as listen.

I attended the rally and witnessed three things that affected me. The first was a man who became hysterical because there where two other men standing at the back of the rally watching quietly. They happened to be wearing suits and ties so the hysterical man came to the police, whom I was standing right beside and implored them to arrest these men for attending the rally. His reasoning was that they must be oil and gas executives and therefore had no right to be there. No right to peaceful assembly? It doesn’t matter who these men were, don’t they have the same right as everyone else? The fact is that we were in front of the Alberta Legislature and those men could have been bureaucrats, local businessmen, teachers, anyone – wearing a suit at a rally does not make you a criminal.

The second thing I witnessed was a verbal confrontation between two men. One was a member of the United We Roll group, and one was an environmentalist. It began with the angry environmentalist confronting the UWR member who asked to discuss the issues calmly. At first the environmentalist agreed but when he could not argue the facts with the UWR man, he launched back into an angry tirade.

And finally, after Greta made her speech and the talented Chubby Cree began to perform, most of the environmentalists spilled out of the grounds. This was particularly sad because it felt like a celebrity love in, not an actual rally for the environment, with support and attention for all of the speakers and performers. It seemed that all of these teachers, their students, and the various others who attended came only to see a young Swedish girl, a foreign influencer during a Canadian election where environment was a major part of the platforms.

Let us be clear, I do not think anyone is saying that we don’t have environmental issues that need to be addressed, we only have differing opinions on how they should be tackled. It makes a lot more sense to talk about these issues with open minds so that we can find workable solutions in new and innovative ways instead of merely screaming accusations that solve nothing

The primary argument in this instance, however, is not about the environment per se. The point is that Greta Thunburg, was given a platform to condemn western industry which was a major platform policy of four of the main parties running in the 2019 election. How is this not considered foreign interference in a federal election? Shouldn’t she have been made to wait until after the election?

In regard to the “Climate Crisis”, there is much to discuss. The climate crisis was declared by Catherine McKenna in early 2019 as she echoed nearly every country in the world. Headlines in many countries read “<insert your country here> is warming faster than all other countries in the world!” The absurdity is that this headline can be read, simultaneously in almost every country in every part of this planet and yet politicians behave as if they are stating a shocking and personal reality. However, it is clearly a fabrication when you can merely change the country to suit your own policy making agenda.

The shocking truth is that legitimate climate scientists have stated that the models being used are wrong and the planet is actually on a slightly cooling trend. These sensational declarations are being put forth to scare people into believing a myth based on manipulation of some truthful scientific findings. Is the climate changing on our planet? Yes! Climate is always changing. Is any of the change manmade? Probably not. Can we do anything about it? Not likely. Is there a difference between climate and environment? Yes! There are a lot of things that we can do to clean up our environment but little we can do about actual climate changes.

We are missing the target when we refuse to talk about solutions to pollution and unnecessary waste – a problem Alberta Oil Sands and Albertans generally care deeply about and have been innovating for decades to address and instead, focus on climate which is most likely beyond our control.

We have to remember that these ‘climate crisis’ have been around for generations; The coming new ice age, was replaced by acid rain, which was replaced by global warming, then climate change and now a climate crisis and a second ‘over-population’ cry. Although debunked, many of these sensational claims rise and fall like the tides. This time it is different as we watch policies being enacted based on cult like belief in overblown claims.

These predictions of doom echo doomsday cults in two ways:

1) They make people so fearful that they will do anything the cult leaders ask, and

2) Their predictions of doom never come to pass and yet the damage they do can last indefinitely.

This crisis also begs the question that if this was really an issue and travelling by vehicles powered by fossil fuels was a major contributing factor, then why do these dignitaries fly to various countries with their entire entourage to discuss the matter when they could just do a remote meeting? Why are they extracting vast amounts of money through the use of carbon taxes and other programs to fleece the individual while not investing that same money into actual solutions? Why are large businesses allowed to build products with designed obsolescence? And why have the reduce, reuse, and recycle programs become so expensive and laborious? These are just a few questions that we all should be asking of our policy makers.

My father always taught me that I should never believe what a person says if their actions don’t align – trust what they do, not what they say. The actions of these so-called environmentalists are screaming hypocrisy, but is anyone really listening?

Another greatly disturbing factor in all of this is that an entire generation of kids is being encouraged to skip school, made to feel guilt and shame, and are stripped of hope for the future. They are persuaded to live hedonistic lifestyles with the promise that the planet is dying therefore, they won’t live much longer, and the consequences of bad choices won’t matter.

This nihilistic attitude and shaming aren’t coming from the local bully. It’s been given legitimacy because it’s being preached by authorities – parents, teachers, politicians and influential figures such as the celebrities they follow including Greta Thunberg. What has been created is crippling hopelessness and a lack of vision, not just for the planet, but also for their personal lives.

And yet another concerning factor is the statement that “the science is settled” used like some kind of meditative mantra. Anyone who dares to question, contradict, or refuses to adopt it are treated like heretics. When legitimate scientists, such as Green Peace founder, Patrick Moore, are silenced, de-platformed and shunned, it delegitimizes the entire project, or at least it should.

Unfortunately, here in Canada, our governments are not interested in facts and have show no remorse for their ‘mistakes’. It seems that they have all signed onto a program of nihilism for all, whether the people agree to it or not.

To watch Greta Thunberg’s address to the European Union shows that this girl is as much a victim of this cult as anyone. She is being used to push this agenda and the child is terrified by a future that has been created out of myth.

Environmentalists like to ignore the fact that oil and gas are not going anywhere anytime soon. They don’t realise how many products are petroleum-based. They also do not consider the environmental impacts of shipping fossil fuels across the oceans when it is readily available in our own country. There is no consideration of how innovation and a mixed petroleum and green energy program could actually be of maximum benefit not just for Canada but for the entire world. Alberta Oil and Gas has been on the bleeding edge of discovery with ethical, clean practises being instituted every step of the way. If anyone truly cares about the environment, they should be a raving fan of the Alberta Oil Sands encouraging further development. Instead, you have a situation where foreign interests, who financially benefit from shutting down Canada’s abundant and highly responsible resource industries, have convinced the masses that this attack is all about the environment – which it is demonstrably not.

The places where the eastern provinces currently get some of their oil are well known for human rights violations and are not held to the same environmental impact standards, we hold ourselves to in Canada. Again, if you want clean, ethical oil with the added benefit of energy independence within Canada – look no further than your own backyard, we have that capacity.

Further, the Paris Agreement seems to be more about individual countries having bragging rights over their own lowering of emissions instead of global emission reduction. It is almost as if some kind of large scale, real-time board game is being played by world leaders. They do not care about the global impact, just so long as they can get their numbers lower than the next guy – they win even though it costs their people and their economy so much more. This is the corruption that we face globally, and it showcases the hypocrisy of the climate crisis ‘game’.

This ruse that’s being played out against Alberta actually hurts the entire country, not just the west. Many Reserves are pro-pipeline but ignored by pundits who buy into the feeding frenzy. Activists with foreign funds come into our country and divide us through lies, suspicion, hate and sometimes violence. Not only are they allowed to engage in these activities, but they are also encouraged through grants from our own federal government.

Vivian Krause’s documentary “Over A Barrel” shows just how devastating this process is to the Aboriginal people, their communities and to the rest of the country. Recently, a UN committee declared that several energy projects in Canada must be stopped immediately because they are detrimental to Aboriginals. They claimed that they did not know that many of these same groups fully support and want these projects completed for the benefit of their communities. All this and yet pundits and politicians alike will not recognize these facts.

Further, I must point out that wealth creates independence and a position of power for the Aboriginal people. When these communities take the initiative to alleviate poverty, foster self-sufficiency, and give their youth hope for the future, their efforts are often thwarted by a federal and now international governing body that would rather maintain a paternalistic control over them. This is a mockery of reconciliation and equality within Canada.

The environmental crisis is debunked by the actions of environmentalists themselves. The idea of Westerners being hillbillies with no brains is discredited by the amount of business and technology developed here. The nonsense about the West being selfish whiners is destroyed by the fact that transfer payments have been paid without significant protest for decades; and in Quebec’s darkest hour, a time when Quebec politicians were denigrating Albertans, it was an Alberta company, with Alberta employees and resources that sent the propane to save them. Many in the West weren’t happy about it, but we did the right thing because we are Canadian and that’s what Canadians do.

Westerners are not the selfish, hateful or backwards individuals that we are so often portrayed as. We deeply care about the environment because our lives are dependant on the great gifts this land has given us, including the natural resources that warm us, drive us, and furnish us with so many, often life-saving benefits.

A Nisku businessman said it best when he told us that all he really wants is for Ottawa to take the cuffs off so that we in the west can do what we do here. He said he would happily send them the money they want if they would just let us work.

When Ottawa offers free money to help us through the tough times it’s an insult. It’s not about the money, it’s about dignity and self-respect. People in the west want to earn their living, not take handouts. They want to contribute to society, build a prosperous future for everyone, and live with purpose.

They explained that when a fellow long-time businessman in Nisku hung himself in his shop bay, it was tragic, but these men understood the despair he faced. He had lived through the tough times of the 1980s and so distraught by the idea of facing it all again, he climbed up into the rafters of his shop, slung his noose and managed to kill himself in a business he had fought for. He just couldn’t face it all again.

It seems like the West has been on the defense for a very long time. We have had to fight for our place in this country, not because we haven’t earned it, contributed to the building of Canada, but perhaps because we have a different idea of what our place is within the country. The West is filled with makers. People who believe in contribution, building, independence, personal and professional responsibility, but most of all they believe that they are equal to every other part of Canada. Unfortunately, this does not appear to be the case.

Chapter Nine: The Morning After the Night Before

“When one is in love, one always begins by deceiving one's self, and one always ends by deceiving others. That is what the world calls a romance.”

~ Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

Moments after the election results started coming in that October evening, my phone began to ping and vibrate with messages. I was invited to join the #votewexit Facebook page by numerous contacts. When I looked at the subscribers of the group there were a few thousand, including most of my friends and family members from every part of Canada. By the morning there would be hundreds of thousands of subscribers actively commenting and sharing their hurt and outrage.

Seeing the votes come in and the Liberals sewing things up in so little time was gut wrenching. It seemed that the scandals, corruption, and embarrassing performance of the Trudeau Liberals meant nothing to the Eastern provinces. Watching the map go red and then suddenly turn blue part way through Manitoba was the nail in the coffin. All of Saskatchewan and all but one seat in Alberta went blue.

The seat in Edmonton Strathcona went to Linda Duncan’s replacement, Heather McPherson, in the long standing NDP riding. This area is the arts and university district in Edmonton. It has always had a very hippy, artsy, party feel to it and is populated by intellectuals, students and artists. It was never a surprise for anyone who knows the area that it would remain orange.

The Alberta independence sentiment went from a slow burning ember to a hot blue flame overnight. It wasn’t just a rumbling, now it was a shout from the roof tops. The people were mad, enraged that their concerns would be ignored once more, especially from their brothers in arms, the Newfoundlanders who were welcomed to Alberta with open arms when the fisheries collapsed. It felt like a betrayal.

The fallout in the coming weeks; the angry exchanges between Premiers, the marginalizing of the conditions in the West, immediate pulling of investment as a direct reaction to the outcome, countless more layoffs and businesses fleeing a Canada that was as much suicidal as it was delusional. These were a series of blows that could no longer be tolerated.

Justin Trudeau’s empty words about fighting for the approximately 8000 Canadian jobs in reference to the SNC Lavalin scandal, apparently does not apply to the tens of thousands of jobs, billions in revenue of the Western provinces.

Alberta Premier, Jason Kenney, and Saskatchewan Premier, Scott Moe, aware of these throws of angry passion wrote strongly worded letters to Justin Trudeau asking for action before unity was further destroyed. In them they outlined the concerns of the people, action steps that were necessary to subdue the anger and pleaded for fairness for those in the West of this great country. In return, they were accused of fomenting this resentment and the cries of the people were ignored.

In the aftermath, as the West pleaded its case, showing how much has been contributed and how fairness moving forward is essential to unity, Yves-Francois Blanchett, Leader of the Bloc Quebecois said he liked his cake and would do with it what he thinks. This statement was made in regard to Quebec receiving massive amounts of money, much of it from Alberta, while decrying how it is created – the Oil and Gas industry. For a man who is the leader of a party who claims to want separation from Canada, he certainly has an attitude of entitlement to Alberta money.

Justin Trudeau ‘s response to all of this has been virtual silence. He told the press that he got the message and was listening, but only a few days later stated that there is no unity crisis in Canada. This begs the question, what message did he receive because it certainly is not the one that the West has been sending.

Trudeau, believing there is no crisis has taken no real action to address the problem he is willfully blind to. He has proven that tens of thousands of Western jobs, are not as valuable as less than ten thousand in one company, SNC Lavalin, in Quebec.

Further, he has made little movement on the dispute with China over canola, pork and beef and done little to get our citizens, Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, being held captive, back home safely. His carbon taxes harm the West disproportionally, not only effecting Oil and Gas but also Agriculture and Forestry. He ignores not just the plight of the West but deepens the divide by continuing to siphon every last penny he can get out of the harassed citizens while doing nothing to protect them.

For a party that is meant to help the most vulnerable in society, this government has done everything in its power to shift what little the people have, to those that have plenty, their wealthy friends and their pet international projects. They’ve gotten control of the national purse and they seem to think it is theirs to do with as they wish.

Trudeau has instituted a kind of tokenism, empty gestures for acknowledging the concerns of the West that are more of an insult to injury. Chrystia Freeland, Seamus O’Regan and Jim Carr have been tagged in dealing with Western Alienation. The problem is, while two new files were created to deal with other issues; Middle class and Diversity, there is no new file for relations with the West and the ministers put in charge are either very busy, completely incompetent or otherwise distracted.

Chrystia Freeland, was appointed as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Internal Affairs. She was charged with handling the disputes in the West. Her qualification for this responsibility is simply that she grew up in Northern Alberta. However, it ignores the fact that she moved away after high school and has never lived here since. Freeland says she will be listening hard, but it seems to Westerners, she is hardly listening? She was still working on the new NAFTA negotiations and the tenuous relationship with the United States under Donald Trump. How much attention will she have when dealing with all these other responsibilities?

Seamus O’Regan, the new minister for Natural Resources, has managed to bungle every file he has been given including Aboriginal Services and Veteran’s Affairs. Insulting and minimizing those most effected by the files. The reason he was given the Natural Resource file seems to be that he is from Newfoundland which also has Oil?

O’Regan’s incompetence and level of incoherence was exemplified when he compared his leaving journalism to the difficulties faced by battle worn soldiers leaving military life. His recent celebration of awarding a Chinese company oil exploration rights off the coast of Newfoundland while doing nothing for the oil and gas industry in the West, speaks to the hypocrisy of the Liberal government and their disingenuous environmental concerns.

Finally, Jim Carr, a man currently battling cancer has been appointed special minister to the prairies. I wonder just how effective or engaged Mr. Carr can be when facing such a pernicious disease. I wish him well, but again it seems that Trudeau has no real interest in fixing the issues. There is a lot of lip service, but little else.

It also must be noted that Jim Carr is a special advisor, there is no file to address Western alienation. Considering that two new files were created, one for diversity and one for the middle class, and given the outcry in the West, why not create a file specifically to address these urgent issues? I think Trudeau made it clear in an interview not long after the election that he doesn’t see Western alienation as a threat to national unity. Does that mean that a strong movement of a large section of the country is not part of the nation as Trudeau sees it? It certainly seems that way. His words on election night are as hollow as his promises on electoral reform, clean drinking water on reserves, and transparency in government – They apparently weren’t meant to be taken seriously.

It was made clear that fateful October evening, the West is left with a decision to make. The current relationship with the rest of Canada cannot go on as it currently is. As much as Westerners may love Canada, it seems that the love is not reciprocated. Therefore, does the West continue to beat its head against a hard brick wall with no interest or acknowledgement of her plight; or does she pack her bags and go out on her own, hoping for a better life than the one she is offered by a cold and heartless mate?

Part Four:

Sealed with a Kiss – Irreconcilable Differences?

“The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. The opposite of art I not ugliness, it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it's indifference.”

Elie Wiesel 1928–2016

Chapter Ten: The Sober Realisation

"You can love them, forgive them, want good things for them ... but still move on without them."

~ Mandy Hale

Canada is considered a beautiful, peaceful place full of really nice people. This often chafes at Canadians, equating nice with boring yet our penchant for apologizing regardless of fault is both mocked and a point of absurd pride. We take it for granted that we don’t suffer much intrigue or strife in this blessed land. Our politics are often seen as dull and uninteresting as we have historically gone about our business of managing one of the largest yet least populated countries in the world.

“If some countries have too much history, we have too much geography,”

Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King - 1936.

There is plenty of space here, we have a diverse economy and an openness that allows for a beneficial blending of our multiethnic population. The winning sentence of a 1972 contest, “As Canadian as possible under the circumstances.” is a perfect example of our unique, humble acknowledgement of the diversity we fully enjoy. Being Canadian is not as simple as it may seem on the surface. The regional differences are extreme and yet there is a ‘personality’ that is easier to appreciate only when we look from the outside in, as Preston Manning once wrote. Our identity, although complex, is based on simple values that we all share. The idea of hard work, surviving harsh elements and rugged terrain, open and welcoming communities, humility and grace under pressure make Canada a wonderful place to live. The concept of Canada, a loosely sewn together tapestry, united by choice and that underlying character of humble kindness is the essence of this great nation and its people. Sure, there are problems, but our problems have generally been small in comparison to other countries and we have tried, with varying success, to be fair in how we handle those problems.

Written into the DNA of our constitution from the beginning is the keen interest in protecting our unique diversity. We enjoy great blessings in the form of resources, fertile land and an innovative population willing to try just about anything if we think it might work to improve not only our own country, but the world in general. This is the home of the electric range, the Avro Arrow, insulin, milk pasteurization, and so many other discoveries and inventions. We tend to downplay this rich history, modest in our own achievements.

Canada and her people are amazing, unfortunately, there have been powerful entities in this country that have been set on fueling division. They are fearful of the lose grip they have on power slipping from their grasp. It began, as shown from the inception of our fair country and it continues to this day. Politicians, media, and various members of the higher classes pitting one region against another. Instead of uniting us under a common vision, we are manipulated into distrust and envy, as they sow seeds of discord at every opportunity. This has to stop, or we will lose this remarkable country we call home.

Chapter Eleven: Breakup – The Story of WEXIT

“I’m not a separatist because I hate Canada. I’m a separatist because I love Canada so much, I want to save some small part of her.”

~ Kelly Elizabeth

Three names are synonymous with WEXIT: Eric Wall, Jenny Walker and the face of the movement, Peter Downing. Each has played a significant part in growing the movement, but momentum was achieved after the 2019 Federal Election. The Facebook page #votewexit hit a peak of subscribers by December 2019 at approximately 270,000. The engagement on the page has been fierce, both from supporters and detractors with posts, comments and likes coming in fast and furious. Peter Downing is continually active on the page, posting news, updates and the occasional sarcastic meme.

Peter Downing is a polarizing figure, maybe too polarizing. Some of his posts on Social Media have been questionable and his personal history does not play well with the deep suspicions of the west. I refer to his Ontario upbringing and his past with the RCMP. There is no question that Downing was instrumental in calling attention to the issues. Conceivably all trailblazers lack a certain polish that rubs some the wrong way, naturally brash and somewhat aggressive in moving ideas forward. Downing may be more John the Baptist, preparing the way – perhaps it is time for the master to appear?

Throughout 2020 there have been many changes and machinations in the separation movement. Out of what was strictly a movement, both federal and provincial parties have been born. Leadership has changed and growing pains felt by many.

Downing stepped down from the leadership position after overseeing the registration of the federal party now known as ‘Maverick’ and led by Jay Hill. Peter is still active in the movement but is no longer the front man.

Eric Wall with interim leader, Wade Sira, have been extraordinarily successful in Saskatchewan, leading the provincial ‘Buffalo Party’ to a substantial showing in the provincial election. Despite only running in 17 ridings, the ‘Buffalo Party’ captured the third-largest share of the votes in the October 2020 provincial election.

In Alberta, the ‘Wildrose Independence Party of Alberta’ or ‘WIPA’ was created out of two other independence parties and is currently led by interim leader Paul Hinman. Jenny Walker is still involved in the movement but has since stepped down from many of the boards she championed.

British Columbia. and Manitoba parties have floundered as the pandemic hit and attentions shifted in response.

WEXIT, however is not just these political parties and goes beyond the moniker. WEXIT encompasses the continual battle between the West and Ottawa. Before there was the convenient hashtag and in conjunction with it, there have been attempts at reforms and justice for the West. In 2000 there was the ‘Firewall Letter”, which was an expression of frustration that fuelled the Reform Party. Premier Scott Moe sent his protest letter to Ottawa and created a file on autonomy. Alberta premier Jason Kenney sent his protest letter and created a “Fair Deal” panel to research what Albertans really wanted from Confederacy, although he refuses to seriously look at separation despite significant support. Michelle Rempel Garner headed up a document called the “Buffalo Declaration”, and Peter Downing created the “Inferno Letter”. Excerpts from each of these documents and protestations are below:

Inferno Letter (IL) vs. Firewall Letter (FW) vs. Fair Deal (FD) vs Buffalo Declaration (BD)

FW = Withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan to create an Alberta Pension Plan offering the same benefits at lower cost while giving Alberta control over the investment fund. Pensions are a provincial responsibility under section 94A of the Constitution Act. 1867; and the legislation setting up the Canada Pension Plan permits a province to run its own plan, as Quebec has done from the beginning. If Quebec can do it, why not Alberta?

IL = Safeguard each individual Albertan by reclaiming all Canadian Pension Plan (CPP) contributions from Ottawa, and commission a portable and properly funded Alberta Pension Plan to protect and enhance the retirement savings of all Albertans.

FD = Creating an Alberta Pension Plan by withdrawing from the Canada Pension Plan.

FW = Collect our own revenue from personal income tax, as we already do for corporate income tax. Now that your government has made the historic innovation of the single-rate personal income tax, there is no reason to have Ottawa collect our revenue. Any incremental cost of collecting our own personal income tax would be far outweighed by the policy flexibility that Alberta would gain, as Quebec’s experience has shown.

IL = Terminate Ottawa’s encroachment on exclusive provincial jurisdiction by prohibiting federal payroll deductions. (Direct taxation is the jurisdiction of the Albertan Government.)

Withdraw from the federal Employment Insurance (EI) program and create an Albertan equivalent.

Require itemized invoices for all federal services rendered. No monies are to be paid to Ottawa unless proof of service is validated.

FD = Establishing a provincial revenue agency to collect provincial taxes directly by ending the Canada-Alberta Tax Collection Agreement, while joining Quebec in seeking an agreement to collect federal taxes within the province.

FW = Start preparing now to let the contract with the RCMP run out in 2012 and create an Alberta Provincial Police Force. Alberta is a major province. Like the other major provinces of Ontario and Quebec, we should have our own provincial police force. We have no doubt that Alberta can run a more efficient and effective police force than Ottawa can – one that will not be misused as a laboratory for experiments in social engineering.

IL = Immediately end Alberta’s policing contract with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Implement a transition period in which all provincial policing duties are to be transferred to the Alberta Sheriff’s Department. Commission an Alberta Bureau of National Investigation for federal investigations in Alberta that are currently assigned to the RCMP.

Establishing a provincial police force by ending the Alberta Police Service Agreement with the Government of Canada

FW = Resume provincial responsibility for health-care policy. If Ottawa objects to provincial policy, fight in the courts. If we lose, we can afford the financial penalties that Ottawa may try to impose under the Canada Health Act. Albertans deserve better than the long waiting periods and technological backwardness that are rapidly coming to characterize Canadian medicine. Alberta should also argue that each province should raise its own revenue for health care – i.e., replace Canada Health and Social Transfer cash with tax points as Quebec has argued for many years. Poorer provinces would continue to rely on Equalization to ensure they have adequate revenues.

IL = N/A

FD = Opting out of federal cost share programs with full compensation, such as the federal government’s proposed pharmacare program.

Seeking an exchange of tax points for federal cash transfers under the Canada Health and Social Transfers.

FW = Use section 88 of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Quebec Secession Reference to force Senate reform back onto the national agenda. Our reading of that decision is that the federal government and other provinces must seriously consider a proposal for constitutional reform endorsed by “a clear majority on a clear question” in a provincial referendum. You acted decisively once before to hold a senatorial election. Now is the time to drive the issue further.

IL = N/A

IL = Withdraw from Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) as the financial guarantor of home mortgages in Alberta. This responsibility must be transferred to the Alberta Treasury Branch (ATB).

IW = Assert full control over firearms regulation, as policing is a provincial matter.

FD = Using the existing provincial power to appoint the Chief Firearms Office for Alberta.

IL = Assert full provincial control over immigration, as Quebec currently does.

FD = Emulating Quebec’s practice of playing a larger role in international relations, in part by seeking Alberta representation in treaty negotiations that effect Alberta’s interests.

FD = Emulating Quebec’s legal requirement that public bodies, including municipalities and school boards, obtain the approval of the provincial government before they can enter into agreements with the federal government.

FD = Establishing a formalized provincial constitution.

BD = Recognition of the West as a distinct society.

As you can plainly see, these complaints and frustrations have little to nothing to do with the economy – it’s about fairness and a lack of control in the current system of the people’s way of life. If the culture of the West is so different than that of the East and these demands so unreasonable, then perhaps the only way forward is to divide up this land and suffer the consequences? If our mutual culture, our values are so different, then why are we holding onto each other with such tenacity? Can we work out our differences and should be try?

Chapter Twelve: Breaking Up is Hard to Do

“Accept what is, let go of what was, and have faith in what will be”

~ Sonia Ricotti

The first thing we must acknowledge and understand is that succession is not an easy, straight forward path. We can see from the Quebec Referendum and the Clarity Act that resulted, there are no guarantees.

Second, the WEXIT movement, despite great accomplishments, is currently lacking any cohesive leadership.

Third, provincial autonomy, pulling back every power the provinces have from the federal government must be achieved so as to set us up for success, regardless of separation.

Fourth, there must be a plan in place for independence – how do we proceed immediately after a successful referendum?

Fifth, if complete independence is achieved, we must be ready to become an independent country.

Sixth, we ought to consider the international implications and how an independent West will fit into the world at large.

And seventh, if the referendum is not successful, how do we proceed?

Succession is not as simple as having a referendum. There is a path that makes it all possible, but only possible not guaranteed. Convincing the citizenry that independence is the only option left will be a hard task in and of itself. The people can be angry, but they will ultimately make the decision to leave based on logic and reason, mixed with the fears of the unknown. You have to convince both the head and the heart that it is the right thing to do.

To begin the task of persuading the public, a cost benefit analysis should be done – what do we win by leaving? What do we lose? What do we maintain by staying? What do we lose if nothing changes? The numbers must be crunched to prove viability or you are dealing with nothing more than fantasy. There are many objections to leaving Canada. Each objection must be carefully considered, and an honest response determined. We can learn many things from the Quebec referendum because many of the same questions and concerns were raised at that time. If independence is wanted, you must do the math with real numbers not make believe.

We also learn from the Quebec example that the question must be very precisely worded. Forming a perfect question whose validity cannot be doubted later is essential for getting it passed in parliament. Without a truly clear, precise question, you are dead in the water. You also cannot mix objectives. A failing of the first Quebec referendum was that it mixed trade and other negotiations with leaving Canada. Again, the question must be clear and precise so that it cannot be rejected or questioned by parliament before or after the referendum is actually held. Also, to be considered in all of this is the campaign used to convince the people that they should vote to leave. It must be of the highest degree of integrity. Anything less than full disclosure and it will cause problems later. The standards of communication must be impeccable in every instance.

Leadership in the WEXIT parties have got to check their egos and create a vision for the future that is about the people of the West. WEXIT is bigger than any one person. It is about justice, fairness, and control of our own lives. We need to organize and mobilize if we are to achieve those end results. It does not matter what the name of the leader is or what that leader would like to happen – the people come first. If that is not the main objective of the leader – to listen to the people, then we gain nothing by leaving Canada. The whole point of WEXIT is for the people to have a voice and control of their own lives. Without that fundamental and guiding principle, WEXIT is meaningless.

Autonomy is the next key, regardless of whether we wish to leave Canada or not. We need to run our own affairs in every way we possibly can before we begin to consider going it alone. This includes a provincial police force, total control over tax collection and the services we provide to citizens, an Alberta pension, etc.… Anything and everything that is within provincial purview must be taken back from the federal government as soon as possible. There are several reasons for this; if we leave, we must have these services set up in advance so that it is a clean transition; it leverages what powers we have within the federation; it gives us more control over our lives and the way we administer services; it removes power from a federal government that does not understand the needs of the West; and it would put Albertans back to work as we move out of the economic downturns created by low oil prices, harmful policies from Ottawa, and the pandemic. Autonomy has little if any downside and is a natural step in the right direction for every province in Canada. The greatest harm to any democracy is the centralization of powers. When the voices of the people are easily ignored by a distant government that cannot be held accountable for its actions, tyranny is fostered.

The framework for what happens immediately after a successful referendum must be put in place. Initially there is the ending of the relationship between the West and Canada. There are legal documents and procedures that must be followed, and all of this must be mapped in preparation.

There are many aspects that must be considered and prepared in regard to being an independent country including defense, currency and banking, trade and travel, citizenship, etc.… We could not and should not leave these considerations until the last minute. Preparation must be done well ahead of time. A constitution for the newly formed country with laws and protections must be ready to set in place immediately upon succession. People must be able to exchange currencies and banking must be set up to help people make those transitions. Food supplies, medications, legal identification…all of these tedious considerations must be set at the ready and the people must be given the time to switch to new ways of doing things. A rollout of education in these new procedures must be created and ready to go, along with an informed bureaucracy to help the citizenry make an efficient transition.

There is a lot of work to be done before independence is achieved. The list of considerations above is not exhaustive, it’s only the beginning. The only way to entice people to make such a substantial change is to prepare a seamless transition and inform them of how simple it will be if they chose this path. This will be the greatest selling point WEXIT would have.

The next consideration is an important one. International recognition is going to be significant. Whether we like it or not we live in an interconnected world and having the recognition of other countries will be important moving forward. There is a certain amount of protection in being recognized as an independent country as it allows us to trade and be fully involved internationally. Without recognition, we will be forced to go through Canada to make international deals and we would still be subject to Canadian agreements. Obtaining international support is imperative and must be sought early if true independence is wanted.

The final consideration that I will address here is one that is painful for many WEXIT enthusiasts. What happens if a referendum is unsuccessful? You will not be able to keep running referendums until you get the answer you want – this is not the European Union. A referendum in each of the Western provinces is most likely a once in a generation achievement. If it is unsuccessful, we must accept the outcome with grace and dignity and keep working to make the changes that will create a better place for all of us. This can be achieved within our Western borders if we work together and use whatever might we have to push for justice from the federal government.

Chapter Thirteen: Kissing Up May Be Harder

“They spoke of small things at first, since it was best, when reattaching threads, to begin with the easiest knots.”

~Chris Cleave, Everyone Brave is Forgiven

Change must happen! That one thing is clear. For Western Canadians and others outside of the “Golden Triangle” of Montreal, Ottawa, and Toronto, we all know that the way this country is currently organized is unjust. A densely populated, tightly centralized geographic area makes decisions for remote populations that they do not understand. Autonomy, as discussed previously is the first key to leveling the playing field. Electoral reform and major constitutional changes would serve the entire country. Decentralization of federal government bodies, the bureaucracy and the state media company, CBC is imperative. For the West, a redrawing of the map or an enshrined guarantee to tidewater access is mandatory.

As Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King said:

“If some countries have too much history, we have too much geography,”

That statement was made in a speech to the House of Commons in 1936 and I reiterate it here because not much has changed. Perhaps that is the primary problem in Canada – it is too large geographically, too unwieldly. You cannot satisfy one corner at the expense of another.

Having such a huge land mass means that each region has quite different needs and concerns. Couple the vast landscape with concentrated populations in the centre and limited influence outside of it and you have a recipe for disenfranchisement.

Less than a handful of cities in one geographical region are making the decisions for all of Canada, despite the fact that they cannot know the hearts and minds of their remote countrymen. A fisherman in Newfoundland Labrador cannot know the needs of a rural farmer in Saskatchewan any more than that farmer can understand the mind of a Toronto bank manager nor she the heart of an Inuit hunter or him the interests of a Quebec dairy producer, a PEI Lobster fisherman, a British Columbia forestry worker, an Alberta oil executive, etc.…

This is not meant as an assault on the individuals for not doing their homework, it is a statement of an inevitable fact of life. Canada is far too big to have a one-size-fits-all solution for the problems. The only way to combat the issues and manage a country of this geographical size is for more localized powers.

We can not continue living in a country that does not fairly represent and address the needs, values, and cultures of the various regions of this massive hunk of earth. This land’s richness is in its diversity of resources and the people who manage and develop those resources. Whether it is fisheries in the Maritimes, manufacturing in the East, farming in the centre, oil and gas in the west, forestry in British Columbia or mining in the far North – each part of this country contributes great value to the whole and should have an equal say in how this country is run. Currently, that is not happening, and we are weaker for it.

The CBC, as with all state broadcasters, has an extremely specific mandate. The only reason to fund such an institution with tax payer dollars is so that every region of the country is fairly represented, and our common values shared. It is a means for communicating and celebrating both our regional uniqueness and national similarities. It is meant to bring us together, not tear us apart. Unfortunately, over the years the CBC has abandoned that mandate focusing on Eastern Canada with a sneering contempt for other regions of the country. They are guilty of belittling the common citizen and marginalizing what it means to be a proud Canadian. The most egregious example of this was when Rosemary Barton derisively chuckled at a young university student who said that during the frightening early days of the pandemic, he would be happy to go out and work the fields to ensure food security for Canada. It was a gross belittling of the farmers who supply our food and the earnest desire, of this young man to provide for and protect our country during a very alarming time.

I see only two options for the CBC. The first is that it is cut loose from the government coffers. It can sink or swim on its own merit like every other media company should. The second option is that it is broken up, with small local teams situated right across the country and telling the stories of those remote areas. The program offerings should be as diverse as former shows such as The King of Kensington, Corner Gas and The Beachcombers. Each of those shows were beloved for their humorous look at life in different parts of the country. Our stories are unique, but our values are similar and should be a point of pride for the CBC – they should be seeking out these exceptional perspectives not marginalizing them.

Constitutional and electoral change is necessary for us in moving forward as a country. Justin Trudeau promised that first past the post elections would end when he was elected – he did not keep his word. Electoral reform has been discussed for decades, suggestions have been made but it is time to get serious and demand that this issue is addressed once and for all. Fair representation for all parts of this country is mandatory in creating a country we can be proud of. It may be difficult to get agreement on this complicated issue, especially when it is working just fine for the highly populated areas and certain political parties, but I believe that Canadians want fairness and electoral reform is crucial in doing so.

The Founding Fathers of our country decided that the jurisdiction of national interest would be given to Parliament and those matters of local interest would be given to Provinces. Since the founding of Canada there have been a myriad of disputes over these powers. Federal powers waned up until the 1930s due to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council ignoring the centralist intentions in favour of provincial autonomy. The Supreme court of Canada, on the other hand historically preferred centralization of power. The Constitution Act 1982 furnished the Supreme Court of Canada the influence of power and we have reaped those consequences as demonstrated in 2014 when the Supreme Court was awarded the title of Policy Maker of the Year. Until the constitution is changed, and power is put back into the hands of the people through their elected representatives, Canada will never be truly democratic.

Within a new constitution we must find ways to hold institutions and representatives to task. Basic rights need to be enshrined in a clear and easy to understand document that ensures equality and justice for all. If we were to take on this task now, Canada could show the way forward into the future. If we don’t take on this task, problems will continue to rise, and we will constantly be fighting until we finally break apart.

For Alberta and Saskatchewan there is one problem that must be addressed over all others. It is critical that guaranteed access to tidewater is enshrined into law immediately. It is unacceptable for countries to prevent any landlocked country access to tidewater so why are the two landlocked provinces not given the same rights as countries? This is absolutely unacceptable and the point of contention for many of the disagreements in the West. Whether the maps are redrawn or there is some sort of channel created for transporting our products to market – this is a nonnegotiable moving forward.

To that end, the biggest change in this regard is the idea that resources are only controlled by the provinces so long as they are used within the province. The idea that once they leave the province to go to market, they become the ‘property’ of the Federal Government is wrong thinking. The country is not buying those resources, services, or goods therefore they should not automatically become the purview of the country as a whole. There are arguments for controlling those resources in respect to international and interprovincial trade, but it should not be a matter of provincial ‘goods’ being arbitrarily transferred to the federal government. I do not think this is done in Quebec, Ontario or any of the other provinces so why are we captured in that idea in the west?

Another argument lies within the diversity of our national economy – sometimes what is good for the east is bad for the west and vise versa. This could be addressed by a balancing of power so that we must work together to make a stronger whole. Instead of pitting manufacturing against resource extraction, deals could be made to make Canada more self-sufficient while still getting the best prices for our exported goods. There are international trade deals that must be considered in all of this, what has Ottawa promised to other countries and how do we work within those agreements? We should have a Canada first initiative to address these concerns and work with all regions in the many different industries to get the best for our country. If the 2020 Pandemic has taught us anything, it is that we must ensure basic needs are met within our own country.

It is written that a strong foundation can meet any foe with strength. What we have learned through the divisiveness of this Liberal administration, civil unrest and pandemic is that Canada’s foundation is rocky. Our priorities, as a country must change, and we must begin to look inward first. Until there is clean, potable water in every home, safety on our streets, affordable housing, and the freedom to do and say as one pleases within the bounds of our fair and equal laws, we have nothing to offer the rest of the world.

We are richly blessed to live in a great nation with a rich history of compassion, striving to do better in every way, and using both our hearts and minds to move society forward in a thoughtful and progressive way. We should not be shooting ourselves in the foot by allowing anyone to disparage our heritage or divide us amongst ourselves. If we come together as a society, we can triumph over any adversity. We have the spirit of cooperation built into our DNA and the desire to do what is right no matter how hard. That is what makes Canada the ‘nice’ country. We are kind and generous, and now we need to be kind and generous to each other, see past our differences and make a better way, now and into the future – not just for the generations living today, but for those to come, deep into the future.

Chapter Fourteen: A Parting Kiss

“Had a million things to say and none I knew how. I stepped forward and kissed him, like people kiss at airports, full of love and desperate longing, kisses that must imprint themselves on their recipient for the journey, for the weeks, the months ahead.”

~ JoJo Moyes, After You

As I was working on this book and exploring the possibility of a documentary on the topic, I was asked by Saskatchewan Vlogger Kelly Lamb (ne; Day), what about the Aboriginal people?

I did not have an answer at the time, and it’s proven to be the right course.

After examining many of the documents concerning the rights and responsibilities of the Indigenous Populations in Canada one thing has become clear – it is a legal and political mess. The first thing to do, as I see it, is to go through all of those legal documents and figure out what the current state of affairs is. We also have to recognize and acknowledge that we cannot turn back the hands of time, we can only work with what we currently have. We cannot change the past and should not be held accountable for it, not us nor the Aboriginal people. We have no control of what happened before, but we do have an opportunity to make today better and maybe have some influence on what happens tomorrow. The Aboriginal People, after 150 years, have been robbed of future prosperity by Trudeau’s killing of resource projects. Many of these resources either partially or fully belong to the Natives. Hence, Trudeau is leaving them, once again, with no financial power to move forward in their own way. This marginalization must end, and we have an opportunity to do just that, if we work together.

In regard to WEXIT and/or the changes being fought for in the West; the choice for the Native population seems to be straightforward. They can continue to try to work with a federal government that refuses to listen, uses them as propaganda puppets, and would rather continue marginalization through the shutting down of economic development on reserves, or they can join together in the fight for more autonomy and an equal voice in Canada. WEXIT may be the bargaining chip they have been looking for.

Together we can create a united front and force the Federal Government to be responsible to ALL of her people, not just a small segment in the East that treats many, including the Aboriginal People as serfs to be used at their pleasure.

Westerners are a patriotic yet independent minded people. We didn’t ask for these issues to be laid before us. We would rather work out our problems with the Federal Government. With the seeming lack of support from our fellow Canadians, coupled with the crippling policies of the Canadian Government, that sense of independence has been enflamed. If we must leave in order to save ourselves, make no mistake, we will leave.

For the West to separate, there are a myriad of other problems, but not insurmountable ones. It is not clear if it would be possible to separate under friendly terms within the current constitution and the Clarity Act is anything but clear. The other major problem is that although there is a growing body of separatists, there is no clear leader with a fully realized end result.

Unless and until a leader appears with a clear and compelling vision for the future, well-defined solutions to the problems and a clear-cut path to get to the end result – there can be no western separation.

If such a leader appeared, he or she would have to begin by creating autonomy within the concerned provinces, something that should be done in every province regardless of a desire to leave the country. Unless you have the highest degree of influence over what you can control, you are subject to the Federal Governments whims.

In my opinion, every province and territory in Canada should seize back every single power they can and force the Federal Government to be more accountable to the regions. Only by doing this will the rest of Canada feel as much a part of the country as those in the ‘Golden Triangle’.

The bill that, by default, gives Quebec and Ontario veto over constitutional change, must be thrown out and the constitution must be revisited, and rewritten giving a more fairly distributed representation and checks and balances built into the system so that all voices are heard and respected.

A province can shout and scream for mercy, but when they cannot leverage power electorally, they are not recognized and fall victim to more powerful forces, regardless of fairness. I do not believe that any Canadian individual wants to see their fellow citizen suffer. I believe we all want the best for each other.

What needs to be understood is that there is an imbalance of power in this country, that is unfair in that it has been used to victimize certain regions and peoples when convenient. If we want a fair and just society within our borders, it is time that we work together to make it that way.

Politicians must be taken to task. They need to realize, in a tangible way, that they work for ALL of us, not just for some.

The only way that I see for this to happen is for constitutional reform, otherwise these problems will keep arising. The status quo means that if it is not the West that will insist on leaving, some other region will, and the concept of Canada will die.

As we move into a new century, with all it has to offer, it’s time for Canada to grow up and show the world what a noble society can accomplish with all the tools and riches we have at our disposal. Canada has the opportunity to be the shining light on the hill, a society that can richly bless the world by showing the way to fairness and equality while protecting itself from the vagaries of turbulent outside forces. I call on my fellow Canadians, from coast to coast to coast, to stand up for this ideal, work together and make Canada the Pearl of the 21st century and beyond.

Sources

History:

The Canadian Encyclopedia

Wikipedia

Alberta Government Website

Saskatchewan Government Website

Canadian Government Website

Books:

A Moment of Truth by Ted Morton et al

The Morning After: The 1995 Quebec Referendum and the Day that Almost Was by Chantal Hebert

About the Author

Gillian “Gilly” Davis is a professional writer, communicator, and eclectic thinker. She was raised in Alberta and resides there still. A collector of stories, trivia and other useless information makes her the Cliff Claven of social gatherings. These off-putting characteristics are generally forgiven due to her willingness to muck-in to any project she merits as worthy of her tremendous skills and acumen. Although referred to as a ‘Genius’ she insists she is not. She simply reads a lot and therefore sounds like one. She also can leap tall buildings in a single bound, shoots webs from her fingers - not wrists like some amateurs and lacks the foul tempers most Gingers are notorious for. Tribute can be offered in the form of cozy slippers, salted caramel chocolates with nuts and a delicious red wine, Shiraz, Chianti or a nice Spanish is preferred.