Mark Byron and Adam’s Blog both noticed the Western Standard poll recently that suggested it was time to consider that Western Canada separate.

In the survey, 35.6 per cent of respondents from Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia agreed with the statement: Western Canadians should begin to explore the idea of forming their own country.

Funky Dung wrote and asked me what I think.
Well, I have to be upfront.
The history of Canada is not simple and it factors into my answer.
And I’m no history expert.

The current poll said 35.6 percent of the westerners think it’s time four provinces should consider separating from eastern Canada.

Add the 42% of Albertans ready to take a hike.

I wonder why separatism facinates American friends so much?
Maybe it’s because not even many Canadians don’t know what it took to pull the Dominion of Canada together. We don’t know and respect the contributions each region has made to remain a country.
Why should our friends in the US?
The natural resources available to the United States would be worth any hassle.
The economic return and more self-governing lifestyle would please many westerners who have always seen Eastern Canada as arrogant, powerful and disinterested.

Canada is a soft power. It’s seen as rather benign in the rest of the world.
But we’ve had our battles and while we aren’t firing actual ammunition these days the battles continue.
This is a country of 8 distinctive geographical regions with their own resources.
This is a country where two cultures from two great empires clashed and still clash. The tensions that hold it together, also tear it apart.

When Canada became an official country in 1867 most of the population lived in Upper and Lower Canada. The divide was very British-French. The west hadn’t been thought about much, since most of the population came in from the east and south.
Follow the money.

Under the Constitution Act of 1867, the federal government is responsible for national defence, criminal law, banking, the postal system and foreign relations. It is also involved in many other areas, including transportation, communications, immigration, health and environmental matters.

Right away that set up the conflict between what are now the provinces and territories and the federalist system of governing.

Provincial governments are constitutionally responsible for civil justice, property and municipal institutions. They also share responsibility with the federal government for such matters as health services, agriculture, immigration, social assistance and transportation.

The three territories - Yukon, Nunavik and the Northwest Territories are not soveriegn units like the provinces are. The Federal government delegates their powers.

Oh, I forgot. Newfoundland didn’t join up until 1949, and only recently became Newfoundland and Labrador. I suspect if anyone is going to jump ship it would be Newfoundland first. In the sharing of power and resources they got the short end of the stick. I don’t think they’d talk about it much. I think they’d just do it.

It’s the sharing that gets everyone riled up.

Now, add in official languages, Quebec sovereignty, distinct cultures, economics, aboriginal treaties, population, urban, rural shifts, scandals, municipalities fighting provinces for their piece of the pie, and I cannot tell you why this country is still sea to sea.

Here is a map of the Dominion of Canada in 1873.
There was no offical west per say and the federal government had to buckle down and start looking at what to do about western expansion.
The Hudson Bay Company owned a lot of what is now Canada in the north and west. Traders and settlers lived on these lands since the 1500’s.
Becoming a country was tough stuff. Staying a country is also tough.

Here is what Canada currently looks like.

The bottom line is money and self-interest. It is that simple and that complex.
If you look at the CIA factbook Canada looks like a vast resource.

Population bases remain an issue.

British Columbia - 4.1 million
Alberta - (2001) 2.9 million
Saskatchewan 1.025 million
Manitoba (2003) 1.162.776 million

Ontario - 12.392 million
Quebec - 7.5 million

As amazing as the history of this country is, the adversarial nature of federalism, equalization payments, trade, power sharing, resources, fortunes of provinces rising and falling lead to constant separatist calls.

We are in a period of our history where the West feels profoundly alienated.
And I think that is what you are hearing when you read about this in the US.

Alberta, now a wealthy province, believes it has not got a proper say over it’s own governance and the governance of Canada. Things like a regionally-elected Senate with power equal to the House of Commons and powers of appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada have to be addressed.

So - Funky Dung.
What do I think?
The anger is very real.
Attempts by western provinces to have their say in Parliament haven’t gone well.
Could any part of Canada actually separate?
Yes.
Will they?
I think if provincial interests are not adequately addressed by Ottawa, it could happen.
Western separatists know they’d have to become a US protectorate or state.
I think both the Canadian and US governments know that.
I think Western separatists are working very hard to stress similarities with US interests as anger grows.
Separatism threats worked for Quebec.
We came incredibly close to not being Canada anymore.
I can’t predict the future.
Fortunes shift.


6 Responses to “Alberta Separatism”

  1. 1 Mark Byron 

    The poll asked if people wanted to “explore the idea of forming their own country,” not whether they were ready to bolt right now. That is going to overstate the seperatist vote, since more people are open to thinking about it than actually doing it. For instance, I’d be open to exploring the idea of voting Democratic for president in 2008, but it would be very unlikely that I’d do so.

    Here something that I’d like your take on. Western Canada tends to be the Bible Belt of Canada; is that cultural conservatism what sets them apart and feeds that seperatist spirit, or the frontier/prairie populism (which manafests both right and left; the NDP flowed out of the prairies, IIRC), or both?

  2. 2 Bene Diction 

    I’ll correct that. Thanks.

    As for Western Canada being the Bible Belt, I’ve read/heard that for years.
    I’ve spend my fair share of time debunking that.
    Others have debunked that myth far better.
    I don’t believe it, there are parts of Ontario and parts of the Maritimes that might make that claim. No way the numbers make the west ‘the belt.’

    http://are.as.wvu.edu/o‘toole.html

    Canadian evangelicals vote across party lines Mark.
    We could scream it, stamp it in stone and our US counterparts wouldn’t believe it.:^)
    Here: Jamie Epp of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada has some insight.

    http://www.christianity.ca/news/weblog/2004/04.28.html

    My instinctual answer to your question once the ‘belt’ concept is set aside is a bit of both. It’s a regional identity thing. But instinct isn’t based on fact. I’ll get back to you:^)

  3. 3 bill 

    Good piece
    complex, religion enters in.
    language still not settled.
    Thanks

  4. 4 Kevin Powell 

    If the west comes anywhere near separating, then I would guess those numbers go down. 35.6 is a soft number. Many people moving to Alberta from the east will gladly return if western separation becomes a reality.

    kgp

  5. 5 Bene Diction 

    Very soft.
    The native population in Sask. wouldn’t have much reason to stay so thats a big loss.

    A lot of Canadians would move out.
    A lot more Americans would move in.

Benediction Prayer

Subscribe

You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.

For blog design, Wordpress or MovableType coding or blog consulting, see cre8d design.