Unity on whose terms?
November 25, 2025
Julie Girard is correct that mindless division helps no one, but history shows that peaceful border changes and political realignments – like the breakup of the Soviet Union – have often allowed like-minded people to govern themselves and live more peaceably with their neighbours than before.
Quebec’s decades of separation threats did create economic uncertainty, yet the ultimate result was simple: more federal money flowing from Alberta and the West into Quebec than ever before. Quebec never had the resource base to make good on its threats; Alberta does. That is the difference.
Canada’s federal system was designed in 1867 by and for Eastern Canada, and it still tilts eastward. What upsets Albertans is not that we send billions in net fiscal transfers every year (though we do), but that Ottawa and Quebec actively block the pipelines, plants, and resource projects that create the wealth we are then expected to share. It is one thing to ask for help; it is another to sabotage the helper.
No Alberta government – Conservative, NDP or otherwise – has been blameless. Past leaders have sometimes spent recklessly or failed to diversify quickly enough. Fair criticism.
It remains unclear why Ms. Girard implied that more educational funding would quiet Alberta’s sovereignty concerns. Albertans of every educational background, from tradespeople to PhDs, can be found on both sides of the independence debate. The desire for a fair deal is not limited to any one level of formal schooling.
Independence would not “magically” boost pensions or slash taxes – it would do so directly, because $20–27 billion a year would stay home instead of vanishing into federal coffers. Pipelines would not appear overnight, but without Ottawa’s deliberate delays they could be approved and built years faster.
Finally, separation would not mean isolation. It would mean replacing a one-sided relationship with mutually respectful trade and energy agreements with provinces, states, and countries that want what we produce.
Real unity is built on fairness and respect, not perpetual subsidy plus sabotage. Until we get that inside Confederation, Albertans have every right to consider an alternate future.
Paul McKinstry
Kingman
Julie Girard is correct that mindless division helps no one, but history shows that peaceful border changes and political realignments – like the breakup of the Soviet Union – have often allowed like-minded people to govern themselves and live more peaceably with their neighbours than before.
Quebec’s decades of separation threats did create economic uncertainty, yet the ultimate result was simple: more federal money flowing from Alberta and the West into Quebec than ever before. Quebec never had the resource base to make good on its threats; Alberta does. That is the difference.
Canada’s federal system was designed in 1867 by and for Eastern Canada, and it still tilts eastward. What upsets Albertans is not that we send billions in net fiscal transfers every year (though we do), but that Ottawa and Quebec actively block the pipelines, plants, and resource projects that create the wealth we are then expected to share. It is one thing to ask for help; it is another to sabotage the helper.
No Alberta government – Conservative, NDP or otherwise – has been blameless. Past leaders have sometimes spent recklessly or failed to diversify quickly enough. Fair criticism.
It remains unclear why Ms. Girard implied that more educational funding would quiet Alberta’s sovereignty concerns. Albertans of every educational background, from tradespeople to PhDs, can be found on both sides of the independence debate. The desire for a fair deal is not limited to any one level of formal schooling.
Independence would not “magically” boost pensions or slash taxes – it would do so directly, because $20–27 billion a year would stay home instead of vanishing into federal coffers. Pipelines would not appear overnight, but without Ottawa’s deliberate delays they could be approved and built years faster.
Finally, separation would not mean isolation. It would mean replacing a one-sided relationship with mutually respectful trade and energy agreements with provinces, states, and countries that want what we produce.
Real unity is built on fairness and respect, not perpetual subsidy plus sabotage. Until we get that inside Confederation, Albertans have every right to consider an alternate future.
Paul McKinstry
Kingman