Carson Jerema: The separatist rebellion brewing in downtown Calgary

Article content

Now, if you’re threatening to dismember the country, accusing your opponents of spreading fear is more than a little hypocritical.

Article content

That said, Wilson did make a persuasive case for how Alberta has been unfairly treated, and during the debate he quite nearly matched Kenney’s rhetorical skill. He spoke of how, in his view anyway, every tactic Alberta has tried to get fair treatment in the federation has failed. “We’ve tried loyalty, we’ve tried patience, we’ve tried to reform,” he said.

Article content

Referring to electing Stephen Harper’s government, Wilson added, “We’re told, send the right people, make the right arguments, build the right conditions and the right coalitions and Confederation will work well.” But it is a strategy, he said, that’s “been proven wrong time and time again.”

Article content

His argument is convincing, but ultimately overlooks the successes that Alberta has had in gaining, for example, constitutional control of its resources, or successes in the courts, such as against the Impact Assessment Act, as well as in extracting a pledge from Ottawa, however tenuous, to approve another pipeline. When Kenney pointed this out, Wilson responded by dismissing it as being forced to grovel.

Article content

Article content

On the case for why Alberta should leave, the separatists have somewhat of an advantage, because federalists tend to largely agree with them on the very real frustrations with Confederation, but the separatists miss how essential compromise is to achieving progress in any democratic country.

Article content

However, where things truly fall apart for the independence side is in what hypothetically comes next. And by that, I don’t only mean the mechanics of state, such as currency, military, border policing, taxation, etc., but just how serious an undertaking this would be.

Article content

During the debate proper, Wilson spoke of following the “legal pathway” to separation, which, according to the Supreme Court, as I already alluded to, obligates Canada and the provinces to negotiate the breakup of the country in the event of a clear expression of democratic will to secede. He avoided the words, “unilateral declaration of independence.”

Article content

Instead, Wilson acknowledged the Supreme Court ruling, and punctuated it with, “What a Canadian thing!”

Article content

But, at a later gathering of separatists in the cramped upstairs private party room of a Calgary bar called the Bourbon Room, Wilson stated his belief that, after a successful referendum, Alberta should give Canada a deadline for coming to an agreement. And then, should the deadline not be met, Alberta should respond by declaring independence on its own, suggesting anything less than speedy negotiations would be proof of bad faith.

Article content

Article content

Wilson referred specifically to the final paragraph of the Supreme Court’s 1998 ruling, which contemplated “an unconstitutional declaration of secession.” To be clear, this is not a “legal pathway,” but merely the court acknowledging that such a “de facto secession” would depend entirely “on recognition by the international community.” That is, other countries would be recognizing facts on the ground. According to Wilson, some 20 other countries are prepared to recognize an independent Alberta.

Article content

So it is not at all clear that those who count among the independence movement’s leadership are actually committed to negotiating a deal or following the law.

Article content

Things could become very ugly very quickly.

Article content

Here is how the Criminal Code defines “Seditious intention”: anyone who advocates “the use, without the authority of law, of force as a means of accomplishing a governmental change within Canada.” So, for instance, if members of a separatist government in Alberta declare independence unilaterally, thereby advocating the use of force to uphold Alberta’s own laws, rather than Canada’s, they could be charged with sedition, facing up to 14 years in prison. If they take it a step further and actually carry out the enforcement of their own laws, over Canada’s, they could be guilty of treason, which carries a penalty of life in prison.