Every choice carries risks and returns.

In Alberta’s referendum, Question #10 presents two paths: remain with the status quo, expecting no real change, or initiate a process designed to force change—towards separation, but not separation itself.

To me, the risks of inaction far outweigh the risks of starting this conversation. If Canada cannot withstand a dialogue about its future, it cannot withstand the challenges ahead.

And when that conversation begins on October 20th, I want Alberta to hold the strongest possible hand.

That is why I am voting “Yes” to the first nine questions—demanding greater provincial rights—and choosing Option #2 on the tenth.

Announcing a new statute and regulations, the Minister of the Environment said, “With this Act, we will be able to manage the air, land, and water of this great province.”

Though he went on at some length to tout the many advantages this would bring, I was fixated on the prideful arrogance of that first statement. That this man thought he could manage the air, land, and water of an entire province was astounding.

In that one sentence, I saw the arrogance of the elite governmental class and the unspoken, perhaps unconscious, divine aspirations and beliefs. He was saying that they could control the air, the rain, and even the land’s topography and geology.

He did not say he could prevent or punish activities that might affect these things. He did not say he could influence them. He was quite clear: he could “manage” them. He could, in his wisdom, see the correct result and, with his new power, bring it into being.

This was a spiritual parapraxis, a revealing Freudian slip.

A little humility would be in order.

The Alberta Referendum in October is part of a process, and the process is my friend.

Question #10 requires selecting one of two options. The first is to remain a province. The second is not to separate, but to begin a process.

I can vote on Question #10 with the second option, Option #2: I can ask to start the process for constitutional change.

A vote for option #1 is a vote for the status quo. Option #2 starts the process and starts the many conversations around constitutional change. It is not a vote to leave Canada; it cannot be that. It is a vote to begin a process mandated under the Clarity Act.

The Remainers scream that Option #2 for Question #10 is a vote to leave. That is not true; the rules and processes referred to in the referendum require a vote to start a process of change. Now, that process might result in Alberta leaving, but it is not a foregone conclusion.

The Leavers scream that it is a vote to leave. It may suggest that leaving is a good idea, but again, it is a vote to start a process.

I am eager to start a conversation, and this would be the process.

Alberta and other provinces have good reason to re-federate our confederation.

We have a Confederated state that has become a Conn-Federated State. The West is being conned.

We need a Re-Federated state. We need to reopen our Constitution and make some changes.

To do this, we need to have a conversation. We can start a dialogue with the rest of Canada. I will not be speaking. The Government of Alberta will speak. And I want them to have the strongest possible mandate for change.

So, I am voting “Yes for the 9 questions and #2 for the 10^th.

Yes for 9 and 2 for 10.

I hope that many fellow Albertans, in the privacy of the polling booth, will cast their ballots in the same way.

Our progressiveness, though it may result in a great many wish-fulfillments, piles up an equally giant Promethean debt which has to be paid off from time to time in the form of hideous catastrophes.*

This is a truth of our post-modern age, the legacy of Foucault and Rousseau. Our Promethean debt will be paid. The bill will come due.

The woke agenda, financial and fiscal nonsense and climate arrogance of our political and media intellectuals are working like bulldozer blades, pushing up higher and higher mounds of foolishness till one day, the enormous pile tips over backwards, engulfing us all.

*Carl Jung, Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious, paragraph 276 of the essay, The Psychology of the Child Archetype.”

Some are voting “No” to the 10 questions.

That seems so negative. I am going to vote “Yes” on the last 9 and am leaning toward “Answer #2” on the first question. Answer #2 says, “Yes,” I want a referendum.

I want to start a serious conversation with the rest of Canada. And I want my negotiating team to have the moral weight behind them so that the people on the other side of the table, including Ottawa and any Province that is not onside, to understand that many Albertans would not join Canada under the deal on the table, so why would we stay?

Establishing our own plan is a clear provincial right. The transition wouldn’t be difficult; we could either keep the federal administration while segregating and investing our own funds, or go all-in with a completely independent provincial system.

Either route yields immediate economic benefits. Thanks to Alberta’s demographic advantages, we could increase payouts while lowering contribution rates. More importantly, it proves we can manage our own affairs and act like a mature province.

Additionally, it signals to Ottawa and Eastern Canada that Alberta is an equal partner in Confederation, not just a resource to be exploited. If Quebec can successfully run the Quebec Pension Plan, Alberta can do the same.

An Alberta Pension Plan is legal, feasible, beneficial, and a vital assertion of our autonomy.

This is low-hanging fruit, and it is ripe for the picking.

Alberta has a clear, legal pathway to establish its own provincial police force. By providing formal notice under our current contract with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)—which currently oversees policing in our rural and small-town communities—we can initiate a structured, manageable transition. We will have ample time to adjust, beginning with a standing offer of employment to every dedicated RCMP officer currently serving on Alberta soil.

The reasons for this shift are both legion and undeniable.

1. A Failure of Federal Management

First, the national force’s overarching administration has proven itself fundamentally dysfunctional. This is not a reflection on the front-line officers who risk their lives daily, but rather a condemnation of a bloated federal bureaucracy. To borrow a phrase often attributed to Albert Einstein, the management in Ottawa is “so bad, it is not even wrong.” The serial errors of judgment originating from national headquarters are so frequent and systemic that the entire administrative apparatus has lost its credibility.

2. Broken Institutional Incentives

The current structural incentives of the RCMP actively work against Albertans. Under the federal framework, any ambitious member seeking advancement must look to Ottawa, with bilingualism as a mandatory prerequisite. Consequently, ambitious officers are incentivized to focus on federal optics rather than the distinct needs of the local Alberta communities where they are temporarily stationed. They are forced to look East for career progression, rather than looking at the neighborhood they are paid to protect.

3. A Commitment to Community

Let us move past this outdated model. By expanding the existing Alberta Sheriffs branch into a full-fledged provincial police force, we can recruit, train, and retain professionals who actually want to live in Alberta and serve our communities long-term.

It is time for Alberta to step up, govern ourselves like a mature, self-reliant province, and take this common-sense step to rebalance our relationship with Ottawa.

We have moved back to Calgary, but lived in Victoria, British Columbia, for a time.

Every day in Victoria, you can see signs that demand, “Everyone Deserves A Family Doctor.”

I wonder whether the people who plant them have considered who will meet this demand and how. Are family doctors slaves to the good people of Victoria? Are other provinces to forgo their family doctors and send them to Victoria? Are the costs of this demand to be borne by the people who put up the sign?

March 29 was the anniversary of the death of Ralph Klein. 

Boy Howdy how I miss him.  The most amazing and surprising Premier Alberta has ever had.