More than half of Canadians say Alberta separation should be taken seriously: poll
Article content
While 52 per cent of Canadians think Alberta separation should be taken seriously, 42 per cent think Quebec separation should be taken seriously.
In recent months, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has warned that the continuation of federal policy deemed unfriendly towards her province would precipitate an 'unprecedented national unity crisis.' And, while a referendum on secession hasn't happened in any province since Quebec's last attempt in 1995, Smith has promised that if enough Albertans put their signatures on a petition, her government will facilitate it.
In Alberta itself, 63 per cent say the threat of secession should be taken seriously.
The concern level, however, is lower in the rest of the country. Fifty-one per cent of those in British Columbia agree, as do 54 per cent of those in Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Quebecers are the least concerned: 46 per cent think it's a serious threat. Half of Atlantic Canadians believe it's a serious threat.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
43 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
It's not the time to cave on booze boycotts
Opinion A good measure of the true strength of your intentions is how much you're willing to sacrifice to stand up for what you believe. That should be the case even more when what you're sacrificing is essentially a luxury. You should, after all, be able to hold out a good long time without compromising your principles when what you're giving up is not even a necessity. Well, two Canadian premiers have demonstrated that the strength of their convictions is as shallow as a shot glass. MIKAELA MACKENZIE / FREE PRESs fileS Shelves emptied of American alcohol at a Liquor Mart. Remember when many provinces halted their sales of U.S. alcohol products in response to trade action by the American government? You should — it was, after all, only a little over three months ago that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith was saying this about U.S. tariffs: 'This economic attack on our country, combined with Mr. Trump's continued talk of using economic force to facilitate the annexation of our country, has broken trust between our two countries in a profound way… It is a betrayal of a deep and abiding friendship.' A deep betrayal, all right. As of this week, both Alberta and Saskatchewan began purchasing U.S. alcohol products again. The halt in sales had been a clear and decisive multimillion-dollar message to American producers that Canadians weren't going to put up with the endless tariff follies of U.S. President Donald Trump. With plenty of other domestic and global options, we could no doubt put up with the absence of American wine, beer and bourbon. The boycott threatened US$1.1 billion in American wine sales alone, and U.S. spirits producers have said the boycotts were worse than tariffs. It was a strong message to the U.S. that trade is a two-way street. But a boycott — even of a luxury item that will still face a retaliatory tariff of 25 per cent by the Canadian government — is only as strong as its weakest link. And the governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan, always proud chest-thumpers of the innate toughness of good western folk, have proven to be that weakest link. Heaven forbid the Jack Daniels or Maker's Mark bourbon wouldn't be there to flow for the Calgary Stampede. Meanwhile, Alberta's move was swiftly welcomed by the United States' ambassador to Canada, Peter Hoekstra, who couldn't resist taking a social media victory lap, saying on X/Twitter: 'Very glad to see that Albertans can once again enjoy a cold U.S. beer or glass of wine. Thanks to Premier @ABDanielleSmith for your leadership in removing this barrier to fair and reciprocal trade.' Hoekstra's comments have to be read as a bitter little joke: the fact is that the capricious introduction of tariffs across a broad range of Canadian products by Trump is what built the current barriers 'to fair and reciprocal trade.' (If Hoekstra couldn't see the backhander he was delivering for the insult it truly was, then perhaps the carefully wrought world of diplomacy should not be his trade.) Wednesdays Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture. Alberta seems quite willing to be the butt of that joke: last Friday, Alberta's Service Alberta and Red Tape Reduction Minister Dale Nally said the sales were being restarted to show a 'renewed commitment to open and fair trade' with the U.S. The United States has shown, of course, not one single iota of renewed commitment to anything like open and fair trade. Let's hope that customers in Alberta and Saskatchewan will continue to make the point that their governments don't have the strength to deliver, and continue to boycott American products until American producers can make their own case to their politicians about the damage done by trade wars. If not? Raise a glass to capitulation. And just wait for the next Trumpian punishment to be dealt out to America's former closest neighbour. Because it will come.
Calgary Herald
6 hours ago
- Calgary Herald
Tasha Kheiriddin: Liberals finally making Canada's defence a priority
Damn the torpedoes! Canada's Liberal government is taking aim at defence — and it's about time. Article content This week, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced that Canada will hit the NATO benchmark of 2 per cent of GDP on defence spending this year, instead of waiting for 2032, deploying an additional $9 billion in 2025-2026. Ever the banker, he's also deploying some accounting manoeuvres, shifting $16 billion from the ledgers of other departments to the defence budget to bring it up to the required amount. But that is in line with the tabulations of other NATO countries — and is something predecessor Justin Trudeau should have done, so that Canada would have appeared to be less of a defence laggard for the last decade. Article content Article content Article content But better late than never — and perhaps, just in time. Article content Article content Carney's announcement comes just weeks ahead of both the G7 summit he is hosting in Kananaskis, Alberta and a meeting of NATO leaders later this month in The Hague. The change sends a message to both U.S. President Donald Trump and E.U. allies that Canada means business on defence. Together with the government's border security bill announced earlier this week, Carney is paving the way for a trade deal, or at least some relief from tariffs, with the United States. Article content His spending boost will sit well with his recent pledge to join ReArm Europe, in light of upcoming NATO demands that members spend 5 per cent of GDP in coming years, instead of two. Carney also gets a gold star for actual change. The government will beef up salaries, recruitment and retention of troops, finally acknowledging that new equipment is pointless without skilled personnel. Ottawa will also overhaul the procurement process, a boost for the Canadian defence industry which could offset some of the costs to taxpayers through job creation and revenue. That could also help sell future spending hikes: while polling shows two thirds of Canadians support spending 2 per cent on defence, there's not much appetite for five. Article content Article content But as always, a landmine looms on the horizon: in this case, the infamous F-35 program. Article content Article content On Tuesday, Auditor-General Karen Hogan dropped a bombshell. Canada's planned fleet of 88 F-35 jets is now projected to cost nearly 50 per cent more. It has ballooned from $19 billion in 2022 to a staggering $27.7 billion in 2025, and that's before factoring in infrastructure upgrades, weapons and inflation. Hogan's audit was brutal: the Department of National Defence relied on outdated cost estimates, ignored improved data, and has no coherent contingency plan in place. Infrastructure to house the jets is running three years behind schedule, with some bases not expected to open until 2031. The RCAF is also short on qualified pilots — something it knew back in 2018, but which for the previous government was presumably not a priority. Article content Canada needs stealth fighters. We don't, however, need another lake of red ink. Instead of sticking with 88 F-35s at $27 billion-plus for the fleet, Canada should look at Sweden's Gripen, Boeing's Super Hornet, or a mix of planes. If Carney approves the F-35 as-is, that failure will become the focus, instead of his ambitious plans to rearm. Defence Minister David McGuinty hasn't committed to a review of the project, saying only that he'd ensure that the auditor general's recommendations will be 'fully integrated' into his department. But he should, especially now that Canada is also building stronger ties with Europe, be considering where some of these planes could be sourced.
Toronto Star
7 hours ago
- Toronto Star
Mark Carney says sacrifice is necessary to pay for defence spending. So what will Canadians be asked to do?
Mark Carney 's bold new plan to increase Canada's defence spending comes with two price tags. The prime minister's announcement was clear on one of them: more than $9 billion will be injected into military spending this year alone, and increases in the years after. The other price — 'sacrifice' — got a mention from Carney, but little more by way of detail. Federal Politics Canada plans huge boost in defence spending to hit NATO target by year's end, Carney says Prime Minister Mark Carney tore up Canada's timelines for boosted military spending on Monday 'None of these goals will come easily or quickly,' Carney said, listing the ways in which a stronger defence budget fits into his larger plans to make Canada a bigger, bolder, more independent nation. 'All will require ambition, collaboration and yes, on occasion, sacrifice.' ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW Carney was asked at a news conference later what he meant by this. Did it mean, for instance, that all those dollars for defence would come ahead of health-care spending? This is where the prime minister got vague. He said: 'There's no true security without economic strength, and this is true for defence and security. It's true for our social programs as well. We can't redistribute what we don't have.' Carney, by his own admission, is still learning how to be a politician, but on this and in other areas, he is proving to be a quick study. It is very hard for politicians to ask citizens to make sacrifices. We saw this during the COVID pandemic, when governments and public-health authorities asked an awful lot of the citizens, whether that was mandatory vaccines, wearing a mask, or submitting to lockdowns for weeks and months on end. Canadians were remarkably good about these demands on them, by and large, but there's also no question that it took its toll on them too. The convoy protest was the most outward expression of the pent-up frustration among some of the population, but experts are also drawing some straight lines between the pandemic restrictions and the rising resistance to vaccines of other types too, such as measles. Star Columnists Opinion Andrew Phillips: Mark Carney takes a risk by choosing guns over butter The prime minister announced a 17 per cent hike in military spending on Monday. 'It will be a This is all to say that Carney is probably wise to speak in only general terms of what trade-offs the government — and Canadians — will have to make to turn Canada into a serious, fighting force. ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW Earlier this year, Kevin Page, the former parliamentary budget officer, laid out for Global News what could be required to bring Canada's defence spending up to the target of two per cent of gross domestic product — which Carney said on Monday would now happen by the end of this fiscal year. Page didn't sugar-coat it. He said it would require either big spending cuts, or a budget deficit or a tax hike, or some combination of these measures. Raising the GST by one percentage point, Page offered as an example, would bring an extra $10 billion — that's just slightly more than Carney is promising to give defence this year. That last option would be political poison in a time when Canadians are reeling from affordability challenges and the havoc that Donald Trump's tariffs are wreaking on the economy. Besides, a government that just cut the carbon levy because of its unpopularity, which just received unanimous support for tax-cut measures last week, is unlikely to turn around and ask Canadians to pay more GST. Opinion Althia Raj: Mark Carney can't be allowed to ram through his plan to build big Bill C-5 has been quickly panned by Indigenous groups, human rights organizations, and There's the option of increasing taxes only on the wealthy, but Carney is in the midst of building back Liberals' standing with business and corporate Canada, which saw itself — rightly or wrongly — as under siege from Justin Trudeau's government. Assuming that running a deficit is also not on brand with Carney's fiscal-manager reputation, thus, not on at all, that leaves this government looking for big savings. Everyone always thinks this is a good idea, right up until their services or benefits or jobs get cut. As former PM Jean Chrétien liked to say, everyone wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die. None of this is to pour cold water on the idea of this big, bold boost in Canada's defence ambitions. Carney's speech on Monday was eloquent, even occasionally poetic, on this score. One of my favourite lines: 'In a darker, more competitive world, Canadian leadership will be defined not just by the strength of our values, but also by the value of our strength.' The announcement too, is buying the Liberals a lot of good words from unaccustomed places: the defence community and Conservatives. It will also give Carney and Canada some added heft at this weekend's G-7 meeting, which this country is hosting in Kananaskis, AB. Federal Politics Analysis Mark Carney revives tough talk about America and warns 'a new imperialism threatens' A Canadian government official told the Star that it is 'difficult to say whether or not we'll The prime minister is, then, to borrow from his own phrase, seeing some immediate value for his strong words on defence. Where the value of that strength will be tested is in the cost — not just the $9 billion the government is promising to lay out this year, but in the as-yet unspecified 'sacrifice' it requires from Canadians. Politics Headlines Newsletter Get the latest news and unmatched insights in your inbox every evening Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. Please enter a valid email address. Sign Up Yes, I'd also like to receive customized content suggestions and promotional messages from the Star. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Politics Headlines Newsletter You're signed up! You'll start getting Politics Headlines in your inbox soon. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page.
