EDMONTON – Former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney and independence advocate Bruce Pardy debated whether Alberta should leave Canada and become an independent country, with each individual answering key questions about their side of the argument. Kenney has been a leading voice arguing against the movement, while Pardy has been a leading advocate, and on Thursday, the two joined online media personality Harrison Faulkner and answered, "Do you agree that the Province of Alberta should cease to be part of Canada to become an independent state?""I don't want to see Canada destroyed," said Pardy to begin the debate. "But here's the problem: it has already been destroyed.""Canada has become impoverished, dysfunctional, corrupted and autocratic. Canada is broken, and it cannot be fixed. Powerful people in this country will not allow Alberta to save itself and possibly save the country. Alberta must leave, and a lot of Albertans want out."His arguments for leaving Canada were largely based on Alberta not being respected or well-represented, and on the belief that it is run by a federal government that controls and manages society. Kenney admitted that Alberta and Ottawa's strained and flawed relationship needs to change, but he also believes giving up is not the solution."We would see a huge outflow of capital, of people, destruction of our real estate values, turning to constructive relations with indigenous communities, to an ongoing legal and political war with huge social disruption," said Kenney."All of this for a project that is supported by a marginally small number of Albertans. I think it's not worth the risk. We need to lead and not leave Canada. We need to mend this country, not end it.".Rather than Alberta rebelling against Ottawa, he believes the two governments can work together to achieve their goals. "The reality is, yes, there are frustrations and challenges working through the current system," Kenney said. "It needs to be further rationalized and deregulated, but we have a federal government committed to that, and we Albertans should be prepared sometimes to take a yes for an answer."He cited historical examples, including the agreement between Alberta and Justin Trudeau to expand the Trans Mountain pipeline, as evidence that it can happen, and he believes the MOU on a pipeline from Alberta to the coast of Northern BC is an indication that it will happen again. Pardy, however, said Kenney's examples are policy changes with no lasting legacy. The issue stems from a federal government that manages society. "This is a Canadian future, and no amount of incrementalism and policy discussions and negotiations between provinces and the federal government is going to change any of that," Pardy said. "Governments run this country. That's the thing that needs to change, and there is no prospect of changing that in any fundamental way, without a new and different kind of constitution.".The issue of equalization was debated between the two parties, and both agreed that Canada's tax system needs to be fixed. Alberta, the wealthiest province in Canada, should not be forced to fund the other provinces. Kenney, though, said the solution is to work to fix it, not "tear up the country" over it, and he believes a conservative federal government could solve it. He also said that even with the money saved from equalization, Alberta would still face financial issues covering the costs of federal services and programs. Pardy rebutted by saying the upside is worth it. "There's risk in everything, but what we've got here is the possibility of a wealthy province with a very healthy GDP per person to get out from under the thumb of a confederation that is corrupted, inefficient and full of red tape getting in the way of what Alberta wants to do," Pardy said. .They also addressed the constitutionality of independence and whether Alberta could leave Canada without the consent of the other provinces. Pardy pointed to the 1982 Supreme Court ruling on Quebec independence and said it did not require consent for independence, but instead said that "if a province passes a referendum on a clear question and a clear majority approves of it, that triggers an obligation to negotiate."He also said it instructs that there are no predetermined conclusions for the negotiations, and everything is on the table. "Here's one of the many possibilities, if the two sides come together to negotiate, and they cannot make a deal, one of the possibilities is that Alberta will unilaterally declare itself to be independent," Pardy said. "Now that's not what the Supreme Court described, but it didn't describe an alternative either. "And if that happens, the next possibility is that Alberta will be recognized by other countries, like the United States, as an independent country. If that happens, and it's a big if, but if that happens, essentially, it is de facto done."To Kenney, though, that "if" is not worth taking, especially because the "if" could drive away investors and take Alberta from one of the wealthiest provinces and make it one of the poorest. "Well, I appreciate Bruce's intellectual honesty, not just now, but as usual, because he just admitted that the separatists are inviting Albertans to take a huge leap into the unknown, with no safety net, with no certainty of its outcome, but one certainty, which is endless chaos," Kenney said."Chaos that will be kryptonite for investment.".As for the issue of Alberta being landlocked if it were to become its own province, Pardy said it already is, and the power of being an independent country will give Alberta more power. Most of Alberta's oil is exported to the United States, and being an independent country will not change that. Conversely, an independent Alberta would have more tools to deal with the federal government and BC, which are blocking oil from reaching the West Coast. "'I'm not saying there wouldn't be conflict, but by all rights, Alberta, as an independent country, would have far better leverage to bargain, both with the US and with allowing BC products through Alberta to get to the rest of the country," Pardy said. Kenney argues that Alberta is not landlocked in Canada, though, because it has guaranteed access to the West Coast under federal jurisdiction. He said it has been demonstrated through the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and other projects. And it will be demonstrated once again through the Northern BC pipeline. "So is it perfect? No," Kenney said. "But when we put our shoulder to the wheel and when we are united, when we create alliances across the Federation, when we make the case about how Canada can be more prosperous by responsibly developing our resources, we win those arguments.".Pardy, though, argues that all of Kenney's examples fail to address the issue of constitutional change and federal jurisdiction. "Mark Carney is still able to say, 'Well, BC might not have the constitutional authority to refuse, but politically, we are going to listen to them, and until he gives us the thumbs up, because we have control over both the coastline and interprovincial developments, we are just going to hold this up,'" Pardy said. For Kenney, it all goes back to not throwing away our fractured, but still advantageous, place as Canadians by betting everything on a massive risk. "We should mend Canada, not end Canada," Kenney said. "Let's get back common sense federal government that we had under Stephen Harper, find align allies across the country, and continue to make progress so we continue to be the most prosperous place in Canada."Pardy believes Albertans have already lost faith in Canada, though, and that the constitutional changes necessary to repair the relationship will never happen. "Now I don't know what the chances are for Alberta independence," Pardy said. "I really couldn't say. Maybe it's 50/50. Maybe it's a lot less. But I do know this: the chances are not zero, and that means it is a better chance for radically reforming this country than any other proposal I have heard."
