What The APP IS:
What The APP IS NOT:
Put simply, the Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) is a comprehensive educational initiative focused on garnering support for a future where Alberta determines its destiny, ensuring prosperity and freedom for future generations.
1https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-31.8/page-1.html
If good–faith negotiations between Alberta and Canada are unsuccessful following Alberta’s successful referendum on independence, Alberta can still appeal to paragraphs 154 and 155 of the Quebec Secession Reference for guidance.1 Specifically, para 155 says that following unsuccessful negotiations, a province may issue a de facto declaration of independence and pursue international recognition of sovereignty.
Therefore, if talks between Ottawa and Alberta collapse despite Alberta’s democratic mandate, Alberta can maintain its mandate by issuing a de facto declaration of independence dependent on recognition from the international community.
1The Quebec Secession Ruling is available here: https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1643/index.do
If it chooses to pursue independence, here is what would be required for each province to join an independent Alberta:
Whether other provinces have an appetite for their own independence right now or not, it is clear that Alberta must lead the independence movement. No other province has as much momentum behind independence as Alberta does. Once independent, Alberta will be able to show all other provinces how they too can flourish under a new system of government separate from Ottawa.
“Wouldn’t an independent Alberta be landlocked?” is one of the most common questions the APP receives. “An Alberta within Canada is already landlocked” is our reply.
Asking whether or not an independent Alberta would be landlocked is an excellent question, but it’s a non–sequiter. The fact of the matter is that according to the classical definition of “landlocking,” Alberta is already subject to it. We do not have immediate access to any port on our North, South, East, or West sides, and unless something drastic changes in the future, it’s going to stay that way.
The question to ask, therefore, is not whether an independent Alberta would be landlocked or not, but whether an independent Alberta can navigate its landlock better than an Alberta within Canada can. And the answer to that question is a resounding yes. Here’s why:
From Alberta’s $353.3 billion annual GDP, $182.2 billion is exported internationally 1, and $38.7 billion is imported internationally 2. But shockingly, almost 90% ($167 billion) of Alberta’s international exports flow to America. Put simply, America is far and away Alberta’s largest trading partner.
But while Alberta’s economic prosperity is intimately connected to America’s appetite for our goods, Alberta does not presently have the authority to sign trade deals with America. According to sections 91(2) and 132 of the Canadian Constitution, that authority rests chiefly with Ottawa. The main problem with this division of authority is that Ottawa’s interests are not Alberta’s interests. Ottawa signs trade deals that are best for the east, not the west. Thus, Alberta does not presently experience immunity from COOL–style beef labeling, or guaranteed pipeline infrastructure into America, leading to uncertainty in the markets.
However, if Alberta were independent, it would finally have the right to negotiate international trade deals (including deals with America) on its own behalf and for its benefit. Ottawa would no longer represent us; we would represent ourselves. Freed from bureaucratic restrictions like Bill C–69, and freed from the influence of lobbies like the eastern dairy cartel, we would be able to ship increased volumes of goods like oil and gas to America, while also importing more international goods as well.
1 https://www.atb.com/company/insights/the-twenty-four/alberta-international-exports-to-december-2024/
2 https://oec.world/en/profile/subnational_can/alberta
As previously mentioned, Alberta does not negotiate trade deals between itself and the international community. According to the Constitution, that authority rests chiefly with the Federal Government. This is true, not only for international trade, but domestic trade as well. Just as Ottawa negotiates international trade on Alberta’s behalf, it governs trade between Alberta, B.C., Saskatchewan, and the rest of the provinces and territories.
Once again, this is a source of frustration for Alberta. If certain provinces block Alberta’s trade with other nations, as is common with our pipeline woes, Alberta is unable to retaliate. For example, the UCP passed Bill 12 in 2018, hoping to govern the flow of Alberta’s oil. This would have effectively “turned off the taps,” giving Alberta trade leverage in the process. However, after Alberta passed Bill 12, Canadian courts ruled the Bill constitutionally impermissible, and the province had to retreat from its position.
But if Alberta were independent, it would command a level of leverage it’s never experienced before. Not only would we be able to negotiate international trade deals for itself, it would be able to deal domestically as well. Rather than being handcuffed by the Federal Government, Alberta could employ new tools, and forge new relationships, to both economize and increase our exports and imports.
Right now, Alberta is part of Canada. Canada is not (geographically) landlocked. Therefore, Alberta is not part of a landlocked country and is not protected by international landlocking rights. For example, the UN passed “The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982” 3. In it, there are rights granted to land–locked nations like:
Land-locked States shall have the right of access to and from the sea for the purpose of exercising the rights provided for in this Convention including those relating to the freedom of the high seas and the common heritage of mankind. To this end, land-locked States shall enjoy freedom of transit through the territory of transit States by all means of transport.
And,
Transit States, in the exercise of their full sovereignty over their territory, shall have the right to take all measures necessary to ensure that the rights and facilities provided for in this Part for land-locked States shall in no way infringe their legitimate interests.
And,
Traffic in transit shall not be subject to any customs duties, taxes or other charges except charges levied for specific services rendered in connection with such traffic.
These are rights which would be granted to Alberta only if it were an independent nation. It would be a new piece of leverage we’ve never had before. And combined with the other tools mentioned previously, like being able to negotiate with America, and being able to negotiate with Canada and the other provinces, Alberta would finally be able to enjoy a position of trade that reflects our industrious attitude. Put simply, rather than acting within Canada, Alberta is able to navigate its landlock far more efficiently, effectively, and productively, as an independent nation.
3 https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part10.htm
If it chooses to pursue independence, here is what would be required for each province to join an independent Alberta:
Whether other provinces have an appetite for their own independence right now or not, it is clear that Alberta must lead the independence movement. No other province has as much momentum behind independence as Alberta does. Once independent, Alberta will be able to show all other provinces how they too can flourish under a new system of government separate from Ottawa.
Yes, as an independent country, Alberta will have its own passports. It will also work its hardest to negotiate a dual–citizenship agreement with Canada so that Albertans can carry both Alberta and Canada passports.
The APP is proposing Alberta become a constitutional republic. Here’s why:
Protected Democracy – The terms “democracy” and “republic” are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same. The term “democracy” derives from a combination of the Greek words demos (meaning “people”) and kratos (meaning “rule”). Thus, democracy is best described as a political system where the people’s majority is the law of the land. It means that power is divested among the population, which is good. It also means that if 51/100 citizens vote to harm a man, the man might lose his shirt, or worse, his rights, which is problematic.
As for the term “republic,” it derives from the latin res publica (meaning “public affair”). For the most part, it’s basically the same as a democracy, albeit with one exceptional difference. Whereas a pure democracy makes no provisions or guarantees for the rights of men, a republic does.
When democracies fail and deny the rights and freedoms of minorities or certain citizens, republics engage their constitutional provisions and declaration of rights to protect innocents from being harmed. An absolute democracy practices unlimited power, but a republic uses law to shield its people from oppression, allowing them to own property, freely speak, and vote.
Minimized Kleptocracy – One of the ways that a republic shields its people from oppression is by handcuffing the powers of government. In a pure democracy, bureaucrats can do practically whatever it wants on the grounds that it’s acting in the majority’s interest. Thus, if the government says the majority wants lockdowns, the government locks the nation down; if they say the majority wants a socialist economic system, the government will impose a socialist economic system.
But a republic makes it so that a government is allowed to act in the majority’s interest, only so long as the action is lawful, for no one, including the President or Prime Minister, is above the law. They are not allowed to steal wealth or inappropriately leverage their position for personal gain. A constitution restricts the government\’s ability to do whatever it wants, whenever it wants, by outlining a framework for acceptable and unacceptable actions. This helps guarantee individual rights like the freedom of speech, freedom of association, and freedom to own property, even if corrupted heads of state want to take those rights away.
Accountable Bureaucracy – A republic gives a government and its people two particular guarantees. First, it guarantees a government the stability to pass laws, policies, and reforms. Second, it guarantees citizens the ability to judge those laws, policies, and reforms, at the ballot box.
By setting a stable, clear, predictable, election cycle, republics enable the government to accomplish the work they need to do with a reasonable level of security. Their actions may be unpopular in the moment, but this political apparatus allows them to work without fear of being forcibly removed from office for doing what’s right.
But if those lawmakers do wrong, as they often do wrong, voters have the ability to reflect their displease at the next election. By entrenching a nation’s democratic right in a constitutional code, bureaucracy is forced to give a regular account to its citizens. That citizens are able to vote their conscience without fear of being jailed for expressing their beliefs means they’re able to judge their government’s performance, and then show their judgement at the ballot box.
Finally, even if a bad leader is elected, which happens all too often unfortunately, the republic gridlocks the government and mitigates the damage done to the nation until the country is able to elect a new leader during the next election.
Put simply, the APP is proposing Alberta become a constitutional republic because a republic is the safest, freest, strongest, and best way to protect the Albertan’s rights, freedoms, dignities, and home.
As an independent, non–profit, educational group, the APP does not support or endorse any political parties, but rather, educates Albertans and Canadians on the merits of Alberta independence.
It is almost certain that Canada will try and stop Alberta from separating. Here’s why:
These are just a few of the reasons why Canada will try and stop Alberta from separating. Here are a few tools Ottawa might use to try and achieve their goal:
These are common fears the APP hears regarding Federal interference in Alberta separation. But while these concerns are understandable, the APP is confident they will not defeat Alberta independence for the following reasons:
While Ottawa might try to dissuade Alberta from separating, Alberta’s independence movement is committed to doing what’s best for Alberta, not Ottawa.
1 https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/news/en/item/642/index.do?iframe=true&utm
2 https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/n-5/page-39.html?
3 https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/pdf/c-31.8.pdf
If there’s one thing investors hate, it’s uncertainty. Federal bills like C–69 and C–48 devastate Alberta’s economy. Why? Because they drastically decrease investor confidence in Canada’s regulatory process.
No one knows if Ottawa’s going to shut down energy projects today, tomorrow, a year from now, or a decade into the future.
Thus, rather than risking $billions in Canada where the future is uncertain, investors take their capital elsewhere, investing it in stable markets.
That’s the sort of market an independent Alberta needs to be. If Alberta creates a solid, predictable, stable market, it will generate investment and encourage more capital flow into the province. That is why the APP is recommending Alberta take these steps (among others) to immediately stabilize its market post–independence:
If Alberta uses these steps to create a regulatory apparatus with minimal uncertainty and maximum predictability, investment will flow into the province, Albertans will increase their quality of life, and the province will flourish.
The APP, with the help of legal scholars, economists, professors, and other experts, is currently drafting a proposed Alberta constitution. The current draft is being continually refined to make it the best document possible. The moment it is ready for release, the APP will send it to the public and host a constitutional conference to debate the document’s proposals. Stay tuned!
It is important to clarify that the APP is not a political party. While it can advise Albertans and the Alberta government on public policy, it cannot legally pass any policies or enforce them. Therefore, what follows are merely recommendations. It is up to Albertans to ensure they are democratically enforced.
Will Alberta be part of the WEF: No. The APP does not ascribe to the WEF’s values, agenda, or purpose.
Will Alberta be Part of the WHO: No. The APP does not ascribe to the WHO’s values, agenda, or purpose.
Will Alberta be Part of the UN: No. The APP does not ascribe to the UN’s values, agenda, or purpose.
Will Alberta be Part of Other International Organizations: It depends. If the organization in question aligns with an independent Alberta’s values, it may be advantageous to engage with the group. But if the organization in question does not align with Alberta’s values, the APP recommends Alberta not engage them.
Ultimately, it will be up to voters and the government of an independent Alberta to choose what organizations to join or reject. One thing is certain: The APP will keep working as hard as it can to enshrine and protect the rights and freedoms of all Albertans.
1. MORTGAGES/LOANS:
2. JOBS: