240120 Chris and Dr. Michael Wagner

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Well, good evening, everybody.

(00:19):
It's Chris here from the Whistle Stop Cafe in Mirror, Alberta.
Again.
This is like more podcasting in the last week than I've done in the last six months.
And there is a reason why things are they are lighting up all across the world right

(00:39):
now is specifically in the United States and Canada and specifically Alberta.
And I'm watching what's going on and trying to keep focus on what we need to do here in
Alberta, but it's really, really difficult right now.
I'm not sure if anybody knows, but Donald Trump was elected as president of the United

(01:00):
States again.
Have you heard?
Yeah, today was inauguration day.
And the videos and pictures of the inauguration are just they're fantastic.
It's different.
It's it's not just like a dry political thing anymore.
It's almost like we're experiencing a revival of sorts.

(01:22):
We're going from a place where anybody with conservative values, right leaning is being,
you know, they have been kind of spat on and kicked and I don't even know what the word
is just.
I don't know.
Haven't been treated very nicely.
And all of a sudden, no, not all of a sudden, over the last maybe decade, it's come to the

(01:48):
point where the pendulum is starting to swing the other way.
Donald Trump today has signed something like seventy five executive orders, writing a whole
bunch of wrongs.
One of the things he did that I was incredibly impressed with is he hired back all of the
soldiers that were fired because they wouldn't participate in a medical experiment with back

(02:10):
pay, which is fantastic.
That should happen in this country, too.
Lots of orders signed on immigration.
Lots of orders signed about energy.
The drill baby drill thing wasn't just a slogan like that's happening.

(02:30):
He also signed an executive order regarding tariffs on Canada and Mexico February 1st
if nothing changes.
Now, thank God for our premier who has bigger balls than any premier before her.

(02:52):
Yes, you heard that right.
She's down there building bridges, making relationships with the incoming the the here
U.S. administration, and she's doing a fantastic job.
I think she bought us a little bit of time so that the federal government here in this
country can get their poop in the group and prevent an economic disaster in this country.

(03:16):
Well, you know, prevent more of an economic disaster than we've seen under the Trudeau
leadership over the last few years.
But she's doing a really good job of it.
And as I watch this unfold, I realized something.
Our premier, Daniel Smith, Alberta's premier, is acting as if she is the president of Alberta.

(03:41):
Now, I'm not saying that she's doing things that are outside of her job description because
she's not.
The premiers of the provinces are actually responsible for international relations, dealing
with their energy and resources.
That's a provincial jurisdiction.
She's doing it.
But as I watch the way she carries herself and who she's talking to and what she's trying
to do not only for this province, but for the rest of the country, it's really fantastic.

(04:06):
And I hope that people can see that and appreciate it, even though they may not agree with everything
she does or says or believes, as I don't believe.
I don't agree with everything she believes or says or does.
But on this point, it's great.
So why tonight am I doing another podcast?
And why do I keep talking about Smith and our relations with the United States and Alberta

(04:30):
independence of all things?
Because if you pay close attention to what's going on in the world right now, you're going
to see that all paths lead to Alberta independence.
Now I welcome you 100 percent.
Challenge me on that statement.
If you have a reason why you believe that Alberta is better off the way they are with

(04:52):
the current relationship with the federal government, put it in the comments.
I need to talk about it.
As a matter of fact, I brought a guest on who has spent decades dealing with this issue.
His name is Dr. Michael Wagner.
Now you may have seen him at Alberta Prosperity Project events in the past.
He's been a speaker there and advisor.
And he lays it out plainly.
This is what's going on.

(05:12):
This is why we're in this situation.
This is how we got there.
And this is what we need to do to get out.
So yeah, feel free to challenge anything and put questions up there.
Be respectful about it.
I'll just boot you out because I don't have time for that kind of stuff anymore.
So without further ado, I would like to welcome Dr. Michael Wagner, author of No Other Option,

(05:35):
Self-Determination for Alberta and Time to Leave Canada Cannot Be Fixed.
So yeah, welcome, Michael.
And just so you know, folks, we've been having a little bit of a delay between our feeds.
So there might be a little bit of that, but we'll try and work around as best we can.
So good evening.
Good evening.
Thanks for having me, Chris.
Yes, of course, anytime.

(05:57):
So the delay seems to be longer than usual.
So what I'm going to do is I'll get as quick as I can.
Why don't you just introduce yourself, introduce your book and kind of give folks an idea of
what we're looking at here.
Maybe you can comment a little bit on what's going on between the United States and Canada
and Alberta right now.
And I'll chime in when I have something or when there's a comment, but I'm going to leave

(06:21):
it to you for the for the most part because of the delay.
Is that all right?
Sure.
Like, basically, I just want to sum up the situation as I understand it.
And that is that President Trump threatened to put 25% tariffs on all imports from Canada.
And the vast majority or the biggest item of import from Canada to the United States

(06:45):
is oil from Alberta.
And so the other premiers and the federal government thought that they would put together
like a retaliation strategy for Trump's tariffs.
And one of the things they were considering cutting off Alberta's oil to the United States,
which again is the single biggest item we sell to the United States.

(07:08):
And Danielle Smith rejected that saying no, Alberta is going to continue to sell its oil
to the United States.
That's a provincial resource.
And so then Danielle Smith was not considered to be part of Team Canada because she was
the one provincial leader who would objecting to Canada's retaliatory strategy of cutting
off oil.
And many people were calling her names and saying, you know, even some people were throwing

(07:31):
around trader and things like that because she wasn't part of the Team Canada approach.
But she was just defending Alberta's right.
And it's quite telling that when the federal government up until now, you know, was trying
to work to shut down Alberta's oil industry and various policies to prevent pipelines

(07:51):
and prevent development, and suddenly when it comes to this conflict with the United
States, suddenly Alberta's oil is like the ace in the hole for threatening the United
States to prevent the tariffs from being used.
There's always the whipping boy, regardless of the situation, if the trade is going well,
they want to shut down the oil industry to prevent climate change, so to speak.

(08:14):
And now that we're having this potential fight with the United States, suddenly Alberta's
oil is a Canadian resource and they can threaten the United States with cutting off Alberta's
oil as a way to make the Americans become more reasonable.
So they only see our oil as a real asset, as something positive when they think they

(08:34):
can use it for the benefit of protecting jobs in Ontario and Quebec.
So I hope that came across in spite of the delay that's happening.
Did you hear what I said, Chris, just to get clarification?
I did.
Yeah, that was good.
Yeah, I got it all.
Okay, thank you.
So that the key point is that Alberta is the whipping boy, you know, regardless of whether

(08:57):
it's, you know, before Trump's tariffs, we were the bad guys for climate, with Trump's
tariffs, we were the key resource for leverage with the needs.
And Daniel Smith doesn't want us to be that way.
We don't need to have our resources, you know, prevented from being sent to the United States
as a way of protecting Ontario, which is what it's all about, basically.
Yeah, Alberta is the sacrificial offering, apparently.

(09:19):
Right.
It's a matter of sacrificing Alberta's interests for the benefit of central Canada.
So this is just another example of the same pattern that we've seen, you know, for decades,
Alberta being sacrificed for the benefit of central Canada.
You know, it comes in different forms, you know, whether it's climate change or in the
80s, you know, to our oil at low prices, or, you know, threatening to cut off our oil of

(09:44):
the United States.
But it's always Alberta is being used for the benefit of central Canada.
It's the same pattern we see over and over again.
And that's kind of, you know, fundamentally what we can't get away from, because central
Canada has the majority of the votes.
And so federal leaders will always cater to the interests of central Canada.
And there's just no way around that.

(10:05):
As long as we're part of Canada, we're going to face these kind of threats of being used
for the benefit of central Canada.
I see you're doing some technical stuff.
Yeah, I'm not I'm not sure why it's I'm not sure why it's having such a delay.
Maybe I'll get you to log out and log back in.
Sometimes that'll do it.
And I'll just wait for you to come back in here.

(10:25):
And it'd be the same link.
Okay, well, okay, I'll close it and try again.
Yes, same link.
Okay, so we're just going to wait for Michael to log out and log back in.
But I just want to kind of recap.
So if you're if you're not aware, we already went through a period in the early 80s, where
Alberta was sacrificed to the interests of the rest of the country.

(10:49):
And none of the other provinces really seem to have a problem with it.
If you pay attention to history, and you look at what happened in Alberta as a result of
the National Energy Program, implemented, by the way, by another Trudeau, Pierre Elliott
Trudeau, it was devastating.
We lost 1000s jobs, interest rates soared, it was it was bad all around.

(11:13):
Businesses failed.
And it wasn't just Alberta, it bled out into the rest of the country.
Because at the time, Alberta was really becoming the economic center of the country.
So once that dried up, and once the benefits that we were reaping from our resources here
weren't being spread out to the rest of the country, it was horrible.
And let's bring Michael back on and see if it's a little bit better now.

(11:36):
Technical issues.
Well, you remember a few years ago, when the Alberta government was talking about bringing
better internet to rural Alberta, hasn't been all that successful.
And I mean, it's not like we have cheap internet out here.
I've got the biggest explore net package you can get supposed to be blazing fast 150 megabits
per second.

(11:57):
And still we end up with issues like this.
We'll try again and see how it goes.
Can you hear me, Michael?
No, it looks like what we're going to have to do, folks, I apologize.
But what we're going to do is I'm going to end the stream.
Michael and I are going to do a recorded version of this podcast.
And then I will all play it live at a later date.

(12:21):
I think that's probably the best option right now.
In the meantime, if you want and you should check out his books, Time to Leave and No
Other Option.
They lay out everything you need to know about why Alberta should be considering and pursuing

(12:42):
independence.
And with what we see going on in the world right now with the things that Donald Trump
is saying about annexing Canada and the threats we're facing from all angles, foreign and
domestic right now in this province, we got to do it.
So we'll be back later on with a recorded version of this and in the meantime, have

(13:06):
a great night.
And we will be on again tomorrow night with another guest, Mr. Gordon Kessler, who was
the only MLA elected to the Alberta legislature, who was a Alberta subcist.
And we're going to have a chat with him tomorrow night.
So we'll see you later.
A few moments later, three days later, three weeks later.

(13:31):
Good evening again, everybody.
It's Chris here from the Chris and Kerry show and the whistle stop cafe.
Oh, wow.
Actually, I said that backwards this time.
What does that mean?
Things are changing.
Anyway, we tried this earlier with Dr. Michael Wagner.
We're going to talk about Alberta independence, why we need to be pursuing independence.
We're going to have people the opportunity to challenge that sentiment and ask questions

(13:53):
and that kind of thing.
So we're going to have technical difficulties.
I think we have the technical difficulties sorted out.
So we're trying it again.
I was going to just record it and then play it later.
But I figured, you know what?
Why don't we just throw caution to the wind and give her because that's the fun way to
do it.
Anyway, Dr. Wagner is waiting backstage.

(14:14):
I'm going to bring him on right now and I'm going to actually let him introduce himself,
talk about his books a little bit, why he wrote them, and then we're going to get into
the meat and potatoes of the conversation, which is, of course, Alberta independence.
You may have seen that I hashtag all over the place.
All paths lead to Albert independence because I believe that all paths lead to Albert independent.

(14:38):
So without further ado, here is Dr. Michael Wagner joining us from the basement now, I
think.
Yeah.
Yeah.
From my basement from Edmonton.
Thank you, Chris.
So I think you want me to introduce myself and talk about why I'm interested in this
topic and why I've written about it.

(14:58):
So yeah, my name is Michael Wagner.
I'm a columnist for the Western Standard and I'm a longtime supporter of Albert independence
from one degree to another.
So like back when I was a young man and a teenager, I was already interested in Albert
independence.
I'd be in the early 80s.
So I'm kind of just summarizing things here.
Basically after I had gone to university, I started doing some writing and I became

(15:21):
interested in writing a history of the Albert independence movement.
There wasn't a history of the independence movement at that time.
This was in the early 2000s and I knew there was material available and I wanted the first
history of the independence movement to be written from a sympathetic perspective because
I'd been involved with it.
I knew what the real perspectives were, why people believed in it, why people got involved
in it.

(15:42):
And so I wanted to write that history from that perspective because if an opponent of
independence or a left-wing person wrote a history of it, they would bungle it.
So I ended up writing my first book on Albert independence.
I'm just going to show it here, Alberta separatism then and now.
So that's the book I wrote in 2009, which explained the history of the movement.
The movement at that time had very little support.

(16:04):
That was when Stephen Harper was prime minister.
So people in Alberta trusted Harper to watch out for our interests.
So there was no support for the independence movement essentially at that time and that
book did not sell well and the publisher essentially pulled it from publication.
It did so poorly.
But then Justin Trudeau became leader of the liberal party and I contacted the publisher
and I said, well, if Justin Trudeau becomes prime minister, there's going to be a market

(16:25):
for that book.
So he brought that book back in and Justin Trudeau became prime minister.
And eventually we'd had what was called the Wexit movement where there was large meetings
of people interested in Alberta independence and toward the end of 2019.
And so I was able to sell that book at those meetings.
There were some interest.
After that, some people asked me to update it because it had been written in 2009.

(16:46):
And instead of updating it, I decided to write an altogether different book called No Other
Option Self-Determination for Alberta.
So that book, No Other Option is a brief explanation as to why Alberta should become independent.
It's a historical perspective.
It looks at how Pierre Trudeau was the one who led to the creation of sentiment for Alberta
independence here because there was people in the West were discontent with their relationship

(17:11):
with central Canada right from the very beginning, like for 100 years or whatever.
But there was no movement for independence in the West until Pierre Trudeau became prime
minister.
That's when people started getting involved in creating organizations.
He did so many things to harm the West and to harm Alberta and to harm Canada in general,
actually.
But to make a long story short, he created that movement and he created more reasons

(17:33):
as to why Alberta should become independent.
Anyway, that book kind of summarizes why Alberta should become independent and also explains
that it's a part of Canada's constitutional law that any province can become independent.
You know, Quebec had referendums in 1980 that failed and then one in 1995.

(17:55):
The one in 1995 almost passed.
It just only failed by a little bit.
And so to make a long story short, after that, yeah, very, very small.
After that referendum in 1995, the federal government launched a reference case to the
Supreme Court asking the Supreme Court if Quebec could declare unilateral independence
after referendum.

(18:16):
And the Supreme Court said no, Quebec could not declare independence unilaterally after
referendum.
However, if Quebec held a referendum independence with a clear question and a clear majority
of people voted in favor, then the federal government would be obligated to negotiate
Quebec's independence.
Now that was specifically a Quebec case, but it applies to all the provinces.
So that created constitutional law in Canada that any province that holds a referendum

(18:42):
on independence with a clear question and gets a clear majority in favor of support
of independence, the federal government must begin to negotiate that province's independence.
So that's kind of one of the key points of that book so that people can realize that
this is not some kind of revolution or something we're talking about.
When we're talking about Alibrand independence, we're talking about following the law.
We're talking about following Canada's constitutional law, doing its people's role in property.

(19:04):
And we can get out that way if it's done according to those procedures.
Now let's back up just for just a little bit.
Sure.
Why would Quebec want to leave?
What was that all about?
What was the catalyst that made Quebec decide, hey, we want out?
Yeah, well, actually, I mean, it goes back really historical in their case because they

(19:25):
never wanted to be part of Canada to begin with.
Of course, Quebec was originally a French territory taken over by the British.
And the British actually allowed Quebecers to have a lot of freedom.
They were allowed to keep their religion and their language and to govern their province
according to their own traditions and things.
And so it became part of Canada under those terms.
But over a period of time, especially in the later, well, certainly by the 1960s, a lot

(19:49):
of people in Quebec were kind of fed up.
They just didn't, they wanted their own country.
Like they had their own language.
They were afraid that their language was going to be swamped by English in North America.
That's totally culturally distinct.
Like French culture historically.
So they had their own culture, their own language.
They were afraid of being swamped by North America.
I mean, they're part of an English speaking country.
And the United States was, of course, the most powerful country in the world with English

(20:12):
as the main language.
So they wanted to protect their own culture and identity.
And many of them felt they could do that better as an independent country.
So by the 1960s, there were movements started like organizations to make Quebec independent.
But they were, you know, there's a number of organizations, they were divided among
themselves.
They weren't anywhere until a guy named Rene Levesque came along.

(20:32):
He had been a provincial cabinet minister.
And anyway, he decided to cast his lot in with having an independent Quebec.
So he was very popular and all the different groups united behind him.
So Rene Levesque was a very key person in that, you know, so he was elected premier
in 1976.
And so he was the one who held that referendum in 1980, although it failed.
But yeah, I mean, once you get that idea going, that independence is an option.

(20:57):
And a lot of people, you know, rally behind that.
It kind of builds on itself.
It got some momentum.
And so Quebec, you know, they had the then Pierre Trudeau was reelected in 1980, partly
on because he was promising Quebec, he would reopen the Constitution and fix it because
Quebec didn't like the Constitution.
Anyway, he did change the Constitution, but it wasn't what Quebec wanted.

(21:17):
So Quebec never signed on.
And so we ended up with, you know, controversies in the late 80s.
We had the Meach Lake Accord, which was an attempt to bring Quebec in the Constitution,
and that failed.
And then there was a Charlottetown Accord in 1992.
It also failed.
And it was because of those failures that the momentum for Quebec independence built
up again.
So they were able to have their referendum in 1995.

(21:37):
And again, that one just barely failed, like less than a percent like Chris mentioned.
Since that referendum, though, the sentiment, you know, died away, not completely, but it
dissipated to a certain degree until recently.
Right now, the party Quebec, the separatist party is actually leading in the polls in
Quebec, but they don't have very many members of their Quebec legislature right now.

(22:00):
But still, that idea is still strong there.
But Quebec's main motivation for wanting to leave is cultural and linguistic, whereas
Alberta's has a lot to do with economics, primarily economics, because of especially
with our oil industry.
Pierre Trudeau started it.
Well, he tried to like the oil.
The price of oil did not really go really high until 1973 when there was a war in the

(22:24):
Middle East.
And that's when Pierre Trudeau first put an export tax on Alberta oil because price oil
was high.
And Trudeau wanted the federal government to reap the benefits of that high price rather
than Alberta.
And so oil that was sold, you know, exported to the United States, the federal government
would take a huge percentage of that sale, even though that's the oil was Alberta's resource.
And also, when the oil was sold within Canada, Alberta would only get a fraction of the world

(22:48):
price.
You know, the federal government kept the price of oil low in Canada for the benefit
of Ontario, Quebec, and the revenue they got from the export tax on Alberta's oil, they
would use to import foreign oil at a subsidized price for central Canada.
Anyway, this was grossly unfair.
And that's what led to, you know, many people in Alberta being upset with Pierre Trudeau.
Then he brought in the National Energy Program, which was, you know, kind of that same kind

(23:11):
of policy, but with additional problems for Alberta.
But for the short answer, the short part, though, is that it was primarily economic
considerations that made Albertans want to consider leaving Canada.
So after well, I mean, sure, go ahead.
At least, you know, at least that's in the past.

(23:32):
You know, it's at least it was just Pierre Trudeau that did that.
And, you know, the federal government wouldn't think of using Alberta as an economic whipping
boy or a sacrificial offering to Donald Trump.
So that so we're in a good we're we're in good shape now, right?
Well, not exactly.
I mean, I mean, there's skimming over a few other things.

(23:53):
But, you know, once once Justin Trudeau was reelected was elected in 2015, he started
to implement his climate change program, which involved preventing Alberta from developing
pipelines to export our oil and also other restrictions on our oil industry that would,
you know, prevent the development of the oil industry and hurt us financially and economically.
So that created more support for independence.

(24:14):
But as you mentioned right now, what we're facing right now is that Donald Trump was
elected as president of the United States and he threatened to put tariffs on Canadian
products, all Canadian products sold to the United States.
And so one of the options that the federal government has talked about in retaliating
if Trump puts those tariffs on is to cut off Alberta's oil exports, the United States,

(24:36):
because the United States, you know, they they actually produce most of their own oil,
but they still have to import a lot.
And Canada is the biggest source of imported oil to the United States and specifically
Alberta.
So if Canada cut off oil to the United States, that would hurt the Americans a lot.
And so that was considered to be one of the main weapons that the federal government could
use against Trump's tariffs.
But of course, that's that hurts Alberta a lot if we can't export our oil like we would

(24:59):
be we we would suffer the most by far with that kind of tactic and retaliating retaliating
against Trump.
And of course, that would be they would sacrifice Alberta's interests in order to mean in order
to defend industries in Ontario and Quebec is what it comes down to.
Like they they didn't like our oil industry.
They were trying to shut it down because of the impact was having on climate change.

(25:22):
They didn't like it at all.
And then suddenly when this tariff threat comes up, suddenly this is Canadian energy
and they can cut off Canadian energy.
Suddenly they were in favor of it again, briefly at least.
But again, it's like it's a pattern.
Alberta is the one who gets has to pay the cost.
You know, whether it's the price of oil in the 70s and 80s or whether it's the who's

(25:43):
going to pay the cost for preventing climate change, that's going to be Alberta.
And then now there's tariffs threatened from the United States.
Who's going to pay the cost?
It's going to be Alberta.
You know what I mean?
It's it's the pattern that Alberta is the one that has to pay the cost for the benefit
of central Canada.
So it's just part of this larger pattern.
If we don't want to pay that, though, I mean, you say the federal government took a big
chunk of our oil export revenue in the early 80s.

(26:09):
That apparently was fine.
But now Alberta stands up and says, no, we're not going to let you destroy our economy.
And we're being called greedy.
Our premier, Daniel Smith, is being called a what was the word?
Not a team player.
And she's Alberta's greedy because we're looking after our economic interests.
I mean, it's just money.
We don't.
Why should we?
Why are we worried about this money?

(26:30):
We don't need it, do we?
Well, of course, we get greedy.
You know, it's funny because, you know, when when Peter Lougheed was the premier in the
70s and early 80s fighting Trudeau, he was called greedy.
He was called, you know, a traitor.
He wasn't standing up for Canada.
You know, you want to mean it was so a lot of this similar type of rhetoric we're hearing
now that Daniel Smith is not on Team Canada.

(26:52):
You know, she's not a real Canadian.
She's not being true to her country.
All this kind of stuff.
This is what happens when a leader stands up for Alberta.
This is what Alberta leaders are supposed to do.
And when they do what they're supposed to do, they're you know, they're hammered by
other other people who don't appreciate Alberta standing up for itself.
So I mean, you know, sorry, go ahead.
You know who I would consider a traitor?

(27:15):
Anybody who signed on to an agreement with another group of people or a stronger group
of people in which the people who were asking them to join specifically said, you know,
we desire you to enter into this confederation with us so that the wealth of your the wealth

(27:35):
and resources of your area can be used to build up our factories and enrich our lives
in every conceivable way.
That's greedy.
Absolutely greedy.
And I think that whoever signed on to that was a traitor to the the colonists here in
Alberta.
And nothing's changed.

(27:58):
Well that's the thing.
You know, the federal government is not interested in our best interests.
So the only people we can rely on to defend us here are our premiers, our provincial politicians,
especially the premier.
So, you know, if the premier doesn't stand up for us, nobody else is going to.
So it's really good to hear Danielle Smith defend Canada's oil industry to defend Alberta.

(28:20):
And she's she's very smart.
I've seen her interviewed recently about what's going on in the United States.
And I'm very impressed by how articulate she is in explaining the importance of Alberta
oil to the United States and not only defending Alberta's exports to the United States as
it is right now, but she's trying to develop further markets for Alberta's oil.
The United States, we can actually expand our exports to the United States, not just

(28:42):
maintain what we have.
And that's our production.
I mean, and actually Alberta's oil is is important for American security.
You know, it's interesting going back to the history of the oil sands that the oil man
most responsible for developing the oil stands in Alberta was a man named Howard Pugh, the
president of Sun Oil in the United States.
And he was a conservative and American patriot.

(29:04):
And back in those days during the Cold War, he was concerned for American energy security.
And he saw Alberta's oil sands as a way of providing energy, like not from within the
United States, but neighboring on the United States.
So it's so it would provide security to the United States energy supply to have Alberta's
oil stands.
That was part of his incentive for actually initiating the development of oil sands.

(29:25):
So he created a company called Great Canadian Oil Sands, which I think is now known as Sun
Corp.
But that was he wanted energy security for United States.
And so Alberta's oil supply does supply, just provide energy security for the United States
because it doesn't have to be shipped across oceans.
I mean, if you consider the United States getting its oil from Saudi Arabia or even

(29:45):
Venezuela, they have to come by shipping over the ocean, which is very vulnerable in a situation
where there's conflict.
Whereas Alberta's oil just comes from pipeline in the neighboring country.
So our energy is much more secure if the United States and gives the Americans more security
that way.
And so we should be their main supplier.
And so Daniel Smith's very smart that way in pointing that out.

(30:08):
So why don't we just fix what's wrong with our relationship with Canada and get on with
it?
If it's broken, it can be fixed, right?
Well, I'm glad you mentioned that because that's a very reasonable sentiment.
And that's been the sentiment of Albertans going back several decades back in the time
of Pierre Trudeau.
There was many people who believe that.
And there have been many initiatives in that direction since that time.

(30:32):
And it's because those initiatives were not successful that I think the case for Alberta
independence is very strong.
So for example, one of the very best efforts to fix a British position within Canada was
Reform Party of Canada.
Now that started in the...
Pardon me?
The West wants in.
Exactly.

(30:53):
So it was started in the late 80s because Brian Mulroney had become prime minister after
Pierre Trudeau and he was going to be the West's savior because our members of parliament
were progressive conservative and Mulroney was progressive conservative.
So he was going to be our guy and take care of us.
But most of Mulroney's MPs were from Ontario and Quebec.
And so a situation arose where Canada had to find a city that could maintain Canada's

(31:20):
new CF-18 fighter jets.
We got these new fighter jets and there was a very expensive government contract to maintain
them.
There was only two cities in Canada with the facilities to maintain them, Winnipeg and
Quebec.
So the government held a competition to see which city was the best for maintaining the
CF-18 fighter jets.
And Winnipeg won that competition based on the government's criteria.

(31:41):
And so Mulroney gave the contract to Montreal because Montreal, of course, had a lot more
votes and Mulroney was from Quebec himself.
So again, here was a situation where the West was robbed of what was rightfully ours because
of Canada's political system where the federal government caters to central Canada.
So that kind of was the instigating event that led to Preston Manning creating the Reform

(32:06):
Party, which became very popular in the West.
As Chris mentioned, the motto of the party was the West wants in.
People in Western Canada, we wanted an equal voice that we deserve to have in the federal
government.
And so we elected dozens and dozens of Reform Party MPs, like most of Alberta's MPs were
from the Reform Party in the 1993 and 1997 elections.

(32:27):
And so we sent our MPs to Ottawa to fix things for us and they weren't able to do it.
I mean, they had every good intention and there was so many people involved putting
in so much effort into getting the Reform Party established and getting its MPs elected
and sending them to Ottawa to do what's good for us.
And they did what they could, but we didn't have enough MPs to make a difference.

(32:48):
So that effort didn't work.
There was one other really major effort and that was the Tripoli Senate campaign, which
actually started essentially in the late 1970s and it got really big in the 80s and the 80s
and their Reform Party was behind that.
Now, the Canada Senate is not balanced regionally, so Alberta gets very little representation
within the Senate.

(33:08):
So that's not an option for us as it is.
But if we had a properly balanced Senate, Alberta could have a voice in the federal
government.
So the idea of the Tripoli Senate, the Tripoli was an elected Senate.
One of you was elected.
One was effective, which means it has real power.
And the other was equal, that each province would have an equal number of senators.
So if we had a Senate along those lines where we elect our senators, there's an equal number

(33:28):
from each province and they have effective powers.
If we had a Senate like that in Canada, the West would be able to exercise power within
the federal government and we wouldn't have policies attack us the way that they have
been, you know, especially under Pierre Trudeau and Justin Trudeau.
So there were many people involved in this.
Reform Party was much behind the Tripoli Senate.
It didn't really get going.
But just to make a long story short, one of the main supporters of the Tripoli Senate

(33:52):
was a guy named Stephen Harper, who was one of the original Reform Party MPs.
And again, to make a long story short, he ended up becoming prime minister.
And as prime minister, Stephen Harper initiated a lot of legislation in the House of Commons
and the Senate to try and get Senate reform.
But he was thwarted because a lot of the provinces don't want Senate reform.
And so even some of the members of his own caucus didn't want Senate reform that would

(34:15):
benefit the West because a lot of his caucus was, of course, from Ontario and Quebec.
And ultimately, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the kind of changes he wanted for
the Senate would require a constitutional amendment.
In fact, it would require, I think, unanimous consent of the provinces.
So he was ultimately thwarted at the Supreme Court.
But Stephen Harper spent many years as prime minister trying to get Senate reform for the

(34:37):
West within Canada, trying to fix the system as we're talking about.
So you've got to ask yourself, though, if the prime minister of Canada cannot make the
changes that the West needs, even though he's trying, then who's going to be able to do
it for us?
So if the prime minister can't do it, nobody can do it.
And so it can't be done.
So we've tried many, many Westerners, thousands of Westerners, tens of thousands of Westerners

(34:58):
over several decades through the Reform Party, through the Triple E Senate movement, and
even through other less important efforts, perhaps.
We're trying to fix things so that Alberta would have an equal representation or that
proper representation, as I say, within Canada, and that our voices would be heard and we
wouldn't always be stamped on.

(35:18):
They were trying to fix Canada.
They tried over and over again for decades and it didn't work.
And so if it hasn't worked this far after all these efforts, it's not going to work.
And so that's why I wrote my most recent book called Time to Leave Canada Cannot Be Fixed.
And it's mostly, like I say, the subtitle is Canada Cannot Be Fixed.
And I say Canada Cannot Be Fixed because Westerners have tried for decades to fix Canada to get

(35:43):
a proper voice for the West and none of their efforts worked.
I mean, they didn't fail because they weren't doing it right.
It didn't work because of the ways Canada's political system is.
Ontario and Quebec have the majority of the population.
Therefore they have the majority of the members of parliament in Ottawa.
And if something doesn't appeal to the benefit of central Canada, it can't be done in Canada

(36:04):
politically.
And so because central Canada does not care about what's happening in Alberta in terms
of our, you know, we're getting hammered by the federal government one way or the other,
central Canada is happy about that.
And so regardless of anything we try and do, they have the majority and they can prevent
us from getting the kinds of changes we need.
So as long as Canada's system is like that, and it's going to stay that way because that's

(36:25):
the way the population distribution is, Alberta cannot get our way within Canada.
So if we want to have a government that represents our interests and does things according to
our interests, we're going to have to have our own country as Alberta, as an independent
country.
The leaders that we elect for our government are going to do what's best for us, not what's
best for Toronto and Montreal.

(36:45):
And that's the only way we're going to be able to get politicians who do what's best
for us is by becoming independent.
So that's kind of the theme of my most recent book, Time to Leave.
Do you remember this, Michael, when Jason Kenney came in to save us from the federal
government with the fair deal plan, with the fair deal panel, all these things they could

(37:08):
do.
They talked about employment insurance, pension, they talked about immigration, they talked
about what else was in there.
Basically all the things that we could take control of and do in Alberta.
Equalization was the big one.
Jason Kenney even put equalization to a referendum in the province, and their referendum question

(37:32):
was something like, are you happy with the current equalization, or do you want to continue
making equalization payments, or something like that?
67% of Albertans said no.
Now those 67% of Albertans, I think most of them thought they were going to vote in this
referendum, and if they said no, then we'd stop paying equalization.

(37:52):
Why didn't that happen?
Yeah, it actually was a referendum, the principle of equalization is in the Canada's constitution.
And so based on the succession reference decision, which I mentioned earlier about a province
having the legal option to hold a referendum on independence, there was a misinterpretation

(38:15):
of that decision to think that a province could hold a referendum on any constitutional question
and force the federal government to negotiate.
So actually the referendum was held on a misunderstanding of the Supreme Court's decision, but even
then, like you say, a majority of over 90% of Albertans voted against the equalization
program, like to have it removed from the constitution, and nothing happened because

(38:38):
it wasn't a succession referendum, there was no obligation on the federal government actually
to discuss it, because like I said, that was a misunderstanding.
But even then, the equalization program is a federal program, and so the people in charge
of that are the federal politicians who are primarily elected in central Canada.

(38:58):
So they can just dismiss anything that Alberta says about equalization.
I mean, the equalization program is going to stay there as long as Alberta is part of
Canada, because we have no leverage in negotiating with the federal government.
Like we have this referendum, the vast majority of Albertans vote against equalization, but
we have no leverage in negotiating with the federal government over that.

(39:19):
They can just keep doing that, and there's nothing we can do to stop it.
So it's just the way of Canada's political system is against Alberta in the way it is
right now, and the only way we can take control of our future is by becoming independent.
Are you sure?
Because we have a representative democracy here, and we elect people to parliament.
We elect our members of parliament, and they go to parliament and speak on our behalf.

(39:41):
So if we don't want equalization, and they know that, why don't they just go to parliament
and tell the federal government that we don't want to participate in this equalization program
anymore?
Well, that sounds good, but you know, you got to remember that even, I mean, there's
probably Alberta MPs who would talk against equalization, so I don't want to generalize
too much.

(40:01):
But most of Alberta's MPs are with the Conservative Party, and they want their party to be the
party in power, to have the prime minister, their leader to be prime minister.
And the only way they can do that is to win a majority of seats in Ontario or Quebec.
And so they're going to favor policies that are going to be, that are going to sell in
Ontario and Quebec.

(40:22):
So I suspect even Alberta MPs from the Conservative Party would be like not very, their party
leaders would not be happy with them speaking against equalization.
Pierre-Paul Léves, leader of the Conservative Party, he wants to be prime minister.
He cannot be prime minister unless he gets a large number of votes in Ontario and Quebec.
And if he speaks against equalization, he will not get those votes and he will not be

(40:44):
prime minister.
And so even though I'm like, I'm certain that there'll be, there are Conservative MPs in
Alberta who are not sympathetic to equalization, but the leadership of their party will not
want them to speak against it because it reduces the possibility of them actually forming government.
So even MPs in Alberta who would be sympathetic to Alberta's positions, they have to keep

(41:06):
their, they have to be very careful about what they speak on because they can thwart
the federal party's efforts to win votes in Ontario and Quebec.
They have to be very sensitive about what they say.
So I suspect that, I mean, I don't recall hearing members of parliament from Alberta
speaking out against equalization.
Maybe I'm wrong.
Like it could be that there are some that do so, but the federal, the leadership of

(41:28):
their own party would not be favorable towards that because the incentive is for them to
be quiet so that they can win a national government and Pierre-Paul Léves can be prime minister.
So even though they want to represent Alberta, even within their own party, there's pressure
on them not to speak on those kinds of issues for fear of offending voters in Quebec.
Because of course, Quebec is by far the biggest recipient of equalization payments.

(41:53):
And if you speak against that, that's going to offend Quebecers and they're not going
to vote for you.
So that again, that provides a disincentive for all, for a conservative party MPs in any
part of the country to speak against equalization.
I hope that makes sense.
We saw this.
We also saw this with, yeah, it totally does make sense.
But we also saw this with the pension plan, the Alberta pension plan.

(42:14):
The numbers speak for themselves.
Math doesn't lie.
It's a simple language that everybody can understand if they bother.
And an Alberta pension plan would benefit Albertans greatly.
Absolutely.
100%.
There's no doubt, no matter which way you look at it.
But Pierre-Paul Léves, he was on TV or some social media thing and he said, no, Alberta

(42:35):
should stay on the Canada pension plan.
It's better for them and better for everybody.
Well, he got one of those things right.
It's better for everybody else, but it's detrimental for Alberta.
So how much, I understand helping your neighbours out, right?
But in Alberta here, we have some pretty big problems.
I mean, we have right now it was minus 35 or something last night.

(42:58):
I guarantee you there was people that died on the streets in Edmonton.
We have homeless veterans dying because they can't access funding or get things they need
to survive or get the help they need.
It's absolutely unreal.

(43:18):
Not only that, but when the federal government does something like an ideological mission
against carbon dioxide or cow farts or something like that, Alberta pays and we pay dearly.
Our industry shrinks, we lose jobs, unemployment goes up.
We are so tethered to the voice of our prime minister for better or for worse.

(43:45):
It does not make any sense.
So when we joined the Federation in 1905, I don't understand why people would agree
to that.
But if you laid it out black and white, you told Albertans, this is what we're offering
you.
We're going to take a bunch of money, we're going to send it east.

(44:08):
We're going to use it to fund foreign wars that we have nothing to do with also, by the
way.
We're going to have you over-contribute to all the social programs.
We're going to attack your industry and your culture and your way of life.
We're going to call you embarrassing cousins and sewer rats and all sorts of things.
And then we're not going to give you enough of a voice in the democracy to make any changes

(44:34):
that you want.
Who would agree to that?
Nobody.
Not one person.
Yeah, but historically, it's important to understand, just back in 1905, there was very
few people here.
They were just starting to settle the area.
This was actually then known as the Northwest Territories, Alberta, Saskatchewan.

(44:56):
So they're just bringing in, from the late 1800s, just starting to bring in settlers,
especially from Eastern Europe, who don't necessarily speak English and stuff.
So a lot of the majority of the people that would have been here would be newcomers who
hadn't been here for very long.
Their priority is just trying to get established, trying to...

(45:18):
They're pioneers, trying to break the ground to create their farms and stuff like that.
So there probably wasn't a lot of those kinds of...the reasoning that you're talking about
there.
But the biggest problem was actually that Alberta and Saskatchewan, and Manitoba were
not given the ownership of their resources at that time.
And already then by...
I can't remember the exact date it'd be.

(45:39):
It was before World War I, so it might've been 1912 or something like that.
There was an MLA in the Alberta government, Alwyn Brownlee Moore, I think was his name,
and he wrote a book.
He was very concerned about Alberta not owning its own resources, like along the lines you're
talking about there.
And so he proposed Alberta becoming independent at that time, not actually to exist as an

(46:01):
independent country.
But he figured if we pulled out of Canada, we'd be our own independent country, then
we'd renegotiate our way in on much better terms.
So he already proposed that, like I said, before World War I.
And I know it's before World War I because he actually died as a soldier in World War
I.
But that was very early on, like within 10 years of Alberta, less than 10 years of Alberta
being a province.
Maybe you have an elected member of the legislature saying that Alberta should become independent

(46:24):
as a way of renegotiating our relationship with Canada and getting a better deal.
So there were people who looked at it, who saw what was going on already back in those
days.
But Alberta wasn't developed economically to the degree it is now.
So it was harder for many people to understand the situation.
And like I say, with many people coming from overseas and just becoming, just being pioneers

(46:49):
and starting their farms and stuff, there's probably less, to some degree, less political
consciousness.
Although now that I think about it more, there was a farmers movement, though.
We ended up with a few years later, United Farmers of Alberta, because the farmers did
not feel they were getting a good deal within Canada.
And so they created their own political movements out in the Western Prairies.

(47:09):
We had farmers' political movements to defend the interests of farmers.
It was a regional movement in a sense, but I guess they saw it more as farmers against
other segments of the economy.
So you did get political movements trying to improve the situation of people out here.
But it was never for, aside from that Brownlee Moore guy who I mentioned, there wasn't a

(47:31):
movement for, say, for independence until much later when Pierre Trudeau came along.
Brownlee was the name of the guy?
Brownlee was the premier.
The name of the guy was Brownlee Moore, I think his name, I just had to look it up here
in a book.
But yeah, we had a premier Brownlee.
Yeah, he would have been United Farmers of Alberta.
Yeah, that's what you're saying, right?

(47:51):
He was the last...
I only know one other Brownlee.
I wonder if she's related.
I'm going to have to ask her.
So why don't we just elect an independence party and get after it?
Well, you know, the independence parties, there's been independence parties in Alberta

(48:14):
to one degree or another, but unfortunately, for one reason or another, they've all suffered
from internal conflict.
You know, going back to the most successful independence party we ever had in Alberta
was the Western Canada Concept Party of Alberta, which elected a member of the legislature
in 1982 in a by-election that was Gordon Kessler.
And that's the only time a Western separatist has ever been elected in Canada.

(48:37):
And you know, so he had a lot of support.
That was in the Olds-Dinsbury constituency.
But his party, you know, unfortunately also had internal conflict.
And that was one of the main reasons why when there was a provincial election a few months
later, the party was not able to elect any MLAs.
I mean, they did actually quite well in the sense that they got 11 or 12% of the entire

(48:59):
provincial vote.
So they did well that way, but the vote was spread out a little bit.
It was much stronger in rural areas than cities, of course, but they didn't actually get an
MLA, and that hurt the party and the internal division continued.
So it never did get an MLA elected.
And it's the same kind of situation we've had with independence parties in recent years.

(49:22):
Some of them have, you know, got a certain degree of support in polling, but ultimately,
you know, there's conflicts within the party, and that kind of discredits the party in the
public view when there's that kind of conflict inside.
And so they don't get enough support.
So that's one of the reasons so far we haven't had a successful independence party.
I mean, it's not another question.
It can still happen.
It's happened in Quebec.
Right now we have, of course, Danielle Smith, who is very supportive of Alberta.

(49:46):
But she already has, if she wanted, like she has her government could hold an independence
referendum if it wanted.
So that authority is there.
And if something went wrong in terms of these negotiations with Trump, I mean, you know,
that would be something she could have in her back pocket that she could pull out in
a worst case scenario if she saw it that way.
But that well, sorry.

(50:08):
She did say that she wants to do everything she can to fix Alberta's position within
the Federation, right?
These wrongs and build a better relationship with the federal government and the rest of
Canada so that we can be a stronger country.
And you were there.
She was asked, well, you know what, Premier, if you are, I guess it was a premier at the

(50:28):
time.
If you can't do that, if that fails, what is your or else?
And are you willing to use it?
And she looked out at the crowd of the Alberta Prosperity Project at that leadership debate.
And she said, the Alberta Prosperity Project is the or else.
You folks are the or else.
If I can't do this, if it's not going to work, then it's your job to get that ref, make that

(50:52):
referendum happen and give us the mandate.
Now, that wasn't her exact words, but that's pretty much the sentiment.
If she's unable to do what she thinks she can do or what she's trying to do.
And I mean, we've spoken about this at many events, why it's very unlikely that these
things will work.
We become the or else.
So if you want a referendum, that's our job.

(51:13):
And in Alberta, we have referendum legislation.
If we get enough signatures, enough people supporting it, it compels the government to
put a question, a referendum question to the people of Alberta.
And that's how we can do it.
And Peggy asked, is Alberta able to legally become an independent country?
What would the feds do?
Yes, Alberta is able to legally become an independent country if it is done through

(51:38):
a democratic process.
There is another process, but we don't consider that at this point at all.
And what would the feds do?
They would cry and probably fire a lot of people and make a lot of cuts.
And they would stop telling other provinces to engage in ideological policy that keeps

(51:59):
their resources in the ground and prevents them from being prosperous.
They would be forced to loosen the shackles of the woke climate alarmist agenda that the
rest of the country succumb to.
And things would be painful for a time and they would get much, much better.
Michael, I don't know if you know this, but Quebec, Quebec sits on enough natural gas

(52:21):
that they should be completely energy independent and no person in Quebec should even have to
pay for natural gas.
That's how much they have.
They have a huge reserve and they won't touch it.
They won't drill for their natural gas because they don't need to.
All they have to do is be Quebec and collect their $12 billion of equalization and they're

(52:42):
happy.
But if that wasn't there, if Alberta said, you know what, we're just going to do our
thing.
You guys do your thing.
Let's be cool with each other.
Quebec would be forced to do something.
Atlantic Canada would be forced to stop supporting and propping up federal governments that just
take from the rest of the country to give it to them because it wouldn't be there to

(53:04):
take anymore.
You know?
So yeah, legally, absolutely.
And what would the feds do?
They would cry and many of them would be fired.
Actually, if I can just address what would the feds do, like the referendum, if we had
a successful independence referendum, like as I mentioned, the federal government then
is required, is obligated to negotiate our independence.
What they would first do for sure is they would start offering us incentives to stay

(53:27):
in Canada.
And Dr. Maudrie would talk about this, how the independence referendum doesn't result
in independence automatically.
It results in negotiations towards independence so that the federal government would have
this time period where they can offer us alternatives.
They can say, hey, if you guys decide to stay, we'll give you this, this, this, and this.

(53:48):
Suddenly, the federal government would see that we've had these concerns all these decades
and suddenly they would respond to them.
You know, they wouldn't ignore them anymore.
So and that's called leverage.
Exactly.
So, so people who don't want Alberta to become independent and just want Alberta to have
a better deal within Canada, they too should support an independence referendum because
that is what would give Alberta the leverage to negotiate.

(54:11):
Like I say, a successful independence result would not immediately result in independence.
It would just result in negotiations towards independence.
But the federal government certainly would try and offer us something to stay in.
And we would, you know, we don't know what that would be.
Maybe it wouldn't be very good and we'd have to go independent anyway.
But maybe they would offer us something.
I mean, for myself, I'd like independence, but maybe they would offer something that a

(54:33):
majority of Albertans would be willing to support to stay within Canada.
Maybe they would, you know, reduce.
Well, I mean, they wouldn't be able to, I don't know exactly what they would do, but
maybe they could, maybe they would change the Senate so that we'd have representation
in the Senate property or something like that.
But they would come back with some kinds of offers that would make Alberta's situation
within Canada better.
For sure they would do that.

(54:54):
Now what that would result in, we don't know.
Sorry, go ahead.
There'd have to be a lot.
You know, like if I zoom out a little bit and I consider why is it that I am so independence
minded?
Why do I want to see the independent Republic of Alberta?
What is the end goal?
Well, the end goal for me isn't necessarily independence.
Independence is a means to the goal.
The goal for me is sovereignty.

(55:16):
I want this province and the people of this province to be able to chart their own course.
I want the people of this province to benefit from being able to trade our resources with
our neighbors as we wish.
I want the people of this province to be, to be, to take comfort in knowing that their
rights and freedoms cannot ever be taken away by the federal government, those types of

(55:39):
things.
So if we could get all those things and we were completely 100% sovereign, you know,
then there's no reason to go independent.
However, I am well aware of how the system works and the structure with in which we find
ourselves.
So I, the logical conclusion for me is that independence is the only answer.

(56:00):
But what you said is extremely important.
Whether you believe in a independent Republic of Alberta or an Alberta with a better position
within confederation and some of these inequities addressed, specifically representation, that's
a big one.
You also should be demanding this referendum because that's the only way you're going to

(56:21):
get what you want.
Michael, as Dr. Wagner has described a number of instances where everyone from premiers
to MLAs to prime ministers have been sympathetic to the plight of Western Canada and nobody
has ever been able to do anything.
And I think it's because the this isn't a fact thing.

(56:46):
It's not a logical reason why people would not want this referendum.
It's a feeling thing.
Oh, well, if I if I want a referendum on independence for Alberta, that makes me a trader to Canada.
No, what makes a person a trader to Canada is if you sacrifice and discard the ideals

(57:07):
and the values that this country was supposed to be built on in favour of a flag over the
fundamental values that we should be working towards.
And those fundamental values have been decayed and eroded over the last 150 years.
And it's not stopping unless we stop it.
So yeah, and if I just you know, that idea of a trader, we're not traders.

(57:29):
We're trying to follow Canada's constitutional law.
That's what the referendum is all about.
You know, a trader is someone who either, you know, sells out their country to a foreign
country or, you know, tries to overthrow their government illegitimately, you know, through
violence or something like that.
We're not talking about any of those kind of things.
Like when we follow Canada's constitutional law, we're doing what we're supposed to be
doing within the law.
And so it's the furthest thing from being a trader.

(57:52):
It's being loyal to the country in the sense that we're following the constitutional law
and we're doing what's best for our province in, you know, working towards an independent
Alberta.
That's not treachery at all.
That's you know, we're saving the best part of Canada.
Alberta is the best part of Canada.
We're trying to save it.
And independence is one thing, one major way that we could actually perhaps save Canada,
the original ideals of Canada, as Chris mentioned.

(58:15):
Yeah.
And this country has engaged and allowed destructive policies from the federal government for so
long.
We've been weakened so badly that now the president of the United States literally trolls

(58:37):
our prime minister by calling him the governor of the great state of Canada.
Now that, yeah, it's funny.
I get a kick out of the trolling.
But if you really think about that for a second, you'll realize that what we've allowed to
happen in Canada and actually the Laurentian elites really the East, because they're the

(58:59):
ones that make all the policy, what they've allowed to happen to this country has put
us in a position where we're viewed as weak, ineffective, can't take care of ourselves,
can't afford things like the country's broke.
And now, you know, I would have never thought it possible three months ago, but I don't

(59:22):
think it's an impossibility that Canada could be swallowed up by the United States should
things continue, should a province like Alberta who has the resources to do and not stand
up and say, no, we're not going that way.
We need to make this place great again.
Right.
So we live in some very interesting times.
And now that those words have been spoken, Donald Trump literally spoke the words annex

(59:46):
Canada that changes the game completely.
And if you didn't think about Alberta standing up for itself with the referendum before,
you should certainly be thinking about it now.
Yeah, you know, I think part of the Trump thing is he knows we have such a weak leader.
I mean, Justin Trudeau is probably the main critic of Canada's history and Canada's identity.

(01:00:07):
Like he says, we're a post national society, like with no value, you know, no common values
or whatever.
No identity.
No identity.
Yeah, like we have no identity.
Like, I mean, that's that's not true in Alberta.
We have an identity, but you know, when you see when a foreign leader like Trump sees
someone who who dismisses his own country and criticizes his own country, like what
kind of a leader is that a leader should be standing up for his country and defending

(01:00:31):
its values and its identity and things like that.
And Trudeau does the opposite.
So Canada is in a bad situation with a leader like this.
When you have a weak leader like that, it's easy for a foreign leader, you know, to try
and take advantage of the situation, even if it's just tweets like Trump is doing.
Yeah, it's it's been no shortage of entertainment.

(01:00:52):
You don't need to watch TV shows anymore.
All you got to do is watch snippets of the news, watch X, watch Facebook, social media,
that and it's you can't even write this stuff.
It is literally stranger than fiction.
But to, you know, to the benefit of the province, with all her imperfections, Daniel Smith has
really I mean, she has gone over and above by far what I've seen any other premier do

(01:01:22):
when she was first vying for the leadership at UCP.
I had the privilege of having some conversations with her or I guess she had the privilege
of having conversations with me.
And and I really challenged her on some of the things she said, like I was very frustrated
because Jason Kenney was supposed to fix these things for Alberta.
We're supposed to fix equalization.
We're supposed to get this fair deal panel and get this relationship repaired.

(01:01:44):
And I discovered that everything that was happening was all smoke and mirrors, you know,
like the equalization referendum.
That was exciting.
And then it was nothing.
The challenge of the carbon tax at the Supreme Court, that was exciting.
And it was nothing.
And I spoke to her about some of these things.
I said, you know, what's the point?
If the Supreme Court is against us, everyone's against us, no matter what we do.

(01:02:06):
And she explained to me, not in these exact words, but sometimes what you see isn't exactly
what's happening.
Like we see a challenge in the Supreme Court.
We think, OK, our our government is they're fighting back against this climate agenda.
Well, they didn't.
In the ruling that the Supreme Court handed down, they did.
They said because neither party disputes the facts of climate change, we rule in favor

(01:02:31):
of the federal government and the carbon tax stance.
Well, that to me was just that blew my mind.
Like to not challenge policy that is anti-human in nature, kneecaps our resources, reduces
our prosperity, not just in the province, but attacks what made the entire planet more
prosperous over the last 200 years.

(01:02:52):
We didn't even challenge it.
And then, you know, the equalization thing, it was all the same.
So she knows these things and she seems to be taking steps to address some of them in
her own way.
I don't know what she's fighting against or internally or whatever.
But to see her on the world stage, meeting with the president in the United States, probably

(01:03:14):
the most the most I don't know what the word is, the most consequential presidential election
in U.S. history, at least in my lifetime.
You know, I'm excited to see her get some of these things done.
And I don't think it's going to result in everything we want to see happen in Alberta.
But it's going to get us that much closer.

(01:03:36):
Right.
Do you think we're closer to a sovereign or independent Alberta now with Trump and Smith
and all this?
Or do you think we're farther away?
Well, I'd say we're closer in the sense that you described that I think Danielle Smith
understands independent sentiment in Alberta better than any previous premier.

(01:03:57):
Like I think she does, you know, she talks to people and she listens to people.
I know there's people in her party who are sympathetic to independence.
So even though she doesn't talk that way, I know she's heard a lot of it and she understands
it.
So I think we're closer in that sense.
Like I don't think we're closer in a chronological sense, like it's going to happen this year
necessarily or something.
But we're closer in the sense that we've we've got our first leader who understands why people

(01:04:21):
really want it.
And so if something happens, you know, that's going to trigger something very serious happens
against Alberta, she would be more likely to spring a referendum than any other previous
leader that we've ever had.
So incrementally in that sense.
And also, like she did really step into the leadership void, you know, when Trump started

(01:04:42):
making these tweets about tariffs and stuff and Trudeau is such a weak leader, what could
he do?
She did really step up.
You know, she does have qualities that many other Canadian leaders haven't shown before.
So so like I think we have a better leader than we usually have at the provincial level
here right now.
And so, you know, she's to be commended for what she's doing.
And so like it's progress in a sense, you know, in terms of having a better leader and

(01:05:06):
one who really understands the province and what we need.
So so like it's closer in that sense, I'd say.
What do you what do you think about?
There are there are lots of people out there that would love to just hoist an American
flag and be down with it.
I mean, one to one dollar for dollar Canadian to American.
That's a 30 percent.

(01:05:27):
That's a 30 percent touch right there.
Right to bear arms.
Real free speech.
Part of the most powerful protected country on the planet.
The list goes on and on and on.
I mean, I really don't see many downsides except for emotional attachment to my flag,
to my country.
What do you what do you have to say to the folks who want Alberta to become a fifty first

(01:05:49):
state or want to see Canada as part of the United States?
What does that look like?
Well, like I'm not in favor of that because I'm like for me, the idea of Alberta independence
is Albertans.
We get to make the decisions for our future, for our province.
You know, so we've been fighting the federal government all these years for that.
And I think if we ended up joining the United States, like we wouldn't have the exact same

(01:06:11):
problems, but we'd still we would just be a small like four million people in a in a
country of like three hundred and sixty million or something.
Our voices will be very, very limited.
Like we would not be able to influence the federal government very much at all.
I mean, I know we get two senators, which is proportionately better than what we have
right now.
But even that two senators out of, you know, over a hundred by that point, that's still

(01:06:32):
pretty limited.
So I think our voice in the American federal government would be very limited.
I think they would be able to ignore us basically like we're being ignored right now, but even
even more so.
So and eventually you have to remember, you know, right now we have a free enterprise
president who wants to do what's best for America, but eventually there will be another
democratic president along the lines of Biden.

(01:06:55):
And you know, when you see the kind of things that Biden did, like going after his political
enemies with the U.S. federal government and things like that, if we're if we join the
United States, we're in there for good.
Like Canada gives us this constitutional option to pull out.
The United States does not have that option.
Once you join the United States, you're there for good.
You're not pulling out.
It doesn't matter what your referendum is.
So if we, you know, weld ourselves to the United States like that and then you get another

(01:07:19):
president like Joe Biden or worse, which is quite possible, we're going to be going to
be like going from the frying pan into the fire and there's be there'd be no way out.
So I think our best option is to be independent first as Alberta.
And like my my long term goal would be to have Western Canada as independent.
Like we start it has to be done provincially because the constitutional law is province

(01:07:39):
by province in terms of voting.
So hopefully after an Alberta became independent, after we had a successful referendum here,
maybe Saskatchewan would follow.
And you know, it's a little bit further to see, but maybe in Manitoba and B.C.
But the more provinces in the West that we had together as an independent country, the
more viable we would be, you know, and the more resources and opportunities and things.

(01:08:03):
So my my like, I think the ideal situation for me would be independent Western Canada.
But it has to start with an independent Alberta.
There's no other way to start it.
And so but I would see an independent Alberta is viable on its own.
But but hopefully to be a first step to a bigger project.
And if you know, if people want to try and make the case for statehood, you know, go

(01:08:24):
ahead, make debate it, make your case.
And if you can bring enough people with you, you you could you can move mountains, you
can do anything.
However, the very first step, even for that, is referendum on independence, because a province
can't just say, oh, we're just going to join the United States.
It doesn't work like that.
It has to be a sovereign body that decides to join.

(01:08:50):
Right now, we're subject to the crown.
We are subject to the King of England.
And unless we declare independence from that first and say, hey, daddy, we're moving out
of your house.
Now we're going to be on our own.
We can't move to the United States.
It just doesn't work like that.
So like like I've said many times, all paths lead to Alberta independence.
And maybe I could back that up.

(01:09:10):
I could say all paths lead to an Alberta independence referendum.
That's that's where the real fork in the road is right there.
And I saw some questions.
Go ahead, Michael.
No, I just I was just going to reiterate, like I haven't studied the fifty first state
option in terms of the constitutional details, but I had a friend of mine who studied it

(01:09:31):
and he told me exactly what you said that the U.S. the procedure from the United States
side would be to they'd be willing to receive an independent entity that voted to join the
United States, but they wouldn't absorb part of another country.
So we couldn't go from provincehood immediately to statehood.
We first have to become independent before the Americans would accept us.

(01:09:54):
And really, if we went to all that trouble, we became an independent republic of Alberta
with constitutionally enshrined rights and freedoms built on the best of everything we
see across the globe right now, the United States and Netherlands actually being two
of the best.
We don't have to reinvent the wheel.
We can look and see what worked, what what didn't work.

(01:10:15):
We can have the best form of government, representative government by the people for the people not
subjects to a monarchy or anything like that being babysat by an executive branch of government
that we can't defend against.
We could we could literally have the best place in the world to live.

(01:10:38):
And at that point, you know, statehood isn't necessary.
We can negotiate and be excellent neighbors and just love being close to one another.
But we could be happy in our independence for sure.
Yeah.
Now I actually thought I was going to see some comments challenging the idea of Alberta

(01:11:02):
independence.
I don't recall actually seeing any.
So folks, if you have concerns about an independent Alberta or a sovereign Alberta or anything
like that, put them up in the questions quick because we got to we got to wrap this up pretty
quick.
We had a it's been a late one because we had some technical difficulties.

(01:11:24):
I'll speak on one right now that I know a lot of people think of landlocked.
A lot of people say, well, if Alberta was independent, we'd be landlocked.
What then?
What do you have to say for that?
Dr. Rags.
Yeah.
Well, first of all, you know, our main exports goes to the United States and we still have,
you know, access to the United States.
There's no problem there.
The other thing is, too, that there's a lot of commerce that, you know, comes into the

(01:11:48):
port of Vancouver and has to be shipped across to Eastern Canada.
And I think the other way as well.
And we are in between that.
So if they if Canada tried to blockade us, we could just as well blockade them.
And so it's in neither party's interest to have a kind of a blockade like that.
I mean, that's kind of one of the issues that we discussed in the negotiations towards independence

(01:12:11):
anyway after referendum.
It would not make sense for Canada to blockade Alberta because that would hurt Canada economically
very severely, and especially B.C.
So it would only make sense.
I mean, we want to have our best economic situation and they want their best economic
situation and the way to bring that about would be through negotiations.
And we wouldn't block their stuff and they wouldn't block ours.

(01:12:33):
So you know, it's a kind of an assumption that if Alberta became independent, the Canada
would want to do everything it could to hurt Alberta.
And I don't see why, because we would follow.
I don't think they would either.
Yeah.
We were following a democratic process for following Canada's constitutional law to
hold a referendum.
And then we've been negotiating our way out.
It's not like we're suddenly just leaving the house and slamming the door.

(01:12:54):
We'd be negotiating these things and all these things would be discussed beforehand.
And it would be in Eastern Canada and B.C.'s best interest to have free trade with Alberta
and have good economic relations with Alberta.
So I don't see why the landlocked argument would hold because that basically it's based
on the idea that Canada is going to blockade Alberta just for spite.

(01:13:16):
And I don't think they're going to sacrifice their economic well-being just for spite.
Are they really going to lose willing to lose thousands of jobs just to try to hurt Alberta?
I don't think so.
It doesn't make sense from an economic perspective.
It doesn't make sense.
That's called cutting off your nose to spite your face.
And when you think about trade, trade exists because there's a mutual benefit to both trading
partners.
Right.

(01:13:37):
There would continue to be a mutual benefit to both trading partners.
But another part of this is within within confederation, how well have we done getting
our resources out of Alberta now?
I mean, everyone says landlocked.
But the real word, the real phrase is policy locked.
If we were able to negotiate our exports as a sovereign independent nation, like grownups

(01:14:02):
with our neighbours to the east and west, you think we'd have pipelines?
We absolutely would have those pipelines.
They would have been built decades ago.
So the landlocked thing is actually an argument for independence, not against independence.
I still don't have any cons in the comments about regarding independence.

(01:14:25):
So I'm going to bring up another one.
Military.
What would we do for a military?
What happens to our military bases?
You know, cold, we have Cold Lake, we got Suffield, all these military installations
in the province.
How do we defend ourselves?
Yeah, well, obviously, we have to create our own military.
I don't think that's a huge problem.
I mean, probably there's members probably right now, the Canadian Armed Forces that

(01:14:49):
would want to be part of Alberta's military, you know, they're from here.
And you know, those things, what we do with the bases, that's all part of negotiation
with Canada.
And I don't even see, I think we could have friendly relations with Canada if they still
wanted to use those bases for training purposes or other things like that.
I don't see why we couldn't, you know, give them that in exchange for some benefit that
we'd received in some other way militarily.
So sure, we have we have British training here full time.

(01:15:12):
We have I mean, we've got Chinese military training here all the time.
Why wouldn't we have Canadians?
Well, that's the thing.
I mean, I don't think I want Chinese training here, but other countries, if they want to,
you know, our allies, you know, why wouldn't we let them train here?
And if we've got those facilities, that just benefits us.
I mean, we've got to get something in return, obviously.
But I don't see, I mean, we'd probably be starting a military from scratch, but that

(01:15:34):
can be done.
And we get all brand new equipment that we could buy from the United States with our
oil money that we export to them.
So I mean, actually, because we're not part of Canada and because we're not transferring
billions of dollars a year to Eastern Canada, we have extra billions for, you know, starting
a military from scratch.
Being able to get good equipment.
Yeah.
Thirteen point one billion dollars is what we spent.

(01:15:55):
Now this is off the top of my head.
I think it's thirteen point one billion dollars we spent in 2019 or something like that on
the Canadian Armed Forces, which is absolutely pathetic for a country our size.
Yeah.
Coincidentally, we send the federal government roughly twenty seven billion dollars for which
we get nothing back every year.
So if you simply took our our short shortfall for our contributions to the fed to the confederation

(01:16:20):
and put that into our military, our military would be bigger and better than the Canadian
military in the first year.
That sounds pretty good.
Not only that, but our neighbors to the south.
Some of the world sees them as bullies from time to time.
But they've done a fantastic job of protecting those that need to be protected, especially

(01:16:43):
if they have oil that they need, which we do.
So to think that the United States wouldn't protect Alberta and actually to think that
Canada wouldn't help protect Alberta is that is completely it's ludicrous to me.
It doesn't make any sense.
Yeah.
And I still don't see any we can't do it because.

(01:17:05):
Maybe we did.
Maybe we did such a good job of presenting the position that nobody has a counter argument.
Must have been.
Can you think of any other common counter arguments that you hear in your travels?
I mean, you've been all over the province speaking about this.
As a matter of fact, you've been doing this for decades.
Well, I mean, I've only been speaking for the last few years.
Like I was writing before that.

(01:17:26):
And as a young man, I was involved.
So it's mostly just been in recent stuff.
But like I mean, the landlocked thing always comes up, as you mentioned, trying to I mean,
I mean, I think there's the main argument against it, besides from the landlock is just
that people have this attachment to Canada.

(01:17:47):
What a great country Canada has, which is which is true.
You know, Canada up until Pierre Trudeau was one of the greatest countries in the world.
I have no problem with that.
It's just that, you know, I see Pierre Trudeau is making huge changes in Canada.
You know, in terms of just for two things, one is big attack on Alberta, which said,
you know, created a template for the federal government attacking Alberta and also his

(01:18:07):
changes he made to the Constitution with the Charter of Rights, which is actually it's
in my view has reduced our rights.
So I think Pierre Trudeau has really messed up the country and made it less of a great
country than it was before.
So I'm less committed to it and more interested in Alberta independence.
And it was a Canada was a bit of an experiment.
If you really think about it.

(01:18:27):
No other place has done exactly what we've done before.
I think actually Holland, Netherlands is probably the closest to what we've done.
The United States is not a democracy.
Democracy is not mentioned in the Constitution at all.
And they did that for a reason.
So I kind of look at Canada as, hey, you know, this was the idea was sound.

(01:18:49):
But there's so much that could and must be done way better if we're not going to succumb
to the inevitable outcome of democracy.
Right.
The inevitable outcome of democracy, a pure unadulterated democracy is socialism.
Because if you keep people comfortable enough, they will vote for their own demise.

(01:19:13):
I say I've said it before.
I'll say it again.
Democracy is not the it's not the quickest path, but it's the easiest path to communism.
And that's what we're seeing.
You know, we're seeing an erosion of our rights in the name of the public good.
We have no foundational doctrine to prevent slipping down that slope like what Venezuela
did.

(01:19:33):
So, you know, we got some serious thinking to do and a lot of legwork to do if we're
going to if we're going to fix this.
And fortunately, Alberta has the capability to do it.
I don't think any other province does.
Yeah, just to speak to that point, I think one of the key things there is, you know,

(01:19:54):
a government in a democracy is only as good as the character of its citizens.
And so when the character of the citizens decline, the character of the leaders decline.
So as you mentioned, if you have a society where people are greedy and just wants what's
best for themselves, they're going to vote for other people's money and you'll end up
with socialism.
And so that's because the character of the citizens has declined.
If you have a society where you have strong character and citizens, you can have a democratic

(01:20:20):
society where they elect good people.
And that's kind of the ideal thing.
But again, it's it comes down to the character of the people.
The character of the people of the society is really key to what you're going to end
up with.
You know, if you have a democracy, because the leaders will just reflect what the voters
are like.
And if you've got good people who are voters, you'll end up with good leaders.
If you've got corrupt people who are voters, you're going to have with corrupt leaders

(01:20:41):
because they they get the people vote for the kind of people that they are themselves,
if you know what I mean.
Yeah.
And what what we're seeing in Western society, you know, we're seeing a steady decline,
we're seeing a steady decline turning away from the values that that we were founded
on.
Yeah, that's right.

(01:21:02):
Immorality is celebrated.
Moral action is almost looked down upon.
Yeah.
And yeah, this that's the result is the society decline.
So does the so does the leadership.
Now the United States, yeah, why I think it's different is because number one, I didn't

(01:21:24):
know this until recently, but every single state actually, almost every state, their
constitutions are faith declarations.
They are faith declarations and prayers for their states.
They are Christian.
It's a Christian country founded on Christian values.
And those those laws, that foundational law isn't changeable.

(01:21:47):
Even the even the Constitution of the United States of America is it the supremacy of God
and Christian values are prominent.
And no matter what the people no matter what the democracy says that the democracy in the
United States says, we don't want to, we don't want to have a Christian country anymore,

(01:22:09):
we're going to become something else and whatever.
The Constitution says, No, no, you're not, you're not going to do that.
These are the values that made this country great.
These are the values that give you the freedoms that you enjoy today.
These are the values that give people fleeing tyranny a place to go.
And we're not going to change it.
So that's, that's something I really admire about the United States is that they have

(01:22:31):
their core values and they just don't change them no matter how many people say that they
should.
Yeah, well, the United States was definitely like, even though it's not explicitly Christian
constitution, the people who put it together had Christian worldview to put it together
under under Christian ideas.
One of the problems that arose, especially by the 1960s, is you had the Supreme Court

(01:22:52):
changed its philosophy of interpretation.
And so even though there had been like, say, for example, prayer and Bible reading in the
United States in the schools for for such a long time, in 1962 and 1963, they were thrown
out by the Supreme Court, because you know, prayers and Bible reading were thrown out
of the public schools because the Supreme Court itself had changed and become an adopted
a left wing philosophy.

(01:23:13):
So so there's there are ways of undermining the US Constitution.
I mean, it depends, you know, nothing's perfect.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, there's there's always ways for sinister people to undermine good things, right?
They'll find a way if if enough good people stand up and do their job and do their civic
duty.
It gets too big to rig.

(01:23:34):
I've heard that before.
Well, I don't there's I don't see any questions or comments in there opposing our position
that I'll pass the Gilbert independence.
I think, you know, once people hear the facts, and they have time to process their emotions,

(01:24:01):
the inevitable outcome is that, you know, OK, well, if I want to be free and prosperous,
and I don't want to turn into a socialist hellhole, then we should probably be starting
our own course.
And it's a no brainer.
So where do we go from here?
How do we go from a little podcast with a burger flipper and a very learned author to

(01:24:24):
changing things actually making the province a better place?
Well, that's a good question.
I mean, for each person, it might be a little bit different.
You know, different people can be involved at different levels.
You know, some people see the path forward through an independence party, some see the
path forward through the U.C.P., some through see the path forward through like non-political

(01:24:45):
like non-party organizations like the prosperity project.
So depending on what a person's personal views are and their opportunities are, like some
people could say, write letters to the editor on promoting it.
And just depending on each individual's gifts and talents and abilities and time they have
on hand.
So for me, my what I try and do is just advocate for independence, whether it's speaking publicly

(01:25:08):
or on podcasts or writing.
And so I encourage people if they want to know more about the issue to read my books.
So it's a bit self-interested at this point.
But there's a Didsbury based business that sells my books.
They sell a lot of homeschooling materials and they also have my books.
It's merchant ship.
So the website is just merchant ship dot C.A.
So if anybody was interested in reading about the history of the Albert independence movement

(01:25:33):
and reasons why Alberta should become independent, I'd encourage them to to get one or more of
those books.
I mean, they're not that expensive.
But knowledge is often a very important tool in any kind of political activity.
You want to know what you're doing and why you're doing it.
And so like reading books is a way of gaining the information you need to discuss with others

(01:25:55):
and to even to consider for yourself, like maybe you're not persuaded or you know what
I mean.
So you can read and find out more.
And that's kind of I guess the basis, whether regardless of what kind of activity you want
to get involved in or not get involved in, you really need to have knowledge to act,
you know, because knowledge is power in terms of what you want to support and politically
and get involved in politically.
So so that's kind of the books are there for those who are interested, for those who want

(01:26:20):
that kind of information and background information.
You know, I just encourage them to to get those books.
That's one way of finding out more and to see if they want to see if this idea appeals
to them or if they want to do more for that.
I see that you've got some other books on here.
You're a busy guy.
Is that Amazon?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Amazon like no other options on Amazon, but some other books.

(01:26:42):
Just the kindle of time to leave is there for some reason they don't have a proper offer
for the paperback, but no other option they sell.
So Amazon is actually the best place to get no other option.
But but but overall, my books are carried for the most part by Merchantship.ca.
Like I've got a greater variety of books.
They're like a lot of those books aren't mine, right?
There's there's other people named.
Yeah, like there's a Matt Wagner in there, too.

(01:27:05):
Yeah, so kind of.
But so so if you want to get no other option, which is my kind of my fundamental book on
Albert independence, no other option is available on Amazon for a pretty good price.
But Merchantship.ca also has other books on independence by me if you want, if you're
interested in those.
There we go.
Yeah, if you search my name under the search bar, just search my last name or something.

(01:27:29):
There we go.
There's a whole bunch of things there.
So no other options there.
Time to leave and Alberta, because those are my main books in Alberta independence.
So as I was going through some of your stuff before, I noticed that there was a review
by someone who's very, very well respected in Alberta.

(01:27:51):
He's no longer with us.
His name is Ted Byfield.
Yes.
What what what what's your relationship with Ted Byfield?
I actually like I did some work for him.
I got to know him in recent years, like in the last few years before he passed away,
because he put together a 12 volume history of Christianity, which was completed in 2013,
2014.
Anyway, they had me write.

(01:28:12):
He hired me to write study guides on each of those volumes.
So that was a part time job.
I worked for him for a couple of years and got to know him pretty good.
So I mean, he had been a hero of mine like I in the 1980s.
I you know, I subscribe to a report magazine.
I was a young man and an Alberta report magazine.
That was the key source of information for small seat conservative people in Alberta.
And he was the publisher and the editor.

(01:28:32):
And he had a column in every issue that was the best part of the magazine.
So he was my hero.
He was my political hero.
So it was a it was a real privilege for me to get to know him in his later years and
to become a friend and visit with him.
You know, he knew so much and he worked so hard and accomplished so much for a conservative.
I mean, he was one of the founders of the Reform Party.

(01:28:54):
Reform Party would never have got off the ground the way it did without Ted Byfield.
He was also a major figure in the private school community in Alberta fighting for private
schools in the 1980s.
I mean, he did so many things.
Ted Byfield was like the backbone of the conservative movement in Alberta for many years.
So he was a great hero of mine.
Like I say, it was it was a privilege to get to know him and his son, Vince, who is his
youngest son, is a friend of mine.

(01:29:15):
And Vince wrote the forward to no other option because Vince is an Alberta patriot.
And I also worked with Link Byfield who passed away actually 10 years ago this month.
Unfortunately, Link was kind of kind of the heir to Ted Byfield's writing and editing
and stuff.
And he was a founder of the Wild Rose Party.
Link was he would have been, you know, so important in our movement right now if he
was still around.

(01:29:35):
It was so sad when he passed away 10 years ago.
Yeah.
Yeah, I didn't know much about Ted Byfield.
I knew what the Alberta report was.
I didn't read it often.
But since I've been involved in this, whatever I'm involved in now, kind of advocacy and
politics stuff, his name comes up all the time.

(01:29:56):
And you don't really realize how influential someone might be just by doing what they do
until later on looking backwards.
And, you know, I think you've got a long you got a you got a lot of years left, although
you're way older than me.
But I think someday, Michael, you're going to be your name will be brought up just like
Ted's was for you, the service that you do to this province.

(01:30:18):
So thank you for that.
Thank you for saying so.
My pleasure.
And on that positive note, we're an hour and 17 minutes in plus the earlier one.
So I guess we should wrap it up and say good night.
But thank you very much, folks, for tuning in again.
And thank you, Michael, for taking the time.
It's always a pleasure and I look forward to seeing you at the next in person, which

(01:30:42):
probably is going to be pretty quick.
Great.
Well, thanks for having me on your program.
It's always good to talk to you, Chris.
Anytime.
Good night.
Night, folks.
Night.
Good night.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}240120 Chris and Dr. Michael Wagner

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

240120 Chris and Dr. Michael Wagner

24/7 News: The Latest