BrianB

@PeterHRatcliffe You think a pipeline is the major concern for the AB separatists? Not the senate, HOC seat distribution, equalization formula, methane caps, emmissions caps, forced investment in carbon capture that no other producer has to pay for,etc. Pipeline is the least of it.

The threat of separation creates zero chance of a pipeline to tidewater. A deal on major investments always requires good will, something positive for everyone, minimized risk of damage for everyone, and above all else stability. Deals don't happen thru threats or extortion.

@Bratt_world What stops the Cowichan from returning to court in the future to seek privately held land? What stops any other band from seeking privately held land when they get their cases to court?

There is nothing in the decision that grants any titles over fee simple title. That can’t be done, not unless the parties are willing (and a party to the case) Home owners would have to have been notified before any judgement could be made on their titles.

🧵 Let’s have another conversation about the Cowichan case out of British Columbia. I have here, another expert on aboriginal law and title, she makes some points i had not even considered. Anita Boscariol Associate council at Watson Goepel, a top Vancouver firm, with 25 years service in the public sector. the last ten years she has worked as Director General, Treaties and Aboriginal Government Negotiations west for Department of indigenous & northern affairs She was a consultant for the formation of UNDRIP/DRIPA, as one of the most well versed voices on modern treaty’s of BC -B.A., University of British Columbia, 1978 -LL.B., University of British Columbia, 1982 -Bar British Columbia 1985 -Anita is fluent in Italian, French and Spanish - and also knows how to say Tsilhqot'in properly ! (I been saying wrong all this time)

@Bratt_world The only thing he didnt do was slap her on the ass and ask her to get coffee.

HAHAAHAHHAHAHHA he’s right tho 😍 red is her colour

@Tablesalt13 @grok Every body is back home for lunch on Day 1

.@grok how fast would Canada be defeated f it picked a fight with the USA and Israel, assume NATO is dissolved

@james_xond 24 years old in 1980. 1/2 duplex so small you had to go outside to change your mind.

Trying to prove a point. How old were you when you became a homeowner for the first time?

@business Since net zero is a national goal how about adding 5 to 10 cents per kwh to all hydro electric production to help pay for CCUS? That way the rest of the country can feel good about saving the planet.

Canadian Energy Minister Tim Hodgson said he’s “highly confident” that Alberta oil sands companies can absorb the cost of building carbon capture bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

@KenBoessenkool @TravisToewsAB @jfdinning @PGarritty @trevortombe @andrew_leach @jengerson @DrJaredWesley With all due respect, Ottawa, Ontario, and Quebec dont want Alberta to lead anything. Hasnt changed in the 50 years i have been voting and it is very hard to see how it might change in the next 50.

This morning @TravisToewsAB @jfdinning @PGarritty @trevortombe @andrew_leach @jengerson @DrJaredWesley and I launched Lead not Leave. Read our joint statement here. 1/6 leadnotleave.ca

@Reil76 Opinion, if support is over 30% it should lead to the formation of a political party, or fracture of the UCP. Ultimately a political party is required to move forward.

Honest question for Alberta separatists: What’s the plan if the referendum fails? Not being sarcastic. This is a real strategic question that any serious independence movement needs to answer before it gets on the ballot. What’s the threshold you’d accept as decisive? What happens to the movement the day after a No vote? Does Alberta walk away from the table, or does this become a generational campaign? The Quebec playbook took decades and two referendums. Is that the timeline you’re signing up for? Because voters deserve to know what they’re actually being asked before they vote.

@BobDEithKC @adriandix When is the time?

Well said @adriandix. Now is not the time for Alberta to play politics with the unity of Canada. 🇨🇦

@Reil76 Its been 125 years since the original deal and 40+ since the constitution was written. How long does AB have to wait to renegotiate the the arrangement? What in the world would motivate the east to negotiate in good faith since they hold all the cards?

Alberta joined Confederation in 1905, not 1867. The founding deal was already written, the rules were already set, and Alberta signed onto an existing arrangement. Then Alberta struck oil. Now Alberta wants to rewrite the constitution it inherited. Think about that dynamic for a second. You are the new hire. You did not build the company. You did not negotiate the founding partnership agreement. You showed up decades later, accepted the terms, and were handed a desk. Then you hit a massive sales streak and suddenly you want to vote like the CEO and renegotiate the partnership from scratch. The original partners, Ontario and Quebec, built the institutional framework, absorbed the risk of Confederation, and carried the country financially for generations before Alberta was even a province. The equalization system Alberta despises today exists because the founding provinces understood that regional economies are uneven, and a country only holds together if the arrangement is broadly fair over time. Alberta’s contribution to Canada is real and significant. The oil revenues that flowed east supported federal revenues and transfers for decades. That deserves acknowledgment. But “we generate revenue now” is not the same as “we designed this institution and therefore get to unilaterally change its rules.” Every new partner in any organization brings value. That does not automatically translate into governance authority that overrides the foundational agreement everyone else built and agreed to. If Alberta wants more weight in Confederation, the path is constitutional negotiation with the other partners. Not threats. Not sovereignty referendums. Not pretending the founding compact was illegitimate because it predates your membership. You want a seat at the head table? Earn it through the process that exists. You do not get to flip the table because you are currently the top salesperson.

@DonBraid Why does a mandate require a general election The question she proposed gives Albertans a chance to speak. A yes vote would be the mandate, a no vote sends everyine back to their corner to regroup.

Quebec's PQ leader will hold a referendum - if elected. Smith wasn't elected on any of this. Big difference. There wasn't a whisper of referendums in the 2023 campaign. She has no mandate. The only way to get one is to call an election. #ableg #abpoli #cdnpoli #yyc #yeg

@Bratt_world Just another day in Alberta.

What if tomorrow PM Carney pauses all new project funding to Alberta until after the referendum in Oct, to coax voters in Alberta to stay ?

@LeoLeo1643486 @cspotweet She could, but without the consultation the outcome would be dead in the water.

@Spark2231 @cspotweet That’s already been done, that’s the whole point of the petitions. She’s just too cowardly to put the question to a vote

BREAKING: Premier Smith announces Alberta separation question for October 19th.

@JohnBouras3230 Dont bother debating the Liberals, they think these are wind powered.

Canadians didn’t fall in love with the roar of a propeller. The Snowbirds are a jet team. Always were. Always will be because we will never accept this crop duster we don’t do airshows for safety we want the image of testing the limits.This air plane looks like a Mooney with a smoke generator our government are assholes of they expect this is acceptable to Canadians and our families! Jets or nothing no compromises @RCAF_ARC @RCAFOperations @CDS_Canada_CEMD @NationalDefence @erinotoole @DavidMcGuinty @liberal_party @CPC_HQ @MarkJCarney #cdnpoli

@iamkennethchan Maybe they should let people use natural gas for heat??

BC Hydro has launched a $1-billion push to help customers reduce their power use, as a measure to delay or avoid building $2 billion of new infrastructure. The province is starting to struggle with keeping up with electric demand. #bcpoli #vanpoli #vanre dailyhive.com/vancouver/bc-h…

Sign of the times. It’s more economic to pay people to reduce electricity use than to build more of it. This is what scarcity looks like.

@trainofangels00 Eby thinks Alberta is a threat to Canada when he is signing over all the land access to the coast to what ever native camped there last. The man is an idiot, matched only by those thst vote for him.

B.C. Premier Eby has warned that he feels that the 'threat' of an Alberta referendum on separation is a serious concern for Canada. He noted that this “real and present threat” has been encouraged by choices made by Alberta’s own government. He feels that as a result, the federal government in Ottawa has begun treating Alberta differently. Eby was clear and direct: “Bluntly, we cannot let bad behaviour decide who the federal government chooses to work with." Let's be perfectly honest in this.....most Canadians across the ENTIRE COUNTRY value fairness and national unity. Canadians agree that threatening to break up the country should not be rewarded... Personally I don't think it is, I feel that the choices out of the federal government right now are just common sense. Strong provinces are important, but they must work together as one Canada rather than using separation as leverage. #canpoli 🇨🇦

@KirkLubimov No pipeline. 1st you have to build Pathway, pay carbon tax, share profits with BC and whatever FNs you might build past. All this on top of the normal tax and royalty. There is no money in it, no company will sign on. Smith should realize this is a non starter.

Was the goal post just moved⁉️ Mark Carney: "Discussion on a potential pipeline to transport at least 1M barrels of low emissions Albertan crude to Asian market. The pipeline will only advance with following prerequisites being met: 1. Pathways carbon capture. 2. It requires British Columbians to share substantial financial and economic benefits. 3. Fully respecting duty to consult under Section 35; and that INCLUDES WHETHER TO DESIGNATE A PROJECT BEING IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST, that includes conditions placed on the project and includes ensuring indigenous economic benefits, partnerships, and opportunities for co-ownership." What?! We have to now consult with First Nations IF the pipeline project is in national interest?? WTF

@ronmortgageguy @BenWoodfinden @Anthony__Koch Even with the title issue, it would seem better for the bank to renew existing mortgages for 1 year terms then to force a fire sale of the property. I can see not issuing new mortgages or financing purchases until this is resolved.

@BenWoodfinden @Anthony__Koch 31 Year Mortgage Broker Licensed in BC here Every word in this post is true Real Estate isn't what a Constitutional Lawyer says Real Estate is about whether a Bank is happy to provide a mortgage on the property

The concern with Cowichan was never that someone would show up and take your house. The concern is what happens for example when you try to refinance your mortgage. Justice Young’s decision declared Aboriginal title over roughly 800 acres in Richmond (not the remote northeast...Richmond), covering over 100 privately held properties. The court declared Crown and city-held titles on the land “defective and invalid.” It found that the granting of private titles “unjustifiably infringed” on Aboriginal title. And it said the coexistence of Aboriginal title and private property would need to be negotiated and reconciled going forward with private interests remaining valid only “until such a time as a court may determine otherwise.” Your title wasn’t struck down. But it’s been put on notice. And that’s all a bank needs to hear. Your mortgage is backed by your fee simple title. When a court says Aboriginal title coexists on the same land, and that your title’s grant was an unjustifiable infringement, and that its future needs to be negotiated, the bank looks at its collateral and asks what it’s actually worth. Banks don’t do uncertainty. They price it or they walk away. And they are walking away. A Richmond homeowner who had owned his home since 1975 went public saying his bank refused to renew his mortgage after the ruling. Over 650 people showed up to a Richmond townhall, furious. Montrose Properties (the largest private landowner in the claim area, with Coca-Cola, Wayfair, and Canadian Tire warehouses on the land) stated in legal filings it was denied $35 million in financing because of the ruling, and that discussions about a separate project had ceased. Appraisers are warning property values in the area could drop 30 to 40 percent. It appears that not a single property in the claim area has sold in 2026. Appraisers have started adding disclaimers to their reports: “We assume the subject property is not subject to a land claim and they are valued as if unencumbered.” Plant drew a line between a house in a city and a mining project in the northeast. The court erased that line. And if the ruling really poses no threat to private property, why did David Eby offer $150 million in loan guarantees to backstop mortgages that banks won’t write? Why did his government go door to door asking homeowners if they’d been unable to refinance? Why did his own AG say the ruling “could have significant unintended consequences for fee simple private property rights in BC”? Governments don’t backstop mortgages against threats that don’t exist.