Chantal Hebert

I think Mr. Kenney's goal, ideally, would be to avoid that referendum altogether.

And that is another major difference.

The current government of Alberta does not have an electoral mandate to hold a referendum on separation.

The Quebec government of the time did.

It campaigned on having this vote, and then it held that vote.

certainly would not have missed Danielle Smith campaigning for office by saying, if you elect us, we will be having a referendum on separation.

So the messiness of what's happening in Alberta complicates matters for Federalists in the sense that it is not clear that the government can articulate the position

one way or another without blowing itself apart.

Because a section, a strong section of the people who voted for Daniel Smith are actually part of the yes movement, let's separate.

They are a minority overall, but they make up

good chunk, maybe more than half of the supporters of separation among UCP voters.

So I try to imagine that a Quebec federalist government would

want to ask Quebecers if they want to separate.

Very interesting.

Usually a government that asks a question is supposed to campaign for the yes side to that question.

That's the point of a referendum.

But if that federalist government at the same time

was split in half between those who want to go and those who want to stay and try to figure out the mechanics of even a campaign on that.

I suspect Mr. Kenney's best goal would be to avoid the exercise or at least to push it forward a bit.

To Bruce's point about business in Alberta,