‘We will definitely surpass the minimum’: Lukaszuk confident anti-separatist petition can gather needed signatures

Former deputy premier Thomas Lukaszuk speaks with Alberta Primetime host Michael Higgins about his pro-Canada referendum application being approved by Alberta’s Chief Electoral Officer.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Michael Higgins: Are you already collecting signatures?

Thomas Lukaszuk: No, we’re not. There is a process in place. The chief electoral officer now has to decide whether the old rules, or the rules created for separatists by Danielle Smith, will apply to me.

He will make that decision, and then we will take it under consideration whether we agree with it or not, and then I have 30 days to appoint a chief financial officer. The moment I appoint a chief financial officer, the clock starts ticking for collecting signatures. We don’t know which clock yet, whether it be it’ll be the 90-day clock under the old rules, or the 120-day clock created for separatists.

MH: How much hangs on this July 4 implementation of the new legislation?

TL: It’s really a technicality. The premier, oddly enough, chose American Independence Day to proclaim her pro-separatist legislation. It just really changes the rules on how many signatures we have to get, and judging by the response of Canadians living in Alberta, we find that we will definitely surpass the minimum requirement — no matter which rules apply. It’s always nice to have more time, 120 days to 90 days, but I think we’ll be fine within 90 days.

MH: The premier said that she would let the various processes play out. How do you interpret that?

TL: The premier is wrong on two points. Number one, she doesn’t get to speak or determine which rules apply. That is up to an independent officer of the legislature of Alberta, the chief electoral commissioner. He will make that decision, not the premier.

Second of all, there are no processes. There is a process. My application was the first application filed. It was approved. And the law is clear: There cannot be two competing questions. There cannot be two competing plebiscites or referenda. So, this is the application. This is the process that’s going forward. For reasons unknown to me, those who are pro-separation didn’t file their application on time. So there will be a process, and no more than that.

MH: The premier is leading the Alberta Next town hall tour, which is set to get underway in just a couple of weeks time. Is that a conversation that you take your petition to if it’s ready to roll by that point?

TL: We will bring facts to the table. There are a number of reasons why I did what I did, but I firmly believe that if we are going to have a discussion about the future of Canada, because this is not only about Alberta, this is actually the future of Canada, that conversation must be led by Canadians who actually care about the well-being of Canada as a whole and not separatists.

More importantly, this conversation has to be based on facts, on laws, on economic data, and not on disinformation. This web-based survey that she put out is anything but survey.

And I know, because when I lived in totalitarian Poland, there was a little joke going around: ‘I have two pairs of pajamas, checkered ones and striped ones. I’m taking the checkered ones. Which ones do you want?’ That’s exactly the analogy. It is not polling. It is leading Albertans towards certain answers.

We won’t have any part of that. We will lay out the facts and I am certain that the vast majority of Albertans will not consider separation in any shape or form.

MH: How much of a fight are you bracing for from those who are on the pro-separatist side? What kind of conversation do you envision evolving here?

TL: I think the biggest obstacle will be our premier and her government. She devised this term, ‘Sovereign Alberta within a United Canada’, which is really a word salad. It means nothing. It’s like me telling you I am single within the confines of my marriage.

She’s trying to fuel the separatist movement by passing legislation to make things easier for them — ‘Wink, wink. You know I’m behind you. I’m choosing American Independence Day to proclaim this act for you’, but at the same time, she’s saying, ‘Well, no, I’m not a separatist’.

My petition will force her and her caucus to finally get off the fence and make a decision, which the premier is not willing to answer at this particular time. I don’t anticipate that she will sign my petition. Although, if she truly is a loyal Canadian, if she lives up to the oath that she swore, both as an MLA and as a cabinet minister, she should sign this petition. My hopes are not high for that.

MH: There are two independent MLAs who were expelled from the UCP caucus who are looking to revive the PC brand. How does that sit with you?

TL: Good for them. I think it’s good for democracy. I don’t like the fact that we really have only two viable parties right now, the NDP and UCP. It reminds me of American politics. The more viable parties you have that offer different ideas, different perspectives, the better for democracy and for the electorate.

So good on them. I’m not sure how successful they will be in reviving the party to the point where it can at least become opposition, or one day form government; building a party is a difficult process.

What it will do is create a lot of additional danger for Danielle Smith because she already has the Republican Party of Alberta, which is nipping at her from the far right and taking away support there.

I imagine that this Progressive Conservative Party will be a moderate centre-right party and will be stealing away support from the left side of her caucus. And let’s bear in mind that Danielle Smith has a very small majority at this point in time. She has openly declared separatist MLAs and cabinet ministers in her caucus and many of her Calgary MLAs won the last election only by a handful of votes.

If she loses five to seven per cent of support on either end, she is in political trouble.