UCP needs a question on separation to appease voter base: Lukaszuk

Forever Canadian organizer Thomas Lukaszuk joins Alberta Primetime's Michael Higgins to discuss the possible referendum question on separation.

Premier Danielle Smith and the UCP are “predetermined” to have a referendum on separation, according to Forever Canadian organizer Thomas Lukaszuk after the government issued a news release by accident on the results of the petition committee while it was still meeting. Lukaszuk joins Alberta Primetime to discuss that committee meeting.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Michael Higgins: As a former politician, former deputy premier, what is to be made of the UCP caucus issuing then retracting that news release while deliberations continued.

Thomas Lukaszuk: I was presenting to this all-party committee, dominated by UCP MLAs, sharing with them that most signatories who were signing the Forever Canadian petition, in fact, didn’t want a referendum. The most common comment was, ‘I can’t believe we even have to do this.’ They simply didn’t understand why we would have a referendum in this province on separation. And as I’m presenting, there is sudden turmoil among UCP staffers, because it turns out that they already issued a press release with a decision to use the Forever Canadian question. But I haven’t even finished presenting and there was no vote, there was no question even asked in the committee yet.

So we now know that the UCP caucus and the Premier are predetermined to have any question, as long as separatists get some kind of a question on a referendum for separating Alberta. Let’s put this into perspective, because maybe we often don’t think of it that way, but in the history of Canada, since our inception, only two premiers put a referendum forward on breaking up Canada and separating from Canada. Those were René Lévesque and Jacques Parizeau, both separatist premiers from Quebec. As of tonight, the premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith, will be joining those ranks. She’ll be the third premier in the history of Canada to put forward a referendum on separating from Canada.

MH: Why is putting your question to a referendum a problem?

TL: She just needs any question. The preferred question was the separatist question, but it is stuck in courts. That was a constitutional question that would be legally binding, except they neglected to consult with First Nations, so they can’t use that question. At this point in time, she has to have a question and the Forever Canadian question seems to be convenient to her. But the premier doesn’t realize that she’s getting herself into another problem. Separatists will not accept the Forever Canadian question, because it is a policy question, it doesn’t meet the constitutional and the Clarity Act standards. It was intended, it was drafted to be a policy question to be voted on in the legislature. If we were to pose this question as a constitutional question, it would be stuck in courts just like the separatist question.

So, separatists will not be happy with this question, and I can tell you more than 75 per cent of Albertans and all the signatories on the Forever Canadian petition will not be happy, because we don’t want a referendum to begin with. The premier, she is trying to wiggle out of a very unenviable political position, saving her own political skin. This is what it’s really all about right now, it’s about the premier remaining the leader of the UCP party and staying as a premier. Her strategy seems to be digging, as opposed to getting herself out of that hole.

MH: Could the premier and cabinet, though, not modify your question such that it clears the hurdle of being binding, being constitutional.

TL: They could modify it, but it doesn’t change the fact that no matter what question they put on the referendum, they will be the proponents of a yes-no question on whether Alberta should separate from Canada. So, as I said, she will be the third premier ever to put a question of this nature to a referendum. But if this is a binding question, then she has to consult with First Nations first, she can’t do an end run around that. If it’s a non-binding question, then separatists will not accept it, because they expect a binding constitutional question. This is what happens when you’re too cute by half and you try to please both sides and you don’t pick a side, you have no ideological or moral compass, you end up putting yourself in this position.

I can tell you, for every Canadian, all we can do now is campaign on, no matter what question it will be. Because we don’t have a leaked electors list, we have to ask Albertans to voluntarily register themselves on our website, forever-canadian.ca, so that we can mount a formidable campaign against a formidable force, because it’s no longer just the separatists, but obviously the power of the Alberta government. We know Washington’s involved, we know they have the leaked list. This is now a real campaign.

MH: If we go back to that UCP caucus news release, it stated your application explicitly chose a referendum as opposed to a vote in the legislature, citing multiple examples of you calling for such. Cabinet Minister Jason Nixon at that committee meeting even asked you at one point why you misled those who signed your petition. How do you respond to that?

TL: That’s what desperation looks like. They never cared about this petition, they wouldn’t even call a committee to order. None of the UCP MLAs ever signed the petition, they were very much against this petition. But now it’s a time of desperation, they will grab any lifeline that they possibly could find, even if it leads nowhere, just to have a question on a petition. So now they’re trying to convince nearly half a million Albertans who signed this petition to avoid a binding referendum, hoping that this matter will be resolved in the legislature, wondering why do we even have to go through this process to begin with, that they actually wanted a referendum. No, the only person that really wants a referendum is Mr. Mitch Sylvestre, and he has a right, he’s a citizen, he had his own petition, and Premier Danielle Smith, because she needs to keep him happy.

MH: If the die is cast and Albertans are to vote on a question, yours or otherwise, what do you see evolving between now and October 19?

TL: One of the reasons why I firmly believe that this is not the time to have a referendum, if there ever is, on such a critical existential issue, is because this is going to divide this province even more. This is a very volatile issue, families don’t talk to families anymore, neighbors don’t talk to neighbors, but it is also going to cause phenomenal economic damage to this province. All chambers of commerce and prominent business leaders already are saying that this is causing damage. So what we are really betting is the premier’s political future versus the future of Alberta, both socially and economically, and the future of Canada. And tonight, in her television address, we will find out which is more important to the premier - staying a premier and surviving as a leader of the UCP party, and that means joining the other two separatist premiers in the history of Canada and being the third one to pose a question on separation, or doing the right thing and saying now is not the time to have any referendum, for that matter. Let’s focus on Canadian unity. Let’s continue negotiating in a collaborative way with Ottawa, because she’s doing some good work on that front.