Close Menu
    Danielle Smith opens door to amending constitution to alter treaty rights
    Canada

    Danielle Smith opens door to amending constitution to alter treaty rights

    Share.
    View 37 Comments

    37 Comments

    1. flappysack- on

      Good idea.  Even if you disagree we should separate it the indigenous shouldn’t have veto rights over Canadians.

    2. Maxh_SCGA on

      We could get rid of the Indian act and establish provincial councils of FN that would focus on local to local reconciliation and allow FN who live off reserve to be represented properly. While having a framework for fiscal responsibility….

      Just like the Reform party suggested in the 1990s and the social credit party of Alberta suggested under Ernest Manning.

      Danielle Smith having original ideas… original to the granddaddy dynasty that is.

      Edit: for additional context the assembly of First Nations also eventually adopted the abolishing of the Indian act.

    4. Dradugun on

      I don’t think we should be listening to someone who has a fundamental misunderstanding of the law, constitution, and history of Canada, who wants change the constitution just because they were ignorant of it in the first place and now have egg on their face because of their ignorance.

    5. mrtimbuktwo on

      I guess the US is really serious about thr 51st state. Shes in their pocket. The separation movement seems to be getting momentum. It is pretty crazy folks

    7. CantFeelMyToesAgain on

      Man she’s such a scumbag 

      Also don’t think she has the power to rewrite the law for treaty rights lol

    9. thatguydowntheblock on

      She’s completely right. We need to have a calm, rational, adult conversation in this country about Indigenous privilege, the constitution, and the balkanization of this country due to “treaties”. The courts absolutely need to be reined in – not just on this, more so even on justice and immigration.

      Queue the downvotes… because apparently just ignoring these issues, letting them fester, and then driving this country into the ground is a better solution…

    10. RecentButterscotch74 on

      I love how she says it undermines her ability to govern the province when it means it undermines her ability to ignore treaty rights and do whatever she wants to do. It’s almost as if it’s keeping the province in check and ensure they work with First Nations people on THEIR land just like it was intended to do

    12. NuclearFartMonkey on

      I’m predicting she’ll use the not withstanding clause to force separation through when her plans get rejected by the courts.

    15. SludgeFilter on

      I don’t understand why people think anything else would have happened. With enough money direction and will constitutions can be changed weapons can be acquired. I personally feel that canada is at risk for dissolution with weak central government large area to control and powerful forces outside our borders. 

    16. ThlintoRatscar on

      So… let’s just summarise a bit.

      First Nations own pretty much all the land in Alberta. As part of confederation, they gave the Crown exclusive jurisdiction to govern it in good faith, but never gave up ownership.

      Now, Alberta wants to change the very basis of all law in Canada so that they can steal all the First Nations land and “secede” from the Confederation law that they just asked all Canadians to ask the Crown to ammend.

      Assuming that we as Canada can actually do that, and the First Nations don’t just shoot anyone who tries to enforce unjust laws on them, and His Majesty actually goes along with this, why stop at Alberta’s borders? I mean, if we’re going to tear up all the treaties and conquor the lands, what point is it to stick to arbitrary provincial boundaries? In fact, what even is a Premier or a Provincial Legislature?

      Asinine.

    18. dryersockpirate on

      She can’t open the door to something she has no control over. Constitutional amendments require at least seven provincial legislative assemblies that represent at least 50% of the Canadian population

    20. albertapiratecaptain on

      Watch next she will come out with a big board showing how much tax she is going to charge other provinces for importing and exporting goods into or through Alberta or items shipped from or to certain provinces 5% for bc because mary jane and liqour, 20% for Ontario ( because feds bad ) 10% for everyone else…

      its all just distraction B S for what else is happening… education overhauls, teachers being backstabbed, Healthcare Privativation push, Aish being crippled then now forcing people onto a lesser program of ADAP… the list goes on…

    23. Logical_Hare on

      I mean, she can say whatever she wants, that doesn’t mean it will happen.

    24. Aggravating_Main_710 on

      Of course her “interpretation” is different than everyone else’s.
      Shes fucked over Alberta, now she is focusing on the rest of the country.

    25. Bitter_Sense_5689 on

      Remember what they said last time “if Canada is divisible, so is Quebec.”

    26. Weird_Rooster_4307 on

      Hell no that’s the Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada responsibly of the Federal Government.

    28. darmog on

      Wow, she REALLY hates not getting her way. You can see it every time something doesn’t go exactly the way she wants.

    29. abc123DohRayMe on

      So many people will comment without reading the article. Haters going to hate.

      What she says she is open to a conversation with her fellow premiers on this topic. There is validity to reviewing the treaties. The treaties are outdated and the courts have gone wild in their far left interpretations.

      The reality is that laws should be made by politicians and not courts. If the constitution needs to be interpreted or even changed then this should be done by our elected officials – not unelected judges.

      No constitutional document is perfect. Society changes and so does its needs. A constitution needs to be a living document to reflect this. Look at how many times the US constitution has been amended – amended by its leaders and not its courts.

      Canada has never formally amended its constitution. Is that becuase we just lucked out and created perfection. Probably not.

      But the courts have unofficially changed our constitution on many occasions through judicial.interpretation, creating analogous grounds and adding its own standards.

      This is not the way. There is an amending formula for a reason. The constitution was never supposed to be changed by the courts.

      Society through our elected officials have to take back control from unelected judges – who are for the most part all political appointments for life. Its a crazy and imperialistic system if you really think about it.

    30. Frostsorrow on

      I swear every time I see her name lately, she says something more dumb then then the previous thing.

    33. radi0head on

      Pleasantly surprised to see this subs response to this. Gives me a little hope there is common ground amongst diverse folks when dealing with these issues, minus the low education loonies that somehow get a microphone.

    35. twizzjewink on

      Treaty (def): a formally concluded and ratified agreement between countries (or nations).

      Literally. SHE DOESN’T HAVE THE POWER TO DO THIS. The Reservations need to put their foot down and shutdown the province. ASAP.