Outrage Over Alberta Tax Dollars Funding Separatist Court Appeal
Alberta Taxpayers Funding Separatist Court Battle

A recent letter to the editor has ignited controversy over the Alberta government's decision to appeal a court ruling that halted a separatist referendum petition. The author, Neil LeMay of Edmonton, expressed outrage that taxpayer money is being used to support a private separatist organization's legal battle.

Government Appeal Draws Criticism

The Alberta Court of King's Bench previously ruled the petition process unconstitutional, effectively stopping the separatist initiative. LeMay argues that unless the petitioners themselves challenge the decision, the government should not intervene. He stated, "It is not the responsibility of Alberta taxpayers to subsidize a political project the government claims it does not even support."

LeMay emphasized that diverting public funds to a flawed, privately driven referendum campaign is irresponsible, especially when public services are strained. He called for better stewardship of tax dollars.

Wide Pickt banner — collaborative shopping lists app for Telegram, phone mockup with grocery list

Conflicting Views on Free Speech

Another letter writer, J.G. Esligar of St. Albert, questioned the court's decision, asking, "Since when has it been unconstitutional to ask a question?" They argued that the ruling infringes on free speech and described it as "judge-made law" indicative of a dictatorial approach. Esligar called for the decision to be appealed and denied, but acknowledged that common sense should have prevented it.

Allegations of UCP Separatist Leanings

Dave Lapp of Edmonton praised Justice Shaina Leonard's ruling but questioned Premier Danielle Smith's decision to challenge it. He stated, "What more proof do we need that the UCP are closet separatists too cowardly to be honest with the people of Alberta?" Lapp argued that the government's actions reveal hidden separatist sympathies.

Premier Smith's Stance Questioned

A final letter criticized Premier Smith for bending over backwards for separatists. The author noted that Smith claims to want Alberta to remain in Canada but has changed laws to remove constitutional requirements and is defending separatists in court. They asked, "Why is the government appealing this court decision? Why not let the separatists fight their own battles?" The author expressed skepticism about Smith's commitment to Canada, urging her to show opposition to separatists.

Pickt after-article banner — collaborative shopping lists app with family illustration