It is New Year’s Eve as I write this and as in every last day of the year, it is a time of introspection and wonder at what lies ahead. Secession-minded people have had a good year in 2016. Our greatest allies, Justin Trudeau federally and Rachel Notley provincially, have made it nearly impossible to see a bright future for families in the West. Unemployment is rising, the deficit, both federal and provincial, is rising to levels unheard of since the last time a Trudeau was at the helm. Even in British Columbia, uncertainty looms.

We are approaching a provincial election and the overriding question is who to choose? The BC Liberals have been in power so long that it feels like BC is theirs to do with as they wish.  Christy Clark has tried to be all things to everyone in search of votes but her biggest ace in the hole is the NDP. People in BC have experienced NDP governments before that have nearly bankrupted the province and have had a taste of what the NDP stands for when Adrian Dix stated his party’s views and policies for BC. Voters flocked to the safety of the BC Liberals!

But, where to next? The BC election is slated for Tuesday, May 9, 2017. BC voters, a fickle lot if there ever was one, may just rethink their aversion to the NDP and vote them into power. Why? Because there is no choice. No options.

British Columbia is a strange place. It can be forward thinking and regressive at the same time. There are many who would accept imposing misery on their neighbours and their children to prevent any harm to trees, rocks, birds and crustaceans, even if the means to do so kills much of the wildlife they claim to love. They are mixed in with those that see our resources as a means to provide for families and build a robust economy. Where is the middle?

Any successful independence movement must be able to address the concerns of both. I would suggest an approach where use of resources is combined with intelligent delivery of these resources. Too often we see conflict because either end wants it their way or no way. Most of the time the eco front wins out because they are much better organized, funded and supported. They can get their message out in a way that demonizes any other view. We do not want to be caught in the crosshairs.

So how can we get out a message that appeals to both sides? We have the numbers, I am convinced of this. But many potential supporters are simply unaware of the independence cause and are unwilling to “come out” lest they be set upon. We need a face.

We need a leader who can present our cause in an articulate, thoughtful way. One who can negotiate the pitfalls that come when dealing with a piranha laden media. One who can be at home with a crowd or a single person. We need a Leader. If we have a Leader, the rest will come. Funding, support, media, all of it. We need a modern day Moses who can lead us to the promised land.

Where are you Moses?

I have been inspired.

Being from a Quebec background, I naturally speak French. However I have lived out west for some 40 years now and although my roots are strong, I am now firmly a Westerner.

I’ve been introduced to the “Projet Liberté-Nation”, a concept developed over 5 years by Quebec Lawyer, Mr. Guy Bertrand. In this concept, he carefully lays out his plan for the Quebec of the future, the Quebec of 2030 and beyond.

Now before you completely zone out because it’s a post about Quebec, let me give you some points to consider. First, the Independence movement in Quebec has been ongoing and evolving for some 50 years. They have a wealth of experience and have learned much. We would do well to keep our friends close. Second, we have a common goal, independence. What benefits them will also benefit us.

Mr. Bertrand proposes independence, yes, but his approach is what is refreshing and inspiring. As it stands now, both federally and provincially, power is a top-down affair with the regions being told from above what they can and cannot do.

Usually, the carrot on a string method is used to motivate; either play ball or you don’t get the carrot. We in the West have been following the carrot for about 100 years now, perhaps it’s time we reviewed this?

There has been much speculation about how an independent West would be like. Albertans are solidly leading the charge, followed by Saskatchewan and Manitoba. British Columbia is lagging behind for many reasons, with Vancouver / Victoria being the main areas of resistance to independence. But why does a future independent West have to be based on a provincial model? How is the status quo working out?

For an independence to be successful, Mr. Bertrand states, it must be reborn. Hence his calling for the “République fédérale du Québec”. What?  A FEDERAL republic?

Consider if you will, a Federal Republic of Western Canada. Since we would all share the same hopes and dreams of our new country, gone would be the old monikers of how the provinces are named now. Instead, a new country would be delineated and named by region. For example, The Caribou, Peace River, Okanagan, Foothills, Fraser Valley, etc. Each region would be self-governing and would have representatives in a centrally located capital. There are precedents that can be used as examples such as Switzerland’s 26 Cantons (regions).

In this way, since authority to govern flows from below, the government must follow the will of the people, all of the people.

I would submit that the idea has merit, particularly the concept that if we are to form a new country based on our values and hopes for the future, the old system must come down so we can start on a level playing field.

I’m charged up about this and will endeavor to translate and interpret Mr. Bertrand’s ideas for the future. Granted, not all of them will apply but the basic concepts are sound. Watch for more on this in future posts.

In the meantime, think about this, discuss it and let the concept occupy you, dear reader, until next time.

So, what do you want?

As I look over the various Facebook pages that provide an online home for independence-minded people I am struck by several things and I thought I’d share them with you, the reader. This is by no means an authoritative judgment, just personal observations, nothing more.

First, a bit about Facebook. The social media phenomenon is probably best exemplified by Facebook to the point where it can determine the outcome of events in real-time. We see it all the time, public gatherings, events, conferences and even in organizing riots. The power of Facebook should never be underestimated. Any politician that does so, does it at his own risk.

But it is, after all, social media. The same site that gives us videos of cuddly critters and makes us laugh, cry or angry tends to be a breeding ground for every false hope story and exaggerated claim that can be brought to bear against us.

With all the positive aspects of social media, it’s sometimes too easy to forget the negative aspects. I was once at a coffee shop and noticed a table of six millennials enjoying their drinks. All of them were hunched over their smart phones with fingers flying over the screens. Not a word was spoken, none made eye contact. I watched them for quite some time as did many other patrons. Not one even looked up or even acknowledged the presence of other people surrounding them. Crazy, eh?

As we head towards independence, heavy use of social media is a must. But as we organize and plan it becomes obvious that most social media users are oblivious to the real world. We see movements with thousands of so called members but when it comes time to meet, for real, organizers are lucky to see more than ten. Such is life in our new social media world. Politicians do not see “Likes” as people, to make an impression one has to step out of their comfort zone and be seen.

If you want to be in the forefront, be in the forefront.