Thread

Canada welcomes EU proposal to become 'associate member'

284 points · 354 comments · witweb

WarmWash · 1789653662 · focus · HN ↗
Meanwhile, Alberta, where all of Canada's "energy security" is located, is holding a secession referendum on Oct 19.
The chances of Canada getting everyone to go along with this are close to zero. (As are the chances of Alberta actually seceding).
It's just political theater
1. lostmsu · 1789654082 · focus · HN ↗
  > It's just political theater
  Do you think the referendum in question is not a political theater?
  I don't know much, but it stands to me that the EU association is magnitudes more serious.
2. petcat · 1789654148 · focus · HN ↗
  > where all of Canada's "energy security" is located
  Alberta selling oil to USA is, by itself, like 20% of Canada's entire GDP.
  And 70% of all other exports go to USA too. So yeah it is mostly just theater because there's a loud mouth idiot in the White house.
  They're doing some lip-service and just hoping it will blow over when Trump is gone.
  1. arbirk · 1789654278 · focus · HN ↗
    it is only around 5% of GDP
  2. john_strinlai · 1789654880 · focus · HN ↗
    >Alberta selling oil to USA is, by itself, like 20% of Canada's entire GDP.
    wow, no, it's not "like 20%" at all. not even close.
    the entire oil and natural gas industry was 3.8% of canada's GDP in 2025.
    how did you even come up with that number?
    ian_b13 · 1789666379 · focus · HN ↗
    The official stats Canada website has energy products at ~23.5% of total exports for July 2026
    <a href="https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2020013-eng.htm" rel="nofollow">https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2020013...
    With crude oil and natural gas making up almost 90% of that number in 2025 <a href="https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1210017201" rel="nofollow">https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=121001...
    john_strinlai · 1789668693 · focus · HN ↗
    "Canada's entire GDP" and "exports" are very different.
3. arbirk · 1789654172 · focus · HN ↗
  The EU "theater" in wonderfully bureaucratic
4. Pigo · 1789654232 · focus · HN ↗
  Trips to Canada have always left a bad taste in my mouth, but they've always been to Ontario, Quebec. I've been wondering if I'd like the people in Alberta better.
  1. pyth0 · 1789654331 · focus · HN ↗
    What does this mean?
    Pigo · 1789655497 · focus · HN ↗
    Just getting in I faced extremely rude border agents, which was just confusing. If it hadn't been for work I would have just gone home. There were some nice people, but I felt a general unfriendliness most places I went. Maybe it was just my experience.
    TheCapn · 1789657510 · focus · HN ↗
    As a Canadian I've had pretty shit experiences with the land crossings coming back to Canada from the US. They seem to be total grumpy shitheads all around.
    But at the same time I've had the absolute worst experiences crossing borders from Canada to US too. Seems like agents at the land crossings both ways just hate life or something.
    And lastly, as a Prairie resident, I've felt that general unease in Ontario/Quebec as well. I think people there are just generally more bitter.
    So I'd say don't take it personally, but that's only worth what you make of it I suppose.
    technothrasher · 1789658675 · focus · HN ↗
    > Maybe it was just my experience.
    It certainly hasn't been my experience visiting Ontario and Quebec. I've had nothing but good experiences. The Quebecois, especially in rural areas, are quite direct and I could maybe see that coming across as rude, but I've never felt unwelcome or a lack of friendliness there.
    I've had rude border agents in many countries I've visited, and I've watched CBP officers being incredibly obnoxious to visitors entering the US. I don't think that's a Canada thing.
    ChrisRR · 1789656590 · focus · HN ↗
    It means they're an american who doesn't have any input, they just want to complain about canada without a reason
  2. yokoprime · 1789654515 · focus · HN ↗
    I would suggest you brush your teeth more often if you have a bad taste in your mouth after traveling.
  3. 1attice · 1789654802 · focus · HN ↗
    Stay home, Yankee.
    Pigo · 1789655505 · focus · HN ↗
    Gladly, I have
  4. fidotron · 1789654952 · focus · HN ↗
    It's something many Canadians don't want to accept, but too much of their tourist facing industry is setup to exploit and frankly con Americans.
    I recall on my first trip here ending up in hospital, being mistaken for an American and shown one price list, only for my insurance company to get on the phone and promptly a new price list appeared and a lot of "We're sorry we thought you were American" from the staff.
    And prior to the mobile web dealing with Ontario hotels was like haggling in a Turkish bazaar with an obnoxious layer of passive aggression on top.
    donbox · 1789655554 · focus · HN ↗
    When did you last visit Ontario. How was it compared to your first visit (pre-web so I am assuming a few decades ago).
    fidotron · 1789655804 · focus · HN ↗
    Months ago. I live in Quebec (which is where the hospital incident occurred).
    Now thanks to the Internet it's way harder for hotel clerks to claim prices are different, which used to be exactly what they'd do, consequently it's improved dramatically on that front. I still remember the face of an Ottawa guy decades ago confronted with a european smartphone shoved in his face to show he was lying through his teeth. He clearly wasn't ready for the whole concept.
    hedora · 1789658205 · focus · HN ↗
    The hospital thing is standard practice in the US. The Canadian hospitals likely have to lie to get reasonable payouts from US insurance companies.
    For instance, I once needed $600 of tests at the ER. The hospital billed $80K. The insurance company paid $7K. I paid $100.
    Sure, the $600 does not include the ER overhead, but the $7K was still insanely inflated. The important thing is that the money ultimately came from insurance premiums, so every middleman was able to reliably extort all patients.
    fidotron · 1789658972 · focus · HN ↗
    > For instance, I once needed $600 of tests at the ER. The hospital billed $80K. The insurance company paid $7K. I paid $100.
    The other bit of the story was "we realised you might not be American from your face when we showed you the price list". (They told me Americans would have seen the same list and thought the prices were reasonable). I'm guessing you are American?
    You need to understand how utterly insane this sounds if you are used to European systems.
    And don't get me started on the fact Canadian healthcare doesn't actually transfer between provinces.
    badc0ffee · 1789755848 · focus · HN ↗
    What? You can use your provincial health care card in any other province. My mom made an urgent care visit while in BC, showed her Alberta health care card, and got the usual service with no extra paperwork or costs. (Behind the scenes, BC would have billed Alberta for this visit)
    warmjets222 · 1789656679 · focus · HN ↗
    [dead]
    rsynnott · 1789664866 · focus · HN ↗
    > I recall on my first trip here ending up in hospital, being mistaken for an American and shown one price list, only for my insurance company to get on the phone and promptly a new price list appeared and a lot of "We're sorry we thought you were American" from the staff.
    Where were you actually from? Some countries do have reciprocal deals on this sort of thing, and if you're from a country which does have a reciprocal deal, you might very much legitimately get a different price than if you're from a country which doesn't.
5. fidotron · 1789654380 · focus · HN ↗
  Quebec is also about to have a provincial election where separatism, and everyone's relationship to it, is the main argument.
  Many people on both sides of the Atlantic wrongly think Quebec is more compatible with Europe than the rest of Canada because they speak French, but almost the exact things Quebec separatists care most about are the things the EU wouldn't let them control.
6. yokoprime · 1789654404 · focus · HN ↗
  Its interesting to see just how MAGA-ajacent the comments are on hacker news. You would think most people in tech were more liberal.
  1. dagmx · 1789654754 · focus · HN ↗
    Tech communities like this skew more libertarian I find, which tends to be anti everything that isn’t immediately self serving.
    danans · 1789656633 · focus · HN ↗
    > Tech communities like this skew more libertarian
    Indeed, this is historically a forum with lots of "temporarily embarrassed billionaires".
    My observation is the opposite of the GP - that labor identity and consciousness (not "liberalism") is rising here, pushed in no small part by the transformation in labor value that LLMs have caused.
  2. zmgsabst · 1789656455 · focus · HN ↗
    Obama -> Bernie -> Trump is real.
    DaSHacka · 1789665580 · focus · HN ↗
    Are you.... me?
  3. ChrisRR · 1789656481 · focus · HN ↗
    I think it's more interesting to see how many profiles pop out of the woodwork when certain political topics arise
  4. pjc50 · 1789657869 · focus · HN ↗
    Since the days of USENET there's always been a significant cluster of that kind of views in the tech sphere. Tech does not magically make people more liberal, it's just that going to university sometimes does.
7. bryanlarsen · 1789654436 · focus · HN ↗
  Carney has a majority in Parliament, he can do this pretty much unilaterally if he wants. And a straw poll at the after-beer from band last night had everybody enthusiastic about the prospect.
  As for the secession referendum, it's currently polling at 20-30% and it's not a real referendum, its a referendum to hold a referendum.
8. srveale · 1789654444 · focus · HN ↗
  I think you'll find most Albertans would welcome international trade diversity, and if anything is theatre, it's the referendum. "Secessionists" are a significant minority, and even most of those don't actually want to secede, they just don't like the national government. "Send a message to Ottawa" is the motto.
  1. beached_whale · 1789657892 · focus · HN ↗
    Like, more markets for O&G and maybe AG too.
    I mean, they are getting everything the want with the Fed gov building pipelines and other infra to aid them. The east/west from years back was the company didn't want to budge on the route through Quebec and decided to walk, Keystone was the US cancelling. Trudeau got the pipeline to the west coast done and it's doing a million barrels a day almost now. Plus others to east and Churchill look like they are in the works. Only so many welders
9. 1attice · 1789654749 · focus · HN ↗
  Sort of. The referendum is unpopular and is non-binding, actually a question about whether to have a referendum. Its widely seen as a political maneuver by AB to extract pipeline concessions.
10. AlexandrB · 1789654938 · focus · HN ↗
  Giving Alberta a market where they can sell LNG might get them on board, but this would also require a bunch of new infrastructure (pipelines? ports?) that I suspect the Canadian government will not want built.
  It would be lovely to get Europe off of Russian energy imports.
  1. fidotron · 1789655760 · focus · HN ↗
    One of the major problems of Canada is it's essentially a line of provinces east-west. It means you cannot simply route around a province with unreasonable demands, everyone must be placated, and the resource region of Alberta is seriously landlocked.
    This has bred an economy of rent seekers and real estate at the expense of almost everything else. There are reasons that the best and brightest of Canada enthusiastically leave en masse to the place that Canadians claim to detest most of all, which leads to a sort of self loathing complex with the ones that stay; they are utterly mystified by the idea that anyone with any skills/talent whatsoever would want to move to Canada, it's truly mind boggling. (This is why I prefer Quebec - it's got enough people in it that really like Quebec a lot).
    llm_nerd · 1789656114 · focus · HN ↗
    > you cannot simply route around a province with unreasonable demands, everyone must be placated, and the resource region of Alberta is seriously landlocked.
    Retconned horseshit that emanates from idiot chambers.
    The US is a big country next door, and historically the two economies and trade have been very tightly integrated. So Alberta hooks into the US pipeline system, as cooperative players in a continental energy system, and so does Ontario. There was never a critical reason to make significant East/West pipelines, in the same way that the US has loads of LNG export terminals (they were actually converted import terminals), and being connected to their LNG system meant it made little sense to spend billions of new terminals.
    Not to mention some geographic issues. Running a pipeline through the Canadian shield is not a trivial matter. Possible, but it's much easier though the flyover US states.
    And most hilarious of all about this, the reviled national energy program (NEP) -- you know, the one that 0% of Albertans understand but they're sure it was to screw them -- was the federal government proposing a national pipeline system. Alberta had a massive tantrum about it. Instead Alberta was constrained to selling oil at a massive discount to the US for decades.
    >There are reasons that the best and brightest of Canada enthusiastically leave en masse to the place that Canadians claim to detest most of all
    ROFL. Good god. The fact that you're in Quebec, and you celebrate Quebec (by far the most dysfunctional part of the country, largely a welfare state propped up by the rest of Canada, primarily Ontario), has to be the most hilarious part of this comical fan-fiction nonsense.
    Now you seem to have a hilarious take on Canada, but in the real world the "West" anointed the US as the centre of power (the largest population base, unharmed by two world wars in a row). This means that people from everywhere generally centralized there, for media, for technology, and so on. Thanks to the current idiocracy and the accelerating decline of that country, the whole thing has reversed.
    fidotron · 1789656607 · focus · HN ↗
    > largely a welfare state propped up by the rest of Canada, primarily Ontario
    Aside from the wrongness of the rest of your comment, you're hilariously out of date here. Ontario has become the defining political and economic disaster area in Canada.
    llm_nerd · 1789657118 · focus · HN ↗
    > Aside from the wrongness of the rest of your comment
    I see you've, uh, comprehensively detailed what was wrong.
    Nothing in my comment was wrong.
    > Ontario has become the defining political and economic disaster area in Canada
    ROFL. Christ.
    Ontario's "economic disaster" contributes 2x the amount to federal coffers than Quebec does, despite only being 60% larger in population. It contributes almost 3x more than Alberta, which about tracks with the population difference. In every economic metric, Ontario obliterates Quebec.
    Seeing Maple MAGA nonsense from someone living in Quebec is hilarious stuff. Quebec has always been our special little welfare state, that has a government massively funded out of proportion, largely on the backs of Ontario and BC. Having you slinging stones and talking about the greatness of Quebec is...well, it's amazing stuff.
    fidotron · 1789657281 · focus · HN ↗
    Just don't mention the Ontario car industry, or the state of your public finances.
    llm_nerd · 1789657768 · focus · HN ↗
    > Just don't mention the Ontario car industry
    I mean...mention it? What? What a hilarious comment, that clearly derives from whatever right wing echo chamber idiot chamber you emerged from.
    Aside from the fact that it's...fine... (protip - the automakers have largely ignored Trump and know he's going to die in a pile of his own feces and they'll move on). A gigantic new multi-billion dollar battery plant (still going ahead...hey, didn't multiple in Quebec get abandoned?). A new armoured vehicle plant. Two new heavy duty truck plants.
    I mean, Chrysler is collapsing, but eh. They're collapsing everywhere. BYD will likely buy one of their plants.
    And it's hilarious when Maple MAGA mouth-breathers always bring up the auto industry. It could disappear and we'd move on. This delusion that we're all auto workers here is comedy. I don't know a single person even peripherally related to that industry.
    > or the state of your public finances.
    Which makes it extra funny that Ontario bankrolls Quebec largess. I agree that should be stopped. Quebec needs to stop being the welfare project dragging the country down, which is something that would make Alberta happy as well.
    fidotron · 1789658740 · focus · HN ↗
    > Ontario bankrolls Quebec largess
    A funny way to spell Alberta.
    Ontario doesn't bankroll anyone, and hasn't for decades. We all suffer the weakened CAD simply to secure votes in Ontario.
    llm_nerd · 1789658879 · focus · HN ↗
    > A funny way to spell Alberta.
    Ontario contributes 3x more to federal coffers than Alberta. Now extremely simple sorts look at "equalization payments" (you know, the welfare program for Quebec), and think it's somehow paid for by the "haves", but that isn't remotely how it works. Ontario and BC contribute almost all of the money that is then handed out to welfare provinces like Quebec.
    > We all suffer the weakened CAD simply to secure votes in Ontario.
    LOL, wtf. You really need to disengage from whatever bullshit chamber you clearly get your "knowledge" from, because this is just embarrassing nonsense. Again, having someone from Quebec trying to claim that another part of Canada is holding them down is....good god, it is deliciously tasty idiocy.
    It's funny how you cite "reality" and tell me I'm wrong, yet you haven't corrected a single thing. And FWIW, I'm firmly convinced you are an American spinning a hilarious fan-fiction, because for a Quebecer to actually say these things would be so ironic the universe would collapse on itself.
    fidotron · 1789659850 · focus · HN ↗
    The legendary persuasiveness of the angry Ontarian when reality fails to match what would be personally convenient for them.
    happythomist · 1789660004 · focus · HN ↗
    > And most hilarious of all about this, the reviled national energy program (NEP) -- you know, the one that 0% of Albertans understand but they're sure it was to screw them -- was the federal government proposing a national pipeline system. Alberta had a massive tantrum about it.
    Yes, the NEP proposed extending some natural gas pipelines. You neglected to mention that it also imposed price controls and new taxes on oil and gas revenues.
    Marc Lalonde, the minister responsible, literally said after the fact that the goal of the program was to shift oil and gas revenue from the provinces and industry to Ottawa:
    "The major factor behind the NEP wasn't Canadianization or getting more from the industry or even self sufficiency," [...] "The determinant factor was the fiscal imbalance between the provinces and the federal government [...] "Our proposal was to increase Ottawa's share appreciably, so that the share of the producing provinces would decline significantly and the industry's share would decline somewhat."
    <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Energy_Program" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Energy_Program
11. speak_plainly · 1789655775 · focus · HN ↗
  The real political theatre is coming from Alberta. Secession can't be achieved unilaterally under Canadian constitutional law. A clear majority on a clear referendum question would create an obligation to negotiate.
  More critically, the Numbered Treaties (6, 7, and 8, and to a lesser extent 4 and 10) make the entire idea, for all practical purposes, a legal dead end. These are nation-to-nation covenants with the Crown and not with the province.
  To leave with its borders intact, Alberta would have to negotiate constitutional amendments with Ottawa and the other provinces, while securing affected First Nations’ consent to any transfer or replacement of their treaty relationships with Canada in a situation where Alberta has almost no leverage.
  Good luck.
  1. dallen33 · 1789656201 · focus · HN ↗
    Only sane response in this thread about this topic. Thank you.
  2. beached_whale · 1789658075 · focus · HN ↗
    Alberta's existence as a province was predicated upon those Treaties existing in the first place. It and Saskatchewan were part of the NW Territories until like 1905.
  3. atomic_cattlepr · 1789668070 · focus · HN ↗
    > A clear majority on a clear referendum question would create an obligation to negotiate.
    To be further clear: it would create an obligation on the Alberta government to negotiate. A provincial referendum creates no such obligation on the Canadian government.
12. noir_lord · 1789657628 · focus · HN ↗
  > The chances of Canada getting everyone to go along with this are close to zero.
  They are a democracy, they don't have to get "everyone to go along with this" they just have to get the majority to go along with it.
13. shpx · 1789658049 · focus · HN ↗
  The actual referendum question will be
  > should the Government of Alberta commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada?
  So it's a referendum on whether or not to start the process towards possibly, maybe, holding a referendum in the future.
  <a href="https://www.elections.ab.ca/elections/referendum/" rel="nofollow">https://www.elections.ab.ca/elections/referendum/
14. timbit42 · 1789859830 · focus · HN ↗
  Over 60% of Canada's energy comes from hydro
  15% nuclear
  6% wind
  5% natural gas
  3% bioenergy
  2% solar
  1% oil

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.