Referendum 2026: Separation

This is going to be the first of two posts dealing with the upcoming referendum. I’m sure I’ll have more to say as we get closer to October, but as we head into a long weekend meant to celebrate “Alberta Heritage”, it seems appropriate to start here:

It’s no surprise to anyone who knows me - or reads what I write - that I am 100% against separation, think the referendum is absurd, and plan to vote ‘no’ on 8 of 9 of the other questions (more on that one in the companion blog). With that said, I’m going to do my best to be fair. Fair does not mean balanced, and this movement does not deserve balance. The sides are not equal, and the idea that they should be is a fallacy. But every idea, until tested on its merit, deserves fairness. I have used lots of sources, all of which are linked in the body or at the end. One that I drew on very heavily I’m going to link first:

https://www.separationfacts.ca/ 

It is thorough - exhaustively so - and both open and balanced in its methodology. Much more balanced than I intend to be. This is an opinion blog after all. But Separation Facts evaluates claims made by the various separation factions and shows its work. It’s worth a read, and it deserves to be first in the list.

Alberta has legitimate grievances with Canada, and there is value in talking about them. In my view, that’s yet another reason why separation is ridiculous. It’s counterproductive to that exact conversation. There are those on the separation side who think that a vote in the affirmative gives us some kind of leverage or clout to be in a better bargaining position - a notion I find absurd. Threatening to take your ball and go home has never once worked in a playground or sandbox. How could anyone think it will work on a national stage with a PM who is an economist, pragmatist, small ‘c’ conservative, and who has negotiated and led at the highest of international levels?

I’m very concerned, to put it far too mildly. While I have confidence that most people do not want separation, I know that voter apathy remains high. I know the process will be long and cumbersome (by design), and that people will be dissuaded from staying in lineups. I know hand-counting and actively avoiding tech solutions (ironic from a government that appears all-in on shaky AI investments) will produce inconsistent and questionable results. And, I know that there is a targeted campaign of anti-immigrant and xenophobic sentiment, which I warned about several months ago in another post. I’m sure you see it on your various social feeds and in right-leaning media outlets as well. And the Province, officially, is very firm in this same sentiment. Of the 26 entries on their own FAQ, 18 deal with immigration specifically.

https://albertareferendum2026.ca/faqs/

I firmly believe the Province has their finger on the scale here, despite several UCP ministers (including Smith, to her credit) being openly and publicly against separation. I cannot possibly know what the Premier actually thinks or feels, so I have to take her at her public word. But it’s troubling to see that she has spoken out of both sides of her mouth on this issue over time, and she appears to be at the very least courting separatism while maintaining a Pilate-like distance from it. 

The impetus to all of this is allegedly the recommendations of the series of “Alberta Next” panels, which required registration and were very tightly controlled vis a vis subject matter. Adversarial questions were routinely cut off, while supportive ones were allowed to go over time.The panel reported on topics like an Alberta Provincial Police force, Alberta Pension Plan, personal income tax collection - none of which are in the referendum package - and immigration, equalization, and sovereignty which are. The full report can be found here:

 https://open.alberta.ca/publications/alberta-next-panel-recommendations 

The separation question - “Should Alberta remain a province of Canada, or 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?” is long, wordy, and requires two answers instead of being yes/no. I have no idea why this is, as most referenda are strictly binary. I think part of the intent is to confuse, but also to obfuscate. There are lots of people who mistakenly think that voting to “commence the legal process…” means immediate or full separation, which couldn’t be further from the truth. A (very unlikely) vote in favour of the second part would only trigger one in a long line of next steps. Steps that would involve constitutional challenges, negotiations, lawsuits, further referenda, and decades of economic uncertainty. It’s extremely bad for business and investment to even go through this process at all, and there are many big corporations waiting for a remain vote before pulling the trigger on large projects. How separatists can’t see that is beyond me.

Democracy is alright and all, but a referendum is a great example of its many flaws. We are not experts - as a collective - on anything. Immigration, constitutional law, equalization & transfer payments, healthcare, education, etc. So asking us a series of asinine yes/no questions about those things, knowing full well that the answers will fall mostly on party lines, identity politics, and the influence of far-right AI slop, is irresponsible at best and horrific at worst. Separation is no different. Most people will not put the work in to fully understand the financial, legal, and cultural implications of this. So while I am against this in principle, I have no choice but to participate. We’re all forced to be in that boat, and it’s our responsibility to be thorough and serious. We need voter turnout badly, and we need it from an informed group. I am aware of the irony of using social media to complain about the ills of social media, but we’re all collectively stuck in this technocracy. We have to do our best. 

This is less of an attempt to persuade anyone to vote one way or another, but rather putting resources and information in one place. My thoughts on separation are obvious, and I believe many - if not most - people have made up their minds at this point. There are probably lots of folks who think they understand the question and its implications, and I certainly hope they’ve done some homework. Please share this with your network, and please let me know if I’ve missed some repository of information that can be helpful.

Sources:

https://knowthenine.ca/ - biased against separation and imploring people to vote “no” on all nine subsequent questions.

https://albertataxpayers.ca/ - thoughtful and balanced, but decidedly skewed toward fiscal and financial implications of the referendum questions.

https://www.thenonprofitchamber.org/blog-news/before-you-vote-a-nonprofits-guide-to-albertas-october-referendum - factual and procedural, but through a non-profit lens.

https://albertareferendum2026.ca/ - biased in favour of a ‘yes’ vote on the 9 subsequent questions. Lots of misleading language, or times where context is deliberately left out. Not explicitly in favour of separation, but again uses language on this matter which is deliberately unclear.

https://www.albertaprosperityproject.com/ - obviously very biased to separation and a ‘yes’ vote on all 9 subsequent questions.

https://stayfreealberta.stayfreealberta.workers.dev/ - clearly biased to separation. Mostly just a site collecting donations and newsletter registration.

https://www.forever-canadian.ca/en - kind of similar to Stay Free Alberta in that it’s mostly a site mobilizing and collecting registrations.

https://www.takingbackalberta.net/ - obviously quite biased in favour of separation. Very xenophobic and anti-immigrant.

https://www.elections.ab.ca/elections/referendum/ 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/guide-alberta-separatist-stay-referendum-9.7217218 

https://albertatransitioncouncil.com/ - the “serious” arm of the Keith WIlson-led Let Alberta Decide, ostensibly working on policy and a legal blueprint for separation.

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/umberto-eco-ur-fascism - not directly germane to separatism specifically (it was written in 1995 by an Italian author), but full of surprisingly good context about the roots of and tactics used by aspirational fascists. Much of what underlies the separation movement shares sentiments with fascism.

Stay tuned for my thoughts on “the nine”,

- Adam