Alberta: the jilted lover of Confederation

This is a written version of a talk I delivered to the Rideau Club Roundtable in Ottawa, June 3, 2026.

Thank you for the invitation to join you today. I’m a political scientist at the University of Alberta, and I lead the Common Ground project. Since 2019, our research team has been in the field studying Alberta public opinion and political culture through surveys, focus groups, social media analysis, and direct observation.

More recently, we have been diving deeply into the Alberta separatist movement: attending rallies, tracking online networks, studying speeches, and dissecting the proposals being put before Albertans.

I’m also involved in Lead Not Leave, a policy initiative aimed at promoting a better conversation about Alberta’s place in Confederation.

But more than that, I’m an Albertan. I don’t say that lightly. Many of us who are anxious about the trajectory of the province have a difficult time identifying with our provincial community. We are comfortable saying we are from Alberta, but less comfortable saying we are of Alberta.

A few years ago, I celebrated my “Albertaversary” — the date at which I spent more time living in Alberta than where I came from. Around that same time, I came to appreciate how important it was to connect my tenure in the province to my identity. Not because I think there is one right way to be Albertan.

Quite the opposite.

Because I think Alberta desperately needs a broader understanding of itself — one that reflects the diversity within the province and one that projects a confidence in that diversity to the rest of the world. I want to close today by returning to that idea, because I think it is crucial to the effort to strengthen Alberta’s role in Confederation.

In the meantime, I have been invited today to speak about three things.

First: where Alberta is right now. As many folks often ask me, “what the hell is going on in Alberta?” And “Should we be worried?” The answers: “something quite new, actually” and “actually, yes” might be sobering for some of you.

Second: how we got here. The salience of separatism has increased rather rapidly, and it’s important not to confuse it for your grandfather’s brand of western alienation. It is a far-right populist movement, and it has found a willing enabler in the provincial government. In no uncertain terms: we are where we are because the Smith government led us here.

And third: what Albertans — and Canadians outside Alberta — can do to ensure Alberta remains a stronger part of a better Canada. This doesn’t mean appeasing separatists, but it does mean addressing some of the unfortunate relationship habits that have developed within our Confederation family over the past decade.

More to the point, I will argue that Alberta is the jilted lover of Confederation: a partner who feels under-appreciated and misunderstood, yet yearns for a closer relationship with the rest of Canada. We should approach the upcoming referendum with that in mind.

Alberta is heading toward a historic day of voting on October 19. On that single day, Albertans are expected to face at least ten referendum questions — more than in the rest of Alberta’s history combined. Five are on immigration. Four are on the Constitution. One is on separation. And there may be another on coal mining in the Rockies.

The separation question is not a simple “Remain or Leave” question. It’s not based on a “Yes” or “No” response set. Instead, it asks whether Albertans want to remain in Canada, or begin the process of holding a second referendum on leaving. That wording is crucial, and is one of the many advantages granted to the separatist side over the past year.

Polling suggests Albertans are poised to vote to remain in Canada — by a rate of 60/40 or 65/35. That’s about where Quebec ended up in 1980, remember. But support for remaining is softer when the question is framed as continuing a process rather than as a direct choice between Canada and independence. It’s weaker still when stress-tested by questions like, “would you like to lose your passport?” “or your pension?”

On separation, Albertans are deeply divided along partisan lines. Roughly half of UCP and Conservative Party supporters say they would vote to continue down the path toward separation. Nearly all NDP and Liberal voters say they would vote to end that journey.

But it would be a mistake to assume Albertans are divided in the same way on every part of this debate.

Consider identity. When we ask Albertans how they see themselves, only a very small group — about five percent — identify as Albertan only. Another ten percent identify as Canadian only. The vast majority see themselves as some combination of the two: Albertan and Canadian. So this is not a province full of people who have abandoned Canada emotionally. Indeed, even a surprising number of separatists report feeling at least somewhat attached to Canada. (One assumes this is an affinity for what Canada used to be, as opposed to what it has become or where it is headed.)

The fact that only one-in-four or one-in-five Albertans want to separate does not mean we are a province full of people who are satisfied with the status quo, though.

When it comes to Alberta’s place in Confederation, Albertans do not divide neatly into three clean camps: federalists, autonomists, and separatists. Our team has tried to pigeon-hole Albertans into those categories. But it simply doesn’t work. Most Albertans want to build bridges with the rest of the country. There is still a strong “West Wants In” mentality that carries over from the Reform Party era. At the same time, a majority also wants Alberta to pursue more autonomy within Canada. But that support drops when autonomy means abandoning major national institutions like the Canada Pension Plan, the RCMP, or the Canada Revenue Agency.

So Albertans are not separatists in waiting. But neither are they uncomplicated federalists.

What almost all Albertans share is some sense of alienation from the rest of Canada. Across regions, classes, parties, and ideological camps, many Albertans feel that the province is not treated fairly by the federal government. That it does not get its fair share of attention or support. That feeling has declined noticeably since the 2025 federal election, but it remains a defining feature of Alberta political culture.

Some express this alienation as anger and estrangement. Others express it as frustration and yearning.

Looking at the entire population, I often describe Albertans as the jilted lover of Confederation. There is a strong sense of loyalty — a desire to be there for the country. But there is also a strong sense of unrequited love — a feeling that the rest of the family doesn’t understand us or is not there for Alberta when we need it most. There is a sense that Alberta can do more for Canada, but that Canada will not let us contribute fully because it does not understand or respect the province’s approach.

Underneath all of this is a feeling of underappreciation. And yes, a little martyrdom. Being undervalued is part of Alberta’s political DNA. For separatists, I fear it it has grown into a full-blown victim complex. But for mainstream Alberta, the sentiment is one of unrequited love — a desire to be more appreciated and understood, not to leave.

We have all been part of relationships like this. And if you have not, maybe you were the martyr.

But that analogy — Alberta as the jilted lover — is very different from the analogy separatists use. In separatist speeches and propaganda, Alberta is often portrayed as the abused spouse of Confederation. That comparison is both deeply disrespectful to victims and factually inaccurate.

It also reveals something important about the separatist project. It is not simply about constitutional reform or fiscal federalism. It is about recasting Canada as something not merely disappointing, but violent. Again, that mentality is not widespread. It is, however, gaining a toehold in the province’s political culture. Alongside separatism.

Our Common Ground focus groups show that the Overton Window has moved. In our sessions, we often ask participants to draw us “an Albertan.” For years, the figure who emerged — what we sometimes call “Average Joe” — was not a separatist. But over the past two years, he has become separatist-curious. That does not mean most Albertans support independence. They do not. But it does mean separatism has become a legitimate part of Alberta’s political discourse in a way it was not before. That is a necessary condition for the growth of separatism — though by no means a sufficient one.

Taken together, the facts are clear: separatism has become more salient than ever before. Media attention has increased. Google searches have increased. The movement is getting more oxygen. But so far, that attention has not translated into increased support. Reputable polls peg the “leave vote” as plateauing around 20 to 25 percent.

Given all the extra attention, why hasn’t separatism grown more popular? One reason may be the leadership of the separatist movement itself. Many separatists we speak to acknowledge that the current leadership embodies the worst stereotypes of what it means to be Albertan. They are unlikely to grow the movement in the way René Lévesque or Lucien Bouchard did in Quebec, or Boris Johnson did in the United Kingdom. But that could change. One high-profile elite conversion could shift the dynamic very quickly. A more charismatic, credible, or institutionally connected separatist figure could go a long way toward increasing support. Especially considering the divided nature of the Remain camp.

A second reason for the stagnation of separatist support may be what David Coletto calls the precarity mindset. In a time of global uncertainty and a marauding southern neighbour, Canadians — Albertans included — are looking for steady leadership and stable politics. Even the debate around separatism — let alone the actual act of independence — creates the sort of radical disorder conservatives bristle against.

On another level, the Trump administration is deeply unpopular among many Albertans. Thus, the separatist leadership’s self-described “close ties” to the White House may be driving more Albertans away from the movement than toward it.

So separatism is louder. It is more visible. It is seen as more legitimate as a topic of conversation. But it has not yet become broadly popular. Nonetheless, Albertans are heading to the polls this fall in what could be the first of two referendums on whether to leave Canada. We should not rest on our laurels. If Brexit shows us anything, things can change in a hurry.

The first part of the answer is cultural. The second is institutional. Culturally, modern separatism is not your grandparents’ western alienation.

It is a mistake to treat today’s separatists as the inheritors of the 1980s Western Canada Concept or Confederation of Regions tradition. Many separatist leaders and followers would struggle to tell you what the NEP stands for, let alone explain how it worked. Justin Trudeau is a frequent target of separatist anger. But Pierre Trudeau barely figures into their thinking.

The grievances at the heart of the separatist cause appear familiar. They are primarily economic, focusing largely on equalization and federal regulations on the oil and gas industry. But the tone has changed noticeably.

In earlier versions of western alienation, the complaint was that Alberta was being held back by Ottawa. Today, the grievance is more personal and more existential.

It is not only that Alberta is being held back. It is that “real Albertans” are falling behind. Falling behind other Canadians. Falling behind previous generations. Falling behind their own expectations of where they thought they would be at this stage of their careers and lives. Many speak openly about the forces of globalization, which they see as having taken away once-honoured jobs in primary industry while bringing foreign ideas and foreign people into their communities.

This is not just a battle against Ottawa. It is not just a battle against Justin Trudeau. It is also a battle against Greta Thunberg. And against the Somali neighbours who moved in down the block. It is part of the broader, global “culture wars” that pit proponents of globalization against some of its victims. Separatists are stoking these grievances and anxieties in much the same way far-right populist movements have done in the United States and Britain. And the provincial government has enabled it.

That brings us to the institutional side of the story. When Jason Kenney returned to Alberta to unite the right and defeat the New Democrats, he made a series of fateful decisions that set Alberta down the path toward separatism. One was his referendum-to-nowhere on removing the equalization principle from the Constitution. That exercise (some may say, stunt) became a template for Danielle Smith’s four constitutional referendum questions this fall.

But the more consequential choice involved the internal rules of the new United Conservative Party. Kenney removed many of the guardrails that had existed under the old Progressive Conservatives. Instead of keeping many of the gates that insulate the leader from populist uprisings, the UCP rules allowed powerful factions to form and hold the premier to account on a continual basis.

Most importantly, the party created a provision allowing one-quarter of all constituency presidents to trigger a leadership review. That 22-person threshold became an organizational focus for far-right populists who used it to topple Kenney during the COVID-19 crisis. And it is the same Gang of 22 that now hold sway over Premier Smith.

Under that pressure, Smith has not merely removed the remaining guardrails to separatism. As my colleague at the University of Calgary, Lisa Young, puts it: the premier has paved the road to a separatist referendum and closed the off-ramps.

On the legal front, her government lowered the signature threshold for a constitutional citizen initiative. Under Kenney’s original version of the law, a petition required signatures from 20 percent of registered voters provincewide, plus support in two-thirds of ridings. That is a very high bar, but a threshold just low enough to entice organizers into blowing off steam in an effort to meet it. Smith lowered cut that threshold in half — to 10 percent of votes cast in the last provincial election, and she removed the regional requirements (which stood in the way of a purely urban or rural movement from taking control of the agenda).

Smith also extended the collection window from 90 days to 120 days. That means that while federalists were forced to collect roughly 300,000 signatures across the province in 90 days — a feat they accomplished under the Forever Canadian banner — separatists needed only about 176,000 signatures over 120 days.

The government also allowed corporate and union money into citizen initiative campaigns, where previously only individuals could contribute. And it removed the cap on political party spending in these campaigns. That allows the government and corporate donors to dominate the field — potentially to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars per question, and millions across the full suite.

The government also removed the requirement that petitions be based on constitutionally sound premises — but not before Justice Feasby dismissed the first Stay Free Alberta petition as an abrogation of treaty rights.

And the Smith government reduced the Chief Electoral Officer’s gatekeeping role, including the ability to advise applicants and refer questions to court for review.

Politically, Smith has also done a lot of the separatists’ work for them. She has inflated the size of the movement compared to verified estimates. She repeatedly cites Stay Free Alberta’s claim of 300,000 signatures as if it were fact, knowing full well those numbers have not been validated by Elections Alberta due to the court’s prohibition.

Just as important is what Smith has not done. She has not called for a public inquiry into the separatists’ illegal use of the Electors List. Take Back Alberta lead, David Parker — who played a leading role in ousting Kenney and installing Smith — stands accused of illegally accessing the voters list and publishing it publicly on his Centurion Project website. It is unknown how this access affected the petition-collection process, or how it may provide separatists with an ongoing advantage in the current referendum campaign. Regardless, Premier Smith is not waiting for ongoing investigations by the RCMP and Elections Alberta to be completed.

All of this points to an obvious conclusion. The premier herself wants to hold a referendum on Alberta independence. We can speculate about what is motivating her. But her actions are transparent. She has cleared the path. She has closed the off-ramps. So the short answer to the question “How did we get here on the path to a vote on Alberta separation?” is this: Because Danielle Smith wants us to be here.

First, Albertans have to be at the forefront of the struggle to keep Alberta in Canada. This cannot be a campaign imposed or orchestrated from Ottawa. As Jen Gerson reminds us, it cannot be a campaign driven by Laurentian elites lecturing Albertans about what is good for them. Albertans need to lead it.

But they also need to be strategic.

That means avoiding scare tactics that play directly into the separatists’ condemnation of the federalist side. Threats do little to quell the fear and anxiety driving many Albertans to support or consider separatism.

But this does not mean coddling or appeasing the separatists. Rather, it means pre-bunking and debunking separatist claims by questioning the facts and assumptions behind them. It means not being afraid of “platforming” separatists. The government has already built them a stage. The question is not whether they will be heard. The question is whether their claims will be challenged.

It means establishing a firm set of facts about Alberta’s current place in Confederation and its historic contributions to the country. It also means avoiding a campaign for the status quo.

The Remain side cannot simply say, “Everything is fine.” Or, worse yet, “sit down and shut up.” Everything is not fine. Albertans have real grievances, even when separatists exaggerate and exploit them or misdiagnose their causes. A successful Remain campaign has to offer constructive and feasible reforms that make for a stronger Alberta and a better Canada. That is what Lead Not Leave will be focused on in the coming weeks and months.

But there is also a deeper identity piece. Federalists in Alberta should not campaign solely for Canada. They also need to reclaim Alberta as a part of Canada. They need to reclaim the provincial flag. They need to expand the definition of what it means to be Albertan.

I remember being at a separatist rally last October. I picked up a button that said, “I am Albertan.” I wore it as I walked back from the Legislature Grounds. As I moved farther away from the rally, I noticed people reacting to the button. A few groups whispered as I passed, assuming I was a separatist. Eventually, I stopped and spoke with one of them. I told them I was not, in fact, a separatist. But I hoped to be a prouder Albertan one day. And I asked whether they wanted to join me in that effort. They did. And we had a great conversation about the importance of reclaiming that part of our identities.

I have similar conversations after public talks. People will come up to me — almost always federalists, moderates, or progressives — and I will ask them: “Are you Albertan?” They usually respond, “Yes, I’m from Alberta.” Or, “Yes, my family has been here for generations.” And I’ll say: that is not what I asked. I did not ask where you live. I did not ask where you or your family are from. I asked whether you are Albertan.

Until more federalists, moderates, and progressives step up and claim “Albertan” as part of their identity, the province will continue to have a narrow understanding of what it means to belong. That narrowness fuels the separatist campaign. Because if only separatists get to define what it means to be Albertan, then the rest of us have already conceded too much.

I want to close by answering a question I am getting more and more often: What can federalists in the rest of Canada do to support the Remain side?

Let me start with what they should not do.

First: do not buy into separatist propaganda about the size of their movement. Like the premier, national media outlets have been too willing to repeat Stay Free Alberta’s talking points: that they collected 300,000 signatures, or that separatists make up 30 percent of the population, or that the movement represents more than a million Albertans. These claims are unsubstantiated. They might be true, but we have no firm evidence. You can report that separatists are making those claims. You can even nod to the probability that over a hundred thousand people signed the papers. But do not report the claims as facts.

Second: do not dismiss Albertans’ grievances as illegitimate. If most Albertans feel like jilted lovers, as I said earlier, then invalidating their sense of unrequited love is not going to help. You do not have to accept every grievance as fact. But you do have to understand that those grievances form part of people’s political reality. And their identity. Your judgment will never be their reality. The better approach is to find common ground around reasonable concerns, acknowledge the feelings behind them, and move forward constructively.

That’s what you shouldn’t do. Now what can federalists in the rest of Canada do?

First, platform voices of reason from within Alberta. Do not “both-sides” every argument about Alberta’s future in or out of Confederation, especially when the other side is not grounding its arguments in evidence. Amplifying messages grounded in conspiracy theories is not helpful.

Second, don’t be afraid of speaking out in favour of a strong Alberta in a better Canada. Not all federalists are autonomists who would look at this as interference. If mainstream Alberta is yearning for acknowledgement and recognition, don’t hold back.

Third, celebrate Alberta’s contributions to Confederation. When Alberta does well, do not treat it as a fluke. When Alberta struggles, do not treat it as cosmic or environmental karma. Alberta’s successes are Canadian successes. Alberta’s losses are Canadian losses. Albertans are Canadians.

Fourth, policy-wise, there are several areas worth exploring. More federal jobs in Alberta would be a strong first step. The vast majority of Albertans support that move. Lead Not Leave will also have more to say about reforms to the fiscal stabilization fund — reforms that would make it clear Canada has Alberta’s back in moments of economic crisis. We should also consider reviving something like the Social Union Framework Agreement, to restore a rules-based approach to national programs, services, and the federal spending power.

But we should also think beyond policy.

Fifth, we need to redevelop our physical and emotional connections. A Rally for Canada — not unlike the one held in Montreal in the closing days of the 1995 Quebec referendum — should be planned. Quite frankly, if there isn’t one, reasonable Albertans will question why not. If you have not heard of one, you should be forming and funding a committee today.

In the longer term, we should revisit the national unity projects of the 1990s — programs like SEVEC youth exchanges that sent young Canadians like me into Quebec, and young Quebeckers into the rest of Canada. We need a nationwide effort that builds bridges across the country. Not just railways. Not just pipelines. Emotional bridges between families across Canada.

The overall message should be simple: Alberta is not a problem to be managed. Alberta is not a spoiled child to be disciplined or dismissed. Alberta is not an alien province to be decoded from afar. Alberta is a respected, heard, and valued partner in Confederation.

That is the message Canadians need to send. And it is the message Albertans need to hear from one another. Because the choice before Alberta this fall is not simply whether to remain in Canada. It is whether we can imagine a version of Alberta big enough to include all of us. And whether Canada can imagine a version of itself that has room for Alberta not at the margins, not alone at the centre, but in a leadership role in creating a better country.

That is the work ahead. And it is work worth doing.

Thank you.