PV Alberta Bureau
The questions in Alberta’s October 19 referendum are about monopoly encroachment and Albertan separatism. We’re in a mounting recession, and the United Conservative Party is pointing fingers, using this antagonism and western alienation to further separate the working class and promote the interests of monopoly capital. Don’t let them.
Q1: THE “IMMIGRATION” QUESTION – DON’T BE FOOLED
The UCP asks: “Do you support the Government of Alberta taking increased control over immigration for the purposes of decreasing immigration to more sustainable levels, prioritizing economic migration and giving Albertans first priority on new employment opportunities?”
The Truth: It’s already happening.
“Increased control”? In March 2026, Ottawa quietly handed Alberta sole authority to decide whether provincial nominees can stay. We already handpick workers for our labour market.
“Economic migration”? That’s literally what the Alberta Advantage Immigration Program (AAIP) does. Alberta’s 2026 allocation is 6,603 nominees, up from 6,403 last year. We’re already prioritizing “economic” workers.
“Albertans first”? Like “America First,” this is a classic fascist dog whistle. But Canadian employers are already required to prove no citizen or permanent resident can do the job before hiring a temporary foreign worker (that’s the LMIA: the Labour Market Impact Assessment). And Ottawa already slashed over 146,000 temporary worker entries in the first 8 months of 2025 alone.
So why are they asking? To make you think immigrants are the problem while they take credit for, and further normalize, policies already in place. It’s dividing the working class on artificial lines, plain and simple.
VOTE NO to Question 1.
Q2: THE “WHO GETS SERVICES” QUESTION – ALREADY HAPPENING
The UCP asks: “Do you support the Government of Alberta introducing a law mandating that only Canadian citizens, permanent residents and individuals with an Alberta approved immigration status will be eligible for provincially funded programs, such as health care, education and other social services?”
The Truth: They’re already making it happen. Quietly, and without a referendum.
Healthcare? Already cut. On January 7, Alberta quietly removed public health coverage for temporary foreign workers on International Experience Canada (IEC) Type 58 permits, including young people on working holiday visas. No announcement, no debate. Workers only found out when they tried to renew their health cards. The government said federal rules required private insurance, so public coverage was “redundant” and “discontinued”. (They paused in February after an outcry, but the intent is clear.)
Education? Already under attack. Nearly 46,000 temporary-status students are in Alberta schools. In Calgary alone, 680 students haven’t provided immigration papers to guarantee continued enrolment. Another 1,681 have study permits expiring before September 29. Edmonton Public Schools counts 500 more. If their permits expire, they lose free schooling, and the provincial government is pointing fingers instead of fixing it.
Social services? Partially federally protected. For now. The Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act only stops provinces from imposing residency waiting periods for citizens, permanent residents, protected persons and trafficking victims. It says nothing about protecting temporary residents. The UCP knows this. They’re asking you to endorse a door they’ve already cracked open.
So why are they asking? To make you think they’re asking permission, which they’re not. They’re already denying coverage, already squeezing schools, and already testing the limits. More taking credit for and normalizing rotten policy.
VOTE NO to Question 2.
Q3: THE “12-MONTH WAIT” QUESTION – ILLEGAL AND CRUEL
The UCP asks: “Assuming that all Canadian citizens and permanent residents continue to qualify for social support programs as they do now, do you support the Government of Alberta introducing a law requiring all individuals with a non-permanent legal immigration status to reside in Alberta for at least 12 months before qualifying for any provincially funded social support programs?”
The Truth: For social assistance, this is already illegal under federal law. The UCP knows it. They’re asking you to endorse something they can’t deliver without a steep fight.
For healthcare? Alberta already has a de facto 12-month rule. The Alberta Health Care Insurance Plan (AHCIP) requires temporary residents to “intend to live in Alberta for a minimum of 12 consecutive months” before qualifying for coverage.
For social assistance like welfare, childcare subsidies, etc.? Section 25.1 of the Federal Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act explicitly forbids provinces from imposing minimum residency periods as a condition for social assistance. The UCP can’t just wave that away – they’d need to fight Ottawa in court for the right to deny welfare and childcare subsidies to the suffering.
For refugees and asylum seekers? This question would deny support to Afghan interpreters, families fleeing Taliban retribution, Ukrainian refugees and other people who’ve barely escaped with their lives.
So why are they asking? To make you think “waiting periods” are normal and fair. They’re not. They’re a backdoor way to starve out temporary residents – people who work, pay taxes and contribute to our communities – while pretending their hands are tied.
VOTE NO to Question 3.
Q4: THE “REASONABLE FEE” QUESTION – WHO DECIDES WHAT’S “REASONABLE”?
The UCP asks: “Assuming that all Canadian citizens and permanent residents continue to qualify for public health care and education as they do now, do you support the Government of Alberta charging a reasonable fee or premium to individuals with a non-permanent immigration status living in Alberta for their and their family’s use of the health care and education systems?”
The Truth: “Reasonable” is a blank cheque. There’s no definition, no cap, no protection – just a mandate to charge whatever they want.
How much is “reasonable”? Independent modelling estimates fees of $3,000 to $6,000 per person per year for healthcare and education. The Alberta Teachers’ Association estimates that education costs for families of temporary foreign are $600 million. The UCP wants those families to foot that bill directly.
What about the kids? The ATA points out that Canada signed the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which recognizes education as a right for every child, regardless of immigration status. The UCP’s response? “Children won’t be denied an education, they’ll just have to pay a fee.” That’s a price tag, not a right.
What about taxes? Temporary residents already pay taxes: sales tax, income tax, payroll deductions. This question asks them to pay twice: once through taxes, and again through fees.
So why are they asking? To shift the cost of public services onto the most vulnerable, while taking credit for “saving” taxpayer dollars. It’s a shell game.
VOTE NO to Question 4.
Q5: THE “VOTER ID” QUESTION – SOLVING A PROBLEM THAT DOESN’T EXIST
The UCP asks: “Do you support the Government of Alberta introducing a law requiring individuals to provide proof of citizenship, such as a passport, birth certificate or citizenship card, to vote in an Alberta provincial election?”
The Truth: You already have to be a citizen to vote. This has nothing to do with security; it’s about making it harder for eligible voters to cast a ballot.
Non-citizens can’t vote. That’s already the law. Elections Alberta already maintains voter rolls based on citizenship data from driver’s licences and other provincial ID, which are acquired with support of passports, birth certificates or citizenship cards.
Voter fraud is virtually non-existent. Both Elections Canada and Elections Alberta have repeatedly confirmed that instances of ineligible voting are extremely rare. This is a solution in search of a problem.
What about people who don’t have a passport or birth certificate? Many Canadians, especially Indigenous peoples, seniors and low-income folks, don’t have these documents on hand. Requiring them creates a barrier to voting and doesn’t fix anything. You needed ID to get your driver’s or your citizenship card. It’s already proven. Asking for it again is theatre.
So why are they asking? To make you think elections are rigged. They’re not, except in capitalism’s favour. This is voter suppression dressed up as “election integrity”.
VOTE NO to Question 5.
Q6: THE “JUDGE” QUESTION – A CONSTITUTIONAL FANTASY
The UCP asks: “Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to have provincial governments, and not the federal government, select the justices appointed to provincial King’s Bench and Appeal courts?”
The Truth: This requires a constitutional amendment, and Ottawa has already said no.
Judges are appointed by the federal government. Under Section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867, the federal government has exclusive authority to appoint judges to provincial superior courts. That’s been the law since Confederation.
Ottawa has already rejected this. Prime Minister Mark Carney and federal Justice Minister Sean Fraser have both said they have no intention of changing judicial appointments.
Even if Alberta gets support, it’s a long shot. Constitutional amendments require the approval of the House of Commons, the Senate and at least seven provinces representing at least half of Canada’s population.
So why are they asking? To manufacture grievances against Ottawa. This isn’t about judicial independence; it’s about picking a fight they know they can’t win, to stoke “western alienation” and rally their base.
VOTE NO to Question 6.
Q7: THE “ABOLISH THE SENATE” QUESTION – PURE FANTASY
The UCP asks: “Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to abolish the unelected federal Senate?”
The Truth: This would require unanimous consent of every province, territory and both houses of Parliament. It’s not happening.
We should be fighting for democratic participation and the rights of oppressed nations. Instead, the UCP wants to remove checks and balances to superimpose the interests of corporate monopolies on the working class as if they were our own. They aren’t. Instead of abolition and a power vacuum, the Communist Party of Canada advocates senate replacement with a House of Nations composed of elected representatives of Indigenous peoples, English-speaking Canada, Quebec and the Acadians.
This is a distraction. While the UCP asks you to dream about abolishing the Senate, they’re not talking about the things we can actually change for the better: like housing, healthcare and education funding.
So why are they asking? To make you feel like they’re “fighting Ottawa” while delivering nothing. Another shiny object to stoke “western alienation”.
VOTE NO to Question 7.
Q8: THE “OPT OUT” QUESTION – KEEP THE MONEY, DROP THE RULES
The UCP asks: “Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to allow provinces to opt out of federal programs that intrude on provincial jurisdiction such as health care, education and social services, without a province losing any of the associated federal funding for use in its social programs?”
The Truth: You can’t have it both ways. Federal funding comes with federal standards – that’s the whole point.
Opting out already exists as an option, but you lose the money. Under the Canada Health Act and other federal programs, provinces can opt out, but they forfeit the federal transfer payments that come with them. The UCP wants to keep the cash and ignore the conditions.
This would fragment Canada-wide standards. If Alberta can opt out of federal health standards while keeping the funding, every other province will demand the same, and we end up with a patchwork of different healthcare and education systems across the country.
It’s a constitutional non-starter. Like Questions 6 and 7, this requires a constitutional amendment, and Ottawa has zero incentive to give provinces free money with no strings attached.
So why are they asking? To sell you on the idea that Alberta can have “autonomy” without paying for it. But someone always pays, and it’ll be the people who rely on those services.
VOTE NO to Question 8.
Q9: THE “PROVINCIAL LAWS OVER FEDERAL” QUESTION – A CONSTITUTIONAL REVOLUTION DRESSED UP AS “RIGHTS”
The UCP asks: “Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to better protect provincial rights from federal interference by giving a province’s laws dealing with provincial or shared areas of constitutional jurisdiction priority over federal laws when the province’s laws and federal laws conflict?”
The Truth: This isn’t “protecting rights” – it’s blowing up Canadian federalism.
This reverses 159 years of constitutional law. Since Confederation in 1867, the doctrine of federal paramountcy has been the rule: when valid federal and provincial laws conflict in an area of shared jurisdiction, the federal law prevails and the provincial law is inoperative to the extent of the conflict. This isn’t a minor rule – it’s what keeps Canada one country instead of thirteen competing legal systems.
What happens if this passes? Alberta’s environmental regulations could override federal ones. Alberta’s labour standards could override federal ones. Alberta’s rules on food safety, pharmaceutical licensing or financial regulation could take precedence over federal frameworks. Every province becomes, in areas of conflict, “a law unto itself.” They’re asking for the replacement of the federal system with something closer to a confederation of sovereign states. Do you really trust this provincial government enough to remove all federal paramountcy? What about the next one? What we need is working-class power, not flip-flopping servants of capital with fewer checks and balances.
The Supreme Court already checks federal overreach without blowing up the system. Alberta won a major victory in 2023 against the federal Impact Assessment Act within the existing constitutional order. The courts found Ottawa had overstepped. Alberta didn’t need to reverse paramountcy to win; it needed the courts to enforce the existing division of powers.
And it’s virtually impossible to pass. Constitutional amendments require the House of Commons, the Senate, and at least seven provinces representing at least 50 percent of Canada’s population to agree (the “7/50 formula”). Ottawa has already said no. The UCP knows this; they’re asking you to endorse a fantasy to manufacture grievances.
This is the “Alberta First” version of “states’ rights.” It’s the same logic used to defend segregation in the American South. It has nothing to do with provincial autonomy: it’s about choosing which laws to follow and which to ignore, framed as Province v. Federal, but it’s really the erosion of working-class rights.
So why are they asking? To make you think Ottawa is the enemy while they dismantle the constitutional framework that protects all Canadians, including the most vulnerable.
VOTE NO to Question 9.
Q10: THE “SEPARATION” QUESTION – SELF-DETERMINATION FOR ALL, OR FOR NONE
The UCP asks: “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?”
The Truth: Self-determination of nations is a core Marxist-Leninist principle, but it’s not a pick-and-choose menu.
There is no “legal process” for separation. The Canadian Constitution does not contain any provision for a province to hold a binding secession referendum. The Clarity Act (2000) only says the federal government may negotiate after a “clear majority” on a “clear question.” And the Supreme Court ruled in 1998 that unilateral secession is unconstitutional. The UCP is selling you a fantasy they know they can’t deliver.
Self-determination is universal. Vladimir Lenin wrote: “No nation is free if it oppresses other nations.” He insisted that the working class must be “absolutely hostile” to any dominant nation using force against a nation seeking political separation. The right to self-determination cannot be claimed by one nation while denied to others.
What is a nation, anyway? Otto Bauer, an Austrian Marxist and contemporary of Lenin, defined a nation as “the totality of people who are united by a common fate so that they possess a common (national) character.” Nations aren’t fixed boxes, they’re living communities, forged through shared history and struggle. And living communities deserve the right to determine their own future. But is Alberta really distinct from the rest of Canada, culturally?
Alberta isn’t a nation, but First Nations are – every Treaty Nation, the Cree, the Blackfoot, the Dene, the Métis. They all have the same right to determine their own political future. Their treaties are with the Crown, not with Alberta. The UCP never mentions this because they don’t actually believe in self-determination, they believe that in all of Canada, they’re somehow unique.
So why are they asking? To make you think separation is a realistic “option.” It’s not. It’s a threat to extract more concessions from Ottawa – while ignoring the fact that the same logic would apply to every Indigenous nation within Alberta’s borders.
VOTE REMAIN to Question 10 and demand that any conversation about self-determination includes EVERYONE.
Support working-class media!
If you found this article useful, please consider donating to People’s Voice or purchasing a subscription so that you get every issue of Canada’s leading socialist publication delivered to your door or inbox!
For over 100 years, we have been 100% reader-supported, with no corporate or government funding.
