CTRL+ALT+REFERENDUM

MAKE WORLD A BETTER PLACE BY MAKING A BIGGER WORLD, NOT A SMALLER ONE

by PETER THOMAS BUSCH

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has organized a rodeo of sorts, of thoughts and ideas related to democracy and nationalism, with just about everybody who is anybody in Canada politically stampeding into town for the Referendum on provincial sovereignty being held this Monday, October 19, 2026

Albertans have pretty fixed ideas about certain things, including how to throw a block party.

Differences from other Canadians are minimalized when presented in an inebriated state with a belly full of warm, provincially raised beef, roasted on a spit. For example, Shania Twain is a splitting image of Smith, although about 3 inches shorter.

When you look at the country western singer from Timmins, Ontario, and the grand marshal since 2022, walking together from a distance, anyone could reason away a few inches.

Obvious differences can often obscure the similarities. Sure, a referendum definitely beats mechanical bull riding to kick off the blistering cold winter season on the range, especially so close to the canola harvest and the cattle round-up.

You know, a cattleman has ideas floating about inside his head on how to make the next few months a bit more hospitable, during those long cold winter days in front of the pit fire. And a referendum is like a good tailgate party before the rodeo, you want to nudge your way in and have your say until the other party turns blue in the face.

Apart from asking voters if they want to stay as a province within Canada, the Alberta Government is asking nine other interesting questions related to the rights of provincial citizenship. In Canada, like in the United States, the founding fathers divided up responsibilities between a central government and the provincial governments, with that relationship changing from one generation to the next, quite often based on necessity.

Initially, a strong central government was necessary as a unifying influence, when the population was sparse and the barren land vast, such as for building a transcontinental railway, and establishing profitable trade routes to other nation states. Creating a national identity was not always easy, particularly because of Quebec, a French Canadian jurisdiction, and a derivative of the French Empire that attempted to colonize North America.

French Emperor Napoleon sold Louisiana to the United States, but the British let the French keep their land inside British North America, after the Yankees drove the British north of the 49^th parallel.

Quebec and the French Canadians therein, have always had special status inside Canada, particularly because Quebecers are a large voting block that can turn a federal election one way or the other way. The province also produces a lot of great hockey players on those frozen backyard ponds during the harsh winter months.

And most Canadians share a liking for maple syrup drawn from the trees in Quebec. Maple syrup can even pump up a bacon and egg breakfast in Alberta.

Eventually, centralism became an existential issue with centrifugal forces of federal power pulling the pants off the rodeo clowns. And instead of continuing on with the embarrassment, the federal government gave more autonomy to the provinces.

Lately, immigration has been problematic to the iconic national identities of lumber jacks, maple syrup and hockey. Canada often imports star athletes from other countries to play on the Olympic Team, but those investor visas have been driving up housing prices and causing homelessness.

One question on the referendum is related to the provincial desire to have increased control over immigration into the province – currently controlled primarily by the federal government, except in Quebec who control immigration to protect a distinct French culture and French language, although not Parisian French.

Quebec allows for French Haitian immigration, for example.

Question Two on the referendum, Smith wants to better engineer provincial services only for Albertans. Okay, sounds good to the taxpayers.

Three, Smith wants a 12-month provincial residential requirement before people qualify for provincial services. Okay.

Four, those people stuck in the province who are not from the province and require provincial services ought to be charged a fee or a premium for provincial services. This surcharge would be applied to migrants and American tourists alike. Now who can find fault there. Why should anyone wrangle away expensive services for free?

So there is nothing discriminatory about charging fees to guests.

Defintely 5, Alberta will require proof of citizenship for voting in Alberta. This answer seems to be a no brainer for hardened cowboys and oil riggers born and raised in the province. I am not sure what kind of characters free willy show up at the voting booths on election day and expect to vote without Government issued picture ID.

Question Six, ironically, may be ambiguous. The request to amend the Constitution to remove federal judicial appointment power in provincial courts is a bit trickier since the overreach is a hallmark of federal power. Provinces already control hospitals. If Ottawa lets go of the courts, what else is there other than airports, banking and federal student loans.

I am prepared to spoil the ballot on this one question.

The Seventh question has been around for a few generations of counter-federalists all across the nation who have wanted to abolish the unelected Federal Senate. The Canadian Senate is filled with political appointments, kind of like handing out Governor General Awards or Presidential Medals of Freedom, or the British King bestowing Knighthoods on friends and admirers.

Question 8 is inappropriately put to the people. The ability to opt out of federal programs that intrude in provincial jurisdiction is a legal question requiring the wisdon of the Surpeme Court of Canada Justices to define “federal intrusion” and “provincial jurisdiction” under the Constitution.

So far, Premier Danielle Smith is 6.5 out of 8.

Then there is a counterintuitive question, Question 9, Smith is asking for provincial paramountcy when provincial laws conflict with federal laws – meaning that provinces always win in a tie race to govern. If only the politicians could get it correct from the onset, there would not be any conflict. Smith wants to control the bull, like the cowboys and cowgirls at the Calgary Stampede.

So now, Premier Danielle Smith is 6.5 of 9.

The honeypot question, question number 10, asks whether Albertans want to remain inside Canada, subject to federal oversight, or live outside of Canada, free willing on their own like provincial mustard.

This exercise in democracy is all officially prescribed by Orders in Counsel, which are a bit like Executive Orders. Albertans are sophisticated business people and intellectuals. I should know, I have a law degree from the University of Alberta.

I was a bit pushed back and stepped on because I did not know how to square dance at the law school functions, but intellectually, Albertans are quite interactive and stimulating.

Separation has been on the books in Canada in one form or another since inception. Quebec, for example, has been appeased with extra provincial powers. And all the provinces have the option of opting out of certain federal laws and programs.

One point in the near past, the French Canadian mania to break apart, started by Quebec, spread to the Western Provinces, who wanted to break apart together as a western region – although a very big region.

But let’s get on with it, really.

The Province of Alberta would lose the cost savings in economies of scale if disengaging with the rest of the provinces. I prefer Canadian Prime Minster Mark Carney’s rational in building a national economy between provinces rather than having provinces trading with the United States and Asia. Trading with neighbouring British Columbia and Saskatchewan, perhaps even Quebec and Ontario, ought to be just as attractive.

I have personally witnessed British Columbia raised beef in mid-province and in the northern region shipped over the Canadian Rockies to the Alberta slaughterhouses. And I assume, shipped back to Vancouver grocery stores in select, little bits and pieces.

I don’t mind trading south just along the American border, but I wonder at the logic of trading too deep south when you can trade east and west. Alberta would trade into Montana and perhaps Washington State.

Oil from the Alberta tar sands, for example, goes into the general pool of Canadian resources for import and export needs. British Columbia does not get a price discount for being close to the oil sands.

And Banff is an international destination, neither identified as a provincial resource or federal, although having a national park designation. Let the tourist holiday money flow like black gold blowing all over the sky near the oil rigs.

What if we compartmentalized these substantial, identifiable issues? The adverse outcome would be minimalistic. The idea to belong to a larger world is not manifest in the separation question.

Smaller economies are easier targets for exploitation; and, there are many dark knight operators looking to plunder and grab easy cash, like repeating the mistakes of one hundred years ago when corporations acted and believed the provinces held unlimited resources that could be hauled carte blanche to Europe.

In British Columbia the old growth forests are almost gone. In Newfoundland the fisheries are ruined. The whales are fewer in the oceans. And the buffalo have a long way to come back from near extinction to a reasonable sustainable level of survival on the Prairies, all a result of the inability of a nation to protect against exploitation by foreign buyers.

And try winning a Stanley Cup as a province, let alone how difficult that quest has become as a nation state.

Calgary and Vancouver are only about one hour apart from airport to airport. More time is spent in the airport queue for security checks and boarding than in the air. Oh my, we are literally neighbours.

If you think Whistler is too expensive, try being an out-of-towner and renting a hotel room and buying round-trip flights to the Calgary Stampede. But then those are the multi-national hospitality corporations running up the tab on option pricing schemes. Next shock will be Whistler charging more for snow days, when you can ski properly, as opposed to days when there is no snow and you cannot ski all that well.

While I am divided in thought regarding globalization, I am opposed to the further fragmentation of the nation state. The plenty of predatory separatists operating around the world might get emboldened and set off a chain reaction. And the e-universe has already removed enough international boundaries.

The world needs more unity, more common ground and less division.