Discover Narcity
Get the latest and greatest stories every day in your inbox.
Quebec author abandons effort to document novel’s origins amid AI allegations
Quebec author drops AI evidence effort
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Handout — Francois Couture (Mandatory Credit)
Quebec author Thélyson Orélien has abandoned efforts to compile evidence supporting his denial that artificial intelligence was used to write his novel, his publisher has confirmed.
Éditions du Boréal says it supported Orélien in the process to compile evidence, which it had publicly disclosed in September, but that the author ultimately decided to end it.
The publisher says it respects his decision, although it would have preferred to provide definitive answers to the allegations surrounding his novel, "C'était ça ou mourir."
Boréal also confirms that sales of the novel have slowed since the controversy began, but declined to provide specific figures.
The novel remains available in bookstores, but Boréal says it is currently out of stock at the publishing house, with a new printing expected next week.
The novel was removed from the running for France's prestigious Prix Goncourt earlier this month amid allegations of AI use and separate plagiarism allegations involving Orélien's earlier writings, which he has since acknowledged.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 17, 2026.
By Charlotte Glorieux | Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Keep reading
Show less
Alberta referendum expected to bring finality, but also more questions on separation
Questions to remain after Alberta separation vote
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh
On Monday, Albertans vote on whether to stay in Canada or hold another binding referendum on quitting Canada.
If the vote goes as polls suggest, a majority of Albertans will mark an X to stay in Confederation, and Premier Danielle Smith has said if that’s so, she expects everyone to accept it and move on. Leaders of the independence movement contest that.
And political watchers are divided about whether separation — previously a fringe sentiment — will now be a prominent, permanent feature of Alberta’s political landscape, as in Quebec.
Julian Castro-Rea, a political-science professor at the University of Alberta who studies the separation debates in Quebec and Alberta, believes as long as Alberta feels alienated from the Canadian capital — feeling that Ottawa benefits from Alberta's resource economy without giving back — the movement will have fuel.
"Even if the referendum is lost, the westernization will still be around, because it's kind of a way which, traditionally, Albertans have related to the rest of Canada," says Castro-Rea, who believes western alienation may remain indefinitely.
Alberta's independence movement has been compared to Brexit and separation in Scotland, but the most obvious comparator is Quebec.
Earlier this month, Quebec elected a minority government led by the Parti Québécois, which has promised to call a third independence referendum to leave Canada, following votes in 1980 and 1995.
Experts say the two provinces differ in their catalysts for secession. Quebec and its francophone culture have developed over centuries. Alberta, by comparison, was created alongside Saskatchewan out of the division of the Northwest Territories in 1905.
Alberta's separatists are driven by western alienation rather than a deep-seated nationalist sentiment, like Quebec, experts say. That means it's difficult to see how the long-term future of the movement could pan out.
"They have different identity, different history, different language, as you know, and therefore they can claim, kind of, this historical legitimacy as the basis for their attempts for separation," Castro-Rea says.
Separatist sentiment has been sprinkled into Alberta's saucepan for the past half-century before coming to a boil in recent years. Premier Smith, who has voted to stay in Canada, has repeatedly criticized former prime minister Justin Trudeau's policies as oppressive to Western Canada's sovereignty and its energy-driven economy.
That criticism has softened against current Prime Minister Mark Carney, who referred to Alberta's bid for secession as a "dangerous bluff" on Thursday night. He also said a decisive result would "settle this question."
Andrew McDougall, an associate political science professor at the University of Toronto, says he sees Alberta's referendum as a way to garner political leverage with Ottawa, as Quebec has.
"This has sometimes been referred to in Quebec as the 'knife at the throat strategy,' where Quebec could sort of push its agenda because we've had that incredible threat of a referendum," he says.
But former UCP premier Jason Kenney, speaking in Edmonton earlier this week, said the knife analogy cuts both ways.
"The idea of making the threat by holding a knife to the throat of the federation is how you end up as a have-not province, like Quebec, instead of the ultimate have province like Alberta," he said.
"You want to talk about a lack of investor confidence? The next year, moving towards an actual vote on separation when the first one is won — the economic consequences would be catastrophic."
Political science professor Graeme Young says to understand Alberta’s future, one could look at Scotland.
Young, at the University of Glasgow in Scotland, grew up in Ontario and kept interest in Alberta's prospective separation from afar as Scotland bolsters another push to leave the United Kingdom.
He says he doesn't expect Alberta's separatist campaign will last. He believes the movement could deflate with a different federal political party in power. And he says it can’t draw from the same wellspring of national identity as exists in Scotland.
Young says Scotland's 2014 campaign was, in large part, defeated by uncertainty about the economics of independence, including pensions, currency, finances and its role in the European Union.
And while Scotland has been preparing for more than a decade for another run at independence, Alberta's movement is underprepared, Young says.
"(Alberta's case) has been put together quite hastily," he says. "It does not seem that they have invested as much time and energy into that case as one would expect for setting up a new country."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 17, 2026.
— With files from Lisa Johnson in Edmonton and The Associated Press
By Dayne Patterson | Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Keep reading
Show less
Separation, immigration, the Constitution: A look at Alberta's referendum questions
A look at the 10 Alberta referendum questions
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh
Here are the 10 questions Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is sending to a provincewide referendum on Monday.
Question 1: 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?
What you need to know: Smith has said she wants to see Alberta have a similar accord as Quebec, which has an agreement with Ottawa that lets the province set its own eligibility requirements for economic migrants.
She said in February that a "normal" and "sustainable" level of immigration would represent less than one per cent of the population, or about 50,000 newcomers per year. But critics say Smith has failed to plan for the population growth it invited with a countrywide ad campaign in recent years.
Question 2: 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?
What you need to know: The premier has blamed overburdened public services on rapid population growth in the past five years.
The government's website claims temporary residents cost the province more than $1 billion in health care, education and social services. Critics say those numbers don't add up and that the government is ignoring the economic contributions and benefits they bring to Alberta.
The specific effect of a yes vote is unclear, since the government says it won't define "Alberta-approved immigration status" until after the referendum.
Question 3: 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?
What you need to know: The government says it won't determine which programs would be affected until after the referendum, should Albertans vote yes.
Temporary workers are already ineligible for some provincial programs, such as Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped, and the Canadian Bar Association's provincial chapter says this could run afoul of the Canada Health Act or the Charter's equality provisions.
Question 4: 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?
What you need to know: A potential new charge wouldn't be determined by the government until after the vote, though the premier told Calgary business leaders on Sept. 22 that a health premium could be as much as $1,900.
Education leaders in the province have come out against restricting access to schooling, saying it goes against internationally agreed children's rights.
Question 5: 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?
What you need to know: Voting is already restricted to Canadian citizens, and both Elections Canada and Elections Alberta have reported very few cases of ineligible voting.
Smith has said it's about strengthening the integrity of provincial elections. Critics say this policy would only make lineups at the polls more time-consuming and open the door to racial or ethnic bias at the voting booth.
Question 6: 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?
What you need to know: If approved by voters, this proposal would only commit Alberta's government to working with other provinces and federal lawmakers to make changes to the Constitution.
Changes generally need approval from seven provincial legislatures covering 50 per cent of Canada's population, as well as from the House of Commons and Senate in Ottawa.
Question 7: 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?
What you need to know: Abolishing the Senate would be even more difficult than other general constitutional amendments. It would need to be unanimously approved by all provinces and ratified by the Senate and the House of Commons.
Question 8: 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?
What you need to know: The federal "spending power" authority allows Ottawa to attach conditions to its funding for provinces, with health-care funding under the Canada Health Act as a key example.
A permanent provincial "opt-out" clause would require the Constitution to be amended.
Question 9: 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?
What you need to know: Under the Constitution, federal laws are given standing over provincial laws when jurisdictional issues arise.
This change to the Constitution would require approval from the Senate, the House of Commons and seven provinces representing at least half the country's population.
Question 10: 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?
What you need to know: Advocates for separation say the province needs to get out from under federal taxation and regulation, freeing up wealth and sparking economic development. Federalists say the split would only hurt businesses and saddle landlocked Alberta with debt and the massive cost of delivering formerly federal services.
Smith has framed her other nine other questions on immigration and constitutional reform as a political compromise that could address Alberta's grievances, gain leverage with Ottawa and avoid dismantling the country.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 17, 2026.
Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Keep reading
Show less
Une réponse de Julie Snyder sur la diversité à OD fait réagir sur les réseaux sociaux
Cette année, comme depuis quelques saisons, le sujet de l'inclusivité et de la représentation est revenu souvent concernant OD. Le soir de la finale, une réponse de Julie Snyder par rapport à la diversité à Occupation Double fait réagir.
Le 29 novembre avait lieu le dévoilement des grands gagnants d'OD Chez Nous, Vincent et Noémie, et une vague de commentaires sur la saison et les futures éditions ont pris le Web d'assaut.
Un tweet suggérait plus de diversité dans l'équipe de production, ce à quoi Julie Snyder a décidé de répondre.
La sélection de l'éditeur : Jay Du Temple sera finalement de retour pour OD 2021 et les fans réagissent
Pour ajouter au commentaire de Snyder, une internaute a souligné que selon elle, la diversité chez les candidats démontre une preuve d'inclusivité.
[rebelmouse-image 26002497 photo_credit="Twitter" expand=1 original_size="1049x219"] Twitter
Cela dit, certaines personnes pensent que ce commentaire démontre une certaine incompréhension de la problématique entourant la diversité dans le domaine télévisuel au Québec.
[rebelmouse-image 26002498 photo_credit="Twitter" expand=1 original_size="674x299"] Twitter
Cette fois-ci, la demande se porte sur la production et non les candidats.
[rebelmouse-image 26002499 photo_credit="Twitter" expand=1 original_size="672x262"] Twitter
Un commentaire souligne que lorsque des personnes racisées demandent plus de représentation, la réponse des personnes responsables ne devrait pas être défensive.
La production d'Occupation Double tente chaque année de mieux représenter les réalités multiculturelles, mais selon certains auditeurs, il y a encore du travail à faire.