Liberals announce $258.6M fund for skilled worker training in critical sectors
For the second day in a row, the federal government is announcing plans to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to train more skilled workers in Canada.
Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu is in her home riding of Thunder Bay today rolling out a plan to spend up to $258.6 million over the next five years to train workers in critical sectors, with annual funding of $50 million in the years to follow.
Prime Minister Mark Carney announced the creation of a Sectoral Workforce Innovation Fund a little over a year ago and the government opened applications for the program in August.
The fund aims to fill the gaps between workers' skills and industry requirements in sectors like energy or critical minerals by funding projects that could speed up training or certification.
Hajdu's announcement comes a day after Ottawa unveiled $430 million in spending to help unions and other organizations cover costs for new training facilities and equipment.
The Liberals have announced billions of dollars in spending to train up to 100,000 new skilled workers over the next half decade to support the government's ambitious infrastructure agenda.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 16, 2026.
By Craig Lord | Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Separation, immigration, the Constitution: A look at Alberta's referendum questions
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. 16, 2026.
Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Alberta is to vote on holding a separation referendum. A timeline on how we got here
Albertans vote Monday in a referendum asking whether they want the province to stay in Canada or to have a second, binding referendum on separating from Canada. Strains of western alienation go back decades.
Here's a look at some key events:
1980 — The federal government ignites widespread alienation in Alberta with the National Energy Program, which keeps domestic oil prices below world levels to promote Canadian energy security and increase the federal share of oil revenues. Alberta views it as an unjustified attack and a federal money grab. The issue is later settled, but discontent with Ottawa continues.
1982 — Separatism enjoys a brief heyday. Gordon Kesler of the Western Canada Concept Party wins a provincial byelection in central Alberta on a separatist platform. Later that year in the general election, he loses a spot in the legislature. The party receives 12 per cent of the vote but no seats.
2019 — The anti-Ottawa mood ramps up as the United Conservative Party under Jason Kenney wins power in Alberta, capitalizing on discontent over federal rules and policies deemed to impair Alberta’s ability to create wealth, particularly in oil and gas. Premier Kenney fights for more independence from Ottawa but remains a staunch advocate for the province staying in Confederation.
2022-23 — Kenney is replaced by Danielle Smith, who wins government in the 2023 election on a platform of further asserting independence from Ottawa. Unlike Kenney, Premier Smith, while stressing her preference for a “sovereign Alberta within a united Canada,” refuses to characterize separatists as fringe extremists, saying they have valid grievances that deserve to be aired.
April 28, 2025 — Mark Carney and the Liberals defeat the federal Conservatives to win a minority government.
May 5, 2025 — Smith announces a panel to discuss Alberta's future in Canada. She says her government won't itself put separation on a ballot but would honour a successful citizen petition seeking such a vote. At the same time, her government takes steps to eventually pass rules to lower thresholds for citizen-led petitions.
June 2025 — Former Alberta Progressive Conservative deputy premier Thomas Lukaszuk launches a “Forever Canadian” petition to affirm the province stays in Canada. It eventually collects more than 400,000 names — enough to validate the petition. But by the spring of 2026, the petition is tied up in a legislature committee as Smith questions whether Lukaszuk gathered the names for a referendum or as a trigger for a vote among legislature members.

January 2026 — Mitch Sylvestre of the separatist Alberta Prosperity Project is given the green light by election officials to launch a petition asking whether Alberta should leave Canada. Months later, the petition is deemed successful, having gathered about 223,000 signatures.
Feb. 19, 2026 — Smith announces nine referendum questions about immigration and constitutional concerns will be put to Albertans in an Oct. 19 referendum.
May 13, 2026 — An Alberta Court of King's Bench judge quashes the separatist petition, ruling Smith’s government didn't properly consult First Nations as required in the Constitution. Smith later promises to challenge the ruling, and it remains in legal limbo.

May 21, 2026 — Smith announces a 10th referendum question asking whether Alberta should stay in Canada or hold a binding vote on separation. Smith cites the legal uncertainty of the court decision on the separatist petition as the driving force, saying it unduly deprives thousands of Albertans of having a say. Smith later cites Lukaszuk's petition, too, as a reason. She says both show hundreds of thousands of Albertans want the issue decided.
Sept. 10, 2026 — The Alberta government launches a $4-million advertising campaign for the referendum and urges citizens to vote to stay in Canada. The move comes as polls suggest a broad majority of Albertans want to stay.
Sept. 14, 2026 — Smith's UCP loses a byelection to the Opposition NDP in their conservative stronghold of Calgary-Shaw. Critics across the political spectrum say the referendum was a factor in punishing Smith’s UCP. Her office says the party lost due to right-centre vote splitting.
Sept. 16, 2026 — Smith's government publishes a report it commissioned from the University of Calgary to determine what fiscal challenges and benefits an independent Alberta could see. It estimates an initial five-year price tag of $50 billion to $170 billion, noting that figures could swing sharply depending on factors outside Alberta's control.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 16, 2026.
Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Khate Lessard dénonce des commentaires transphobes de la part d’un pharmacien
« Venant de quelqu’un qu'on est supposés "truster"… »
Dans une série de stories partagée sur son compte Instagram le 3 avril, Khate Lessard dénonce des commentaires transphobes qu'elle reçoit sous ses photos depuis un moment et ajoute qu'ils proviendraient d'un pharmacien qui travaillait à l'endroit où elle s'est déjà procuré certaines prescriptions.
C'est en voyant le nom de l'auteur des commentaires désobligeants que Khate s'est aperçue qu'elle le connaissait personnellement, selon ce qu'elle explique à sa communauté :
« C'est genre, un pharmacien qui travaille dans ma ville natale [...], je l'ai croisé vraiment souvent, j'ai même déjà travaillé à cette pharmacie-là. Et il commente de la m*rde à mon propos sur mes propres photos, genre il me dénigre », poursuit Khate.
Dans les commentaires d'une de ses photos, un.e abonné.e a complimenté Khate, ce à quoi un.e internaute que la créatrice de contenu désigne comme ledit pharmacien a ensuite répliqué :
« Au naturel? Sans artifice? Vous savez que c'est un homme? »
Khate a confié à Narcity que ça ferait quelques mois que cette personne écrit des messages à caractère transphobe sous ses photos :
« Mon pharmacien d’Abitibi qui se met à commenter mes photos Instagram en disant que je suis un homme, que les trans sont dégueulasses [...]. Je n'en reviens pas. »
N'habitant plus dans sa région natale, elle ajoute qu'elle n'a plus à le côtoyer à ce jour, mais qu'elle trouve qu'il s'agit tout de même d'un manque de professionnalisme :
« Je suis à Laval maintenant, mais c'est là-bas que j’ai commencé ma transition. Et oui, je suis allée chercher des hormones là-bas. Je trouve ça inacceptable comme comportement venant de quelqu’un qu'on est supposés truster et qui est notre référence quand on fait une transition. »
Elle a ensuite conclu son intervention dans ses stories Instagram en défendant qu'il est « malaisant » pour les personnes qui vont se procurer des médicaments dans le cadre d'une transition de savoir que le ou la professionnel.le derrière le comptoir pourrait juger ses client.es non seulement tout bas, mais aussi sur les réseaux sociaux.