Discover Narcity
Get the latest and greatest stories every day in your inbox.
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
Feds confirm funding for rare disease research as other questions unanswered
Feds confirm funding for rare disease research
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang
The federal government confirmed at a meeting of Canadian health ministers that it is extending a funding deal on rare disease research, while wider questions on health-care funding remain unanswered.
Federal Health Minister Marjorie Michel told her provincial and territorial counterparts that the $500 million in annual funding for the National Strategy for Drugs for Rare Diseases that was set to expire next year will now be funded on an ongoing basis.
The minister said she also reached an agreement on next steps in talks to deal with other funding issues, including minimum increases for the Canada Health Transfer and the long-term fate of other bilateral agreements.
Michel confirmed late Wednesday that the federal government would extend by one year $1.2 billion in annual funding for mental health, addictions and home care.
She said Friday that the one-year extension on funding that was set to expire in March was to help bridge provinces to the new fall budget schedule.
Michel says she and her regional counterparts agreed they would have another meeting before the end of this year to talk about longer-term funding plans.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 16, 2026.
By Ian Bickis | Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Keep reading
Show less
B.C. man arrested, charged in 2022 double homicide in Metro Vancouver
Man charged in 2022 double homicide in B.C.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson
A 27-year-old man has been arrested and charged in connection with two homicides in Burnaby, B.C., three years ago.
Investigators say Mohammed Arif Ansari was arrested Friday, and two counts of second-degree murder and one count of indignity to human remains have been approved against him.
Burnaby RCMP found the bodies of 31-year-old Kiesha Garie and 30-year-old Umair Kasim inside a vehicle on Alpha Avenue on Oct. 17, 2022.
Police say the homicides were targeted, and that the victims and the accused knew each other.
No further details on the case were released.
Police had previously said that the victims were a couple from Coquitlam, B.C., that had been reported missing before being found dead.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 16, 2026.
Copyright 2026, The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.
Keep reading
Show less
Mégane dit qu’elle aurait préféré ne pas s’inscrire à OD et explique pourquoi
« J’ai même enlevé mon OD officiel… »
Depuis son éviction au tout début de l'aventure d'Occupation Double Martinique, Mégane Lasalle reçoit plusieurs commentaires négatifs, et ce, au quotidien, selon ce qu'elle a expliqué à Narcity. Dans une séance de questions et réponses partagée en stories sur Instagram en ce début décembre, elle a d'ailleurs confié à sa communauté qu'elle aurait préféré ne pas s'inscrire à OD.
C'est après avoir mentionné à plusieurs reprises pendant son parcours qu'elle aimait les marques de luxe que plusieurs Québécois.es l'ont associée à une image qui ne plait pas à tous.tes.
En participant à cette téléréalité, elle n'a donc pas projeté ce qu'elle espérait et, lorsqu'un.e internaute lui a demandé si elle trouvait étrange que sa vie soit maintenant documentée publiquement, Mégane a expliqué qu'elle ne s'y fait pas encore :
« Pour être 100 % honnête, je ne m'adapte pas tant à ma nouvelle vie. Genre quand je dis "nouvelle vie", c'est tout ce qui est réseaux et tout. J'ai même enlevé mon OD officiel. Sincèrement, il y a tellement d'impact négatif après mon visuel à OD que ça ne m'impacte pas positivement, fait que je ne trippe pas tant, mettons. »
Un.e abonné.e lui a ensuite demandé si elle croyait que ça se passerait ainsi à sa sortie de la téléréalité. C'est à ce moment que l'ancienne candidate a avoué qu'elle n'aurait pas participé si elle avait su dans quoi elle s'embarquait :
« J'ai compris que ça allait être compliqué quand j'ai écouté les épisodes. Autant merdique, non. Que ça allait autant m'affecter, non pas une seconde. Avoir su que ça allait être de même, je ne me serais jamais inscrite, mais comme jamais. Je pense que ce qui m'écoeure le plus, c'est de voir à quel point que tout est stagé, mais tout. Puis ça, ça me traumatise littéralement. »
Malgré les mauvais souvenirs qu'elle garde de l'aventure, Mégane mentionne tout de même qu'elle est reconnaissante pour les amitiés qu'elle y a trouvées.
Tu veux toujours plus de contenu OD? Abonne-toi à notre chaîne YouTube pour des vidéos croustillantes toutes les semaines!