Separation threats have hit a dead end for Alberta

Instead of folding, Ottawa is weaponizing Alberta’s separatist rhetoric to galvanize its own base in Central Canada and B.C.

Interview requests

It appears Albertans—the overwhelming majority at least—are in a very reasonable state of mind and are ready to work with the other provinces to make this country work.

At least two-thirds of Albertans do not want to separate from Canada, if you are to believe poll after poll after poll, even though they still have significant grievances with the way Ottawa treats the province. These include long-standing disputes over energy policy, federal environmental regulations, pipeline approvals, and the structure of equalization payments. It’s obvious that if we want to put the separatism chatter to bed once and for all, now is the moment to address the biggest deep-rooted irritants.

Those grievances also explain why many Albertans say they are toying with the idea of separation if the relationship with our federal government doesn’t improve. The separation-curious crowd, in effect, believes that posing an existential threat will force the federal government to take Alberta’s grievances seriously.

Any experienced negotiator will tell you threats will only get you so far. Incessant warnings of “do this or else” eventually lose their ability to trigger a desired response and can, in fact, cause the other side to dig in even deeper. For proof, look no further than U.S. President Donald Trump’s threat to Iran: “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” Thankfully, he wasn’t serious but—bad luck for him—his opponent knew it.

Angry Albertans aren’t talking about anything as extreme as what the U.S. president says he would do, but the radicals among them are talking about ending Confederation. That approach may grab attention, but it does not build a workable path forward. Something, however, has woken up the elites in the East.

So, it’s time to start talking about what a fairer deal would look like.

Alberta-born Prime Minister Mark Carney has gained favour with moderate Albertans by backing away from the anti-oil and gas policies of the Justin Trudeau era. The memorandum of understanding Carney signed with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith in November 2025 to advance a new bitumen pipeline to the British Columbia coast aims to study and potentially advance a new route to tidewater, long seen as critical for improving market access for Canadian oil exports.

But a recent poll suggests winning the hearts of Albertans is about a lot more than oil and gas. It means moving away from old paradigms and avoiding hot-button terms that almost always trigger irrational fury.

The poll, conducted by Vox Pop Labs (the folks who bring you Vote Compass), made a few eyebrow-raising discoveries. Among them, the data suggest strong support among Albertans for federal programs, such as equalization, that help ensure all provinces provide comparable public services at similar levels of taxation.

That’s right: equalization, the issue the pro-separation crowd so consistently latches on to. Equalization is a federal transfer program that redistributes tax revenue so provinces can provide comparable public services at similar tax rates. When asked directly about “equalization,” half of Albertans strongly or somewhat oppose the federal program.

But the interesting thing is that when the e-word was eliminated, attitudes changed. When Albertans were asked about transferring “money to the poorer provinces in order to ensure that Canadians living in every province have access to similar levels of public services,” opposition dropped to 42 per cent, and a majority of 57 per cent supported it.

Which is not to say Albertans are OK with equalization as it exists. Even the word itself has taken on larger-than-life demonic properties.

Further, the majority of those who oppose equalization said it simply needs major reforms rather than abolishing it entirely. Among the faults, opponents said, is that the federal government does not make decisions about the program transparently. They also don’t believe decisions are easy to understand.

“Here’s where there may be an opportunity to improve not only the broader functioning of fiscal arrangements in Canada but also public support for specific transfer programs,” economist Trevor Tombe and journalist Brookes DeCillia wrote in an analysis of the poll.

Suggested remedies include periodic renewal and reforming of the equalization formula to reflect current economic realities. The current formula framework has been in place since 2007, with periodic renewals but limited structural change. And Canadians believe provinces receiving equalization should demonstrate to the federal government that funds are being used responsibly.

For federalists, this is good news because it creates a pathway to a country that functions better than it has. As with the removal of interprovincial trade barriers, significant reform of equalization could be considered low-hanging fruit. Economists have long identified internal trade barriers between provinces as reducing economic efficiency and limiting growth. Addressing both could help settle the biggest grievances that fuel the fires of wild-eyed separatists.

I have believed for a long time that at least some of the people who want Alberta to go it alone do so because they just don’t believe the country will ever work. It’s hard to disagree with them that there has been a long history of Ottawa ignoring or ragging the puck on reforms that westerners have been demanding.

Maybe it’s real this time. Maybe Canada’s forced breakup with the U.S., and the realization that our country has to assert its independence, will unstop the dams that have held back meaningful progress. As an incurable optimist, I believe we are witnessing the beginning of such change.

As this unfolds, it is time to recognize that the tiresome and disruptive separatism discussions need to end. Politicians also need to stop trying to mollify the malcontents. The U.K.’s David Cameron learned that lesson the hard way when he called a referendum, thinking that Britons would reject the idea of leaving the European Union. The ensuing Brexit disaster is a sobering reminder that when politicians resort to cop-outs like referenda, it can lead to unintended consequences.

Instead, let’s collectively do the things we need to make this country work.

Doug Firby is an award-winning editorial writer with over four decades of experience working for newspapers, magazines and online publications in Ontario and western Canada. Previously, he served as Editorial Page Editor at the Calgary Herald.