
Separatists say Alberta's culture is rooted in traditional values. Many say those values don't define them
Social Sharing
Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet said earlier this month that if Alberta were to separate from Canada, it would first have to define itself as a nation with a distinct culture.
"I am not certain that oil and gas qualifies to define a culture," Blanchet quipped at a media conference.
Alberta separatists are trying to make the case that Alberta, like Quebec, does have a culture that's distinct from the rest of Canada — one rooted in traditional conservative values. But recent polling, and many people living in Alberta, paint a more complicated picture.
Many Albertans feel the separatists' definition of Alberta culture leaves them out of the conversation, and one researcher says that could be driving people away from the movement.
Republican Party of Alberta leader Cameron Davies, who calls himself an Alberta nationalist, says Albertans prize family values and freedom from government intervention.
He says Alberta's culture is driven by risk-taking, entrepreneurial spirit and resilience, dating back to its early settlers.
He says Alberta conservatives are distinct from Eastern Canada, but acknowledges they have "a lot in common" with neighbouring Saskatchewan.
"I would challenge you that a Doug Ford conservative is not a conservative from Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills. We have very little in common," Davies told CBC News.
Davies also takes many cultural positions similar to U.S. Republicans, such as eliminating Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies and taking education about sexual and gender diversity out of schools, and says he believes a "vast majority" of Albertans share these views.
The Alberta Prosperity Project, the group driving a petition to force a separation referendum, has a section on its website outlining similar "cultural and identity factors" for leaving Canada. The party lists bilingualism among its cultural grievances, as well as, "The Federal Government's support of wokeness, cancel culture, critical race theory, the rewriting of history, and the tearing down of historical monuments."
Albertans 'build community for themselves'
But plenty of Albertans don't fall in line with those values.
Rowan Morris, a transgender man living in Alberta's oil capital Fort McMurray, knows all about the risk-taking, entrepreneurial Alberta spirit, and mythos around building a better life through hard work and sacrifice.
His parents moved their family to Fort McMurray from Nova Scotia when he was 14, and his dad took a job in the oilfield. He says that "sacrifice for good" is something that's inherently Albertan.
"That also applies to newcomers to Canada. Also applies to Indigenous folks on this territory. It also applies to queer and trans people," he said. "What I see in Fort McMurray is people who move here have no friends or family, and build a community for themselves."
That's about as far as his agreements with the separatists go.
Morris says the talk of "family values" is not inclusive of all families, and the crusade against "wokeness" leaves many Albertans behind.
He also finds the idea of separating from Canada disrespectful to the authority of Indigenous governance systems and values.
"When we are contorting freedom into being something restrictive or something avoidant or punitive, that isn't truly freedom," he said.
"I think the values that are Albertan, or what is Albertan culture, is a willingness to explore and a willingness to embrace the new and to challenge yourself. And those are things that I do see echoed in the root of what folks are talking about on this other side," he said, referring to the separatists, and adding that he feels their anger is misdirected.
Morris believes Alberta does have a distinct culture, but he says it's part of a broader pan-Canadian one, rather than a separate national identity.
Separatists are 'projecting their own values': researcher
In many ways, Morris is not an outlier in today's Alberta.
Jared Wesley, a political scientist at the University of Alberta who studies the province's political culture with his Common Ground research team, says the ideals expressed by separatist groups don't represent the average Albertan in 2025.
"They're absolutely dead wrong, and they're projecting their own values on the rest of Alberta society," he said.
Wesley and his team have interviewed thousands of Albertans. In an April 2024 article for Policy Options, a magazine from the Montreal-based Institute for Research on Public Policy, he noted that they found Albertans are, by and large, socially progressive and fiscally conservative — or, more specifically, tax-averse.
"Alberta is one of those unique places right now where the broader political culture, who we see ourselves to be, just does not align with public opinion," he told CBC News.
In surveying thousands of Alberta residents, researchers found that they often have a "distorted view" of their own political culture, believing their fellow citizens to be significantly more conservative than they actually are.
The researchers noted that ultimately, those surveyed had an image of the "average Albertan" that doesn't match the actual demographics of the province.
WATCH | Albertans discuss sovereignty:
Alberta separatism is in the spotlight. Not everyone is sold on sovereignty
5 days ago
Duration 8:11
Alberta is increasingly ethnically diverse. The province's 2021 census found that more than a quarter of Albertans identify as racialized, and noted that Alberta had the third highest population proportion of racialized groups in Canada behind Ontario and B.C.
Additionally, just under seven per cent identify as Indigenous, which is the fourth largest proportion among provinces, behind Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador.
Wesley's research has found that Albertans identify strongly with both their province and their country. Even among separatists he spoke with, Wesley says fewer than half feel Alberta has its own distinct culture within Canada.
In the survey, when Albertans were asked to select all the political identifications that applied to them, most chose at least two, with the most common being "progressive" and "conservative."
And while the federal Conservatives won 63.5 per cent of Alberta's popular vote in April's federal election, the provincial NDP still captured 44 per cent of the popular vote in the 2023 provincial race, suggesting Albertans are anything but a conservative monolith.
Wesley says he doesn't believe the leaders of the separatist movement truly think of Alberta that way, either.
"The political strategy is to paint yourself as being far bigger than what you actually are, or your ideas as being far more popular," he said. "I mean, that's at the heart of politics."
What polling reveals
Recent Angus Reid polling suggests 19 per cent of Albertans would "definitely" vote to leave Canada if it were put to a referendum, while another 17 per cent are "leaning toward" wanting to leave. A majority, 52 per cent, said they would "definitely" vote to stay, with eight per cent "leaning toward" voting to stay.
By perpetuating a narrow, traditional idea of what it means to be Albertan, Wesley says separatists are turning off a large portion of the province's population.
He says the separatist movement may end up being a "flashpoint" where Albertans realize this disconnect between their public image and their true values.
"A march towards the referendum is going to have people questioning, 'Who are we as Albertans?' " he said. "And I'm not sure the separatists are prepared for the answer that Albertans are going to give them."
The Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) released its own polling last week that pushes back against separatist narratives.
The survey, done by polling firm Environics in April, found Albertans overwhelmingly support causes like raising the minimum wage, rent controls and price controls, as well as the full implementation of universal child care, pharmacare and dental care.
In a statement, AFL president Gil McGowan said the poll was initially for in-house use, but the union decided to release it to counteract the public focus on separatism.
"This polling is a rebuttal to right-wing stereotypes of Albertans," McGowan said.
Young Conservative wants to bridge gap with separatists
Some Conservatives in the province are also pushing back against separatism.
Ahmed Ibrahim, 21, former president of the University of Lethbridge campus conservative club, spoke with CBC News over the phone while working in a canola field just northeast of Lethbridge, in southern Alberta.
Ibrahim was born and raised in Saudi Arabia, and came to Alberta in 2023 to work in agriculture.
"I came here for the Alberta advantage," he said, noting that the province has an opportunity to grow, and he feels that "growth is something everyone deserves."
Still, Ibrahim says he doesn't view Alberta as a separate nation, and believes strongly in the idea and principle of Canada.
Though separatists are a minority in the Conservative movement, he notes that "they have the right to be listened to."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Globe and Mail
15 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
Canada can't solve its housing crisis without the provinces
Mike Moffatt is the founding director of the Missing Middle Initiative. Lisa Raitt is the co-chair of the Task Force for Housing and Climate and a former minister of transport, labour and natural resources. Canada is facing a housing crisis of historic proportions. To restore affordability, the country needs to build 5.8 million new homes by 2030. That means doubling the current rate of housing starts – an ambitious goal set by Prime Minister Mark Carney during the federal election campaign. It's a promise that will define his leadership, and one he'll be under intense pressure to deliver on. But no single order of government can solve Canada's housing crisis alone. While the federal government sets the tone and provides funding tools, the provinces hold many of the most important policy levers. If they don't act boldly, they risk becoming the bottleneck in Canada's efforts to boost supply, improve affordability and build housing that aligns with climate goals and can withstand extreme weather. The federal government has taken meaningful steps, including the promise to launch a Build Canada Homes entity and reinstate a 1970s-era tax incentive to spur rental apartment construction. It has also removed GST from new rental builds and made federal land available for housing. These are important changes – but their impact will be limited unless provinces get moving. In some provinces, we've seen positive momentum toward building density: British Columbia's reform allowing multiple units per lot and Ontario's recent relaxation of parking minimums are helpful steps. Inside the crisis facing Canada's dysfunctional housing market Tony Keller: Build, baby, build: Canada used to know how to do that Although both provinces have introduced reforms, these measures have been neutralized by skyrocketing development charges and sluggish approval timelines. As a result, housing starts in both provinces dropped more than 30 per cent in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the previous year. Municipalities, for their part, are largely 'creatures of the province,' and the decisions they make must be compliant with provincial regulations, such as Ontario's Development Charges Act. Some have begun to implement long-overdue zoning reforms. Some have acted independently, while others were encouraged to do so through the federal Housing Accelerator Fund. These initiatives show promise – but are frequently undermined by provincial inaction or contradictory policies. Fortunately, governments don't have to start from scratch. In 2024, the Task Force for Housing and Climate – composed of 15 housing and policy experts, including former Edmonton mayor Don Iveson and Mr. Carney (he's no longer a member) – published a comprehensive roadmap: Blueprint for More and Better Housing. It outlines more than 140 actionable recommendations across all levels of government to boost supply, deliver affordability, and build homes resilient to climate impacts. This year, the Task Force followed up with a report card grading federal and provincial governments on their performance. The federal government earned a B, praised for its recent initiatives but urged to improve transparency in programs like the Housing Accelerator and to launch a national hazard mapping initiative to prevent building in flood- and fire-prone areas. For the provinces, it's a different story. No province scored higher than a C+, with high fees, slow approvals and inconsistent reforms holding housing back. Among the provinces, Prince Edward Island earned among the highest marks for reforms that have boosted housing supply. However, the province still needs to do more to ensure new homes meet energy and climate-resilience standards. British Columbia introduced some of the country's boldest reforms, but its overall impact is undercut by rising municipal fees and glacial approval processes. Ontario, despite Premier Doug Ford's public opposition to fourplexes, has quietly legalized more density than most provinces and promised to launch a housing innovation fund. But volatile policymaking, persistent delays in the Greater Toronto Area, and the highest development charges in North America have led to low housing starts and, accordingly, a middling grade of C. If Canada is serious about tackling the housing crisis, now is the time for leadership, especially at the provincial level. We already know what works. The policy solutions are well understood and widely supported. What's missing is the political will to implement them. The housing crisis is not just a federal problem, or a municipal one. It is a national challenge – and solving it requires co-ordination and commitment from all three levels of government. The provinces hold many of the keys to housing, and need to act soon to help unlock supply.


National Post
21 minutes ago
- National Post
Ivison: The future is nuclear but we need pipelines too
Article content This week, John Ivison discussed the Carney government's plans for nation-building projects with Dr. Heather Exner-Pirot, a senior advisor for the Business Council of Canada. Article content Ivison asked whether asking premiers to submit projects deemed to be in the national interest will mean we are at risk of pursuing white elephants that are not feasible or uneconomic. Article content Article content 'The tone has markedly improved from the last Liberal government, so there is some optimism,' she said. 'There is a sense that the federal government will be a partner in building things, where, for a long time, we thought they were blocking our ability to build things. So it's a great start but there's only so long that you can have a honeymoon period before things have to happen. We actually have to see some action. And we know that Liberal governments are very good at rhetoric and not so great at implementation.' Article content She said her concern is that projects are being submitted by governments and then projects deemed 'nation-building' are being selected by the federal government. Article content 'The direction it's going is a little concerning, in that they want to have a short list of nation-building projects and they will determine if it's nation building and use the public purse to fund them in cases where the private sector will not step up. Article content 'There may be a handful where that's justified. There's obviously a role for governments to build infrastructure. But the low-hanging fruit is obviously to improve our regulatory competitiveness. We have very restrictive, very burdensome regulatory processes. There are a lot of projects that proponents want to do on their own, without government help, if the regulation was better, if we had better tax competitiveness with our competitors. And so I will tolerate a handful of these nation building projects, if they make sense from a business side. But at the end of the day, we're going to need to see the regulations improved and streamlined.' Article content Exner-Pirot said that Mark Carney's goal of a two-year approval process is a 'great target' Article content '(But) we should walk before we run. For some of these things, three years also look pretty good. Two years is certainly feasible if we have good processes and good relations with Indigenous partners. The Conservatives were talking about a six months (approval process) and that just didn't seem feasible to me – that you would never be able to fulfill your duty to consult and accommodate in such a timeline. So two years is ambitious, but doable and we should reach for it.' Article content She pointed out that Canada has to be regulatory and tax competitive with jurisdictions like Texas. Article content 'We would like to bring some of that capital back home. But at the end of the day, investors are going to make those decisions based on the return that they get. Let's make sure that our tax system is competitive so that capital actually wants to choose Canada. One sector where Exner-Pirot is extremely bullish is nuclear power generation using small modular nuclear reactors. Article content This is the one area where I just think: 'Yes, this is a nation building project'. We should lead on SMRs. And there's so many strategic reasons for Canada. One is that we have the uranium source. (We are) the world's number two exporter and number two producer of uranium. We have phenomenal deposits in northern Saskatchewan and in Nunavut. We could dominate the supply chain and the technology. We are building the first SMR in the G7. It has taken some public money to get there. But being the first mover really does accord you some benefits as you try to sell these models in the future. So where can we go next? Nuclear really has the potential if you get the cost curve down. It's a baseload clean energy that needs very little land and very little material inputs. In 100 years, do I think we'll be doing mostly nuclear? Yes, I honestly do.' Article content On specific projects, Ivison asked if a bitumen pipeline should be a priority. Article content '(Alberta premier) Danielle Smith has said it, and my analysis suggests it's absolutely true: There is nothing that will change the economic growth, the GDP, the productivity per capita in this country as much as a bitumen pipeline. We finally added Trans Mountain about a year ago. That's at 90 per cent utilization right now in one year. Our producers filled it fast, so there's clearly demand. We're seeing most of that demand come from Asia, so there is strong demand in global markets for Canadian heavy oil. But it is concerning that we have added this pipeline and we're already running out of egress. So there is an urgency from the producers that we need to start thinking about the next pipeline. And I don't think we're going to get Northern Gateway in two years. If everything went well, probably four years. And that's why we have to start planning for (the next one) now,' she said. Article content Exner-Pirot said whichever pipeline plan comes forward will require the B.C. government to revisit its opposition to tanker traffic on the West Coast. Article content 'I'm finding this hard to understand because B.C. has actually done some constructive and progressive things on the economic development side since Trump was inaugurated. (Premier Dave) Eby has almost been the most vocal about wanting the elbows up. He said in February that if we don't sell Canadian oil and gas, they will just get it from places like Venezuela. I thought: 'Wow, this guy has had a light bulb moment'. To hear (his support for the tanker ban) two and a half months later is quite disappointing. Now a lot of this is federal jurisdiction, so while we want the feds to get out of the way, (it is different) on inter-provincial pipelines, because that is clearly federal jurisdiction. We know from Trans Mountain when B.C., if you recall, said: 'We will use every tool in the toolbox to stop this project'. And they did. But it wasn't their right. The feds can overturn the oil tanker ban. That's their jurisdiction. But what proponent really wants to step into a situation where a provincial government is going to use every tool in the toolbox to stop your project? It's obviously not bullish for investment to have this kind of political disagreement on the ground.' Article content Ivison asked if the idea of a 'grand bargain' between Alberta and Ottawa on decarbonizing bitumen before it is transported to the West Coast by pipeline is a viable option. Article content 'It is feasible. The industry itself has proposed carbon capture and also using some solvents to reduce emissions. In the last 11 years, they have actually reduced carbon intensity emissions per barrel by 30 per cent. So they are doing the work. A lot of the carbon comes from natural gas input to heat the bitumen. That's an expense. There's every reason why they would rather not have to pay that kind of money. Article content 'Right now, the oil sands, on a life cycle basis, is only about 1-3 per cent higher emissions than the global average barrel, the average crude. But if we did this carbon capture, if we did some of the solvent innovations that they're using, it would actually be below the global average on a life cycle basis. So there is a grand bargain to be had. The industry itself has been advocating it. We're very competitive on an economic basis. We want to be competitive on a carbon basis. Article content 'What Danielle Smith is saying is: 'Where's the money going to come from to spend probably $20 billion on these (carbon capture) technologies? If you know you're going to get another pipeline and you can increase your production and fill it with a million barrels a day, well, now there's more revenue coming in and there's a justification. (But) if all your profits have to be driven into carbon capture, you're just not going to get any investment. All of this is cost, none of this is profit and they still have to have a certain level of return from the investors or the investors will just take off.' Article content Moving east across Canada,, Exner-Pirot has been skeptical about Arctic ports being commercially viable. She noted that the feds and the province of Manitoba have spent more than half a billion dollars on the port of Churchill and it's still not attracting shippers and investors, while the Northwest Territories is trying to push the idea of an 'Arctic Security Corridor' that runs between Alberta and Gray's Bay in Nunavut, via Yellowknife. Both ports are impacted by a short shipping season because of sea ice. Article content 'It's a terrible idea for oil and a very bad idea for liquefied natural gas,' she said. 'You will never get a return on your investment. We do want northern development. We do want those regions to prosper at a local level. (But) this is not the thing that's going to grow our GDP. This is not the thing that's going to help Canada diversify its exports away. Article content 'A port in Churchill and a port in Gray's Bay can be useful for helping local mining development happen. That's important for jobs, for taxes, for royalties, for those communities' economic health. So there's a reason it's a public good to provide some basic infrastructure, basic transportation access for the people that live there. Article content Critical minerals are a very different thing from oil. You can mine, you can produce all year and stockpile it, and then in that short shipping season you can ship it out. It's not very expensive just to have it sitting there while the shipping season is closed.' Article content Exner-Pirot said the signs are positive that Canada will finally get its act together and overcome the barriers to economic development because the alternative is stagnation. Article content 'If we return to our complacency after what we've seen and what we've gone through, then God help this country. The conversation right now, again, is focusing on a few projects. I'll be tolerant of this, maybe for a handful of projects and for a handful of months. But (we must) improve our regulatory systems, especially at the federal level. That is where we need to see movement. You can't bring in new people at the rate we bring in new people, and you can't be dependent on China at the rate that we're dependent on China. That cannot keep going on,' she said. Article content


National Post
21 minutes ago
- National Post
FIRST READING: The wild overreach contained in the Liberals' new border control bill
Article content TOP STORY Article content The first piece of legislation tabled by the new Carney government is a bill framed as a means to tighten the 'security of the border between Canada and the United States.' Article content 'The Bill will … keep Canadians safe by ensuring law enforcement has the right tools to keep our borders secure, combat transnational organized crime, stop the flow of illegal fentanyl, and crack down on money laundering' read a backgrounder. Article content Article content But within days of the text becoming public, analysts began to notice that Bill C-2's 140 pages contained a number of provisions that went well beyond the usual scope of chasing down drug smugglers and gangsters. This includes a clause that technically outlaws paying for anything with more than $10,000 in cash. Article content Article content The bill would do this via an amendment to The Proceeds of Crime and Terrorist Financing Act, legislation that was first made law in 2000. The amendment states that it would become an offence to accept 'a cash payment, donation or deposit of $10,000 or more in a single transaction.' Article content It doesn't matter if the $10,000 is paid to a licensed business for a legal product or service: The mere fact that the payment is in cash is what makes it illegal. Article content Article content It also becomes illegal if 'a prescribed series of related transactions' come to a total of more than $10,000. So, if you pay $2,000 cash to a contractor more than five times, that contractor will have officially violated The Proceeds of Crime and Terrorist Financing Act. Article content Article content In a statement, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms conceded that it's a rare thing for a Canadian to pay a five-figure bill in cash, but warned that once the precedent is set, it would be very easy for governments to reduce the 'legal amount' of a cash transaction. 'Restricting the use of cash is a dangerous step towards tyranny and totalitarianism,' it wrote. Article content 'If we cherish our privacy, we need to defend our freedom to choose cash, in the amount of our choosing. This includes, for example, our right to pay $10,000 cash for a car, or to donate $10,000 (or more) to a charity.' Article content Another twist with the provision is that it only covers donations collected by an entity involved in 'the solicitation of charitable financial donations.' So virtually all of the anti-Israel protests regularly blockading Canadian streets would be exempt, as they're not organized by registered charities. If you want to hand $10,000 in cash to your local Globalize the Intifada vigil, The Proceeds of Crime and Terrorist Financing Act has no quarrel with you.