On Alberta separatism, just over half of Canadians say they understand the desire: poll
A new poll suggests more than half of Canadians say they understand why Alberta might want to split from Canada — even if almost two-thirds say they don't want that to happen.
Article content
Article content
The Leger survey, which polled 1,537 Canadians between May 16 and 18, suggests that 55 per cent of Canadians understand Albertans' desire for independence.
Article content
Because the poll was conducted online, it can't be assigned a margin of error.
Article content
Seventy per cent of Albertans said they understand why their province might want to become an independent country.
Article content
The poll suggests 63 per cent of men say they grasp what's driving Alberta separatism, while 48 per cent of women report the same.
Article content
While 77 per cent of Conservative voters said they understand the reasons behind the separatism movement, only 48 per cent of Liberal supporters responded the same way.
Article content
Sebastien Dallaire, Leger's executive vice-president for Eastern Canada, said the survey suggests that there's a 'level of empathy' for Albertans. He added Canadians likely don't think it's a good idea for the province to separate, given the dire consequences it would have for the entire country.
Article content
'If you're in B.C., it means the country will be split in half from your perspective,' Dallaire said. 'If one province leaves, then it may open up, you know, more discussion about, of course, Quebec possibly also wanting to do the same, or other provinces.'
Article content
Only 26 per cent of respondents said they support the idea of Alberta becoming an independent country, with 12 per cent saying they 'strongly' support it and 15 per cent saying they support it 'somewhat.'
Article content
The numbers in the polling don't always match up due to rounding.
Article content
Sixty-two per cent of respondents said they're opposed, with 50 per cent saying they're 'strongly' opposed, 13 per cent saying they are somewhat opposed and 11 per cent saying they 'don't know.'
Article content
Among respondents who support the province of Alberta becoming a country, 76 per cent say they understand why Alberta might want to become independent.
Article content
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith's government introduced a bill earlier this month to make it easier to launch a citizen-initiated referendum — including one on separating from Canada.
Article content
Smith has pointed to growing alienation in her province and frustration with Ottawa and has argued that those wanting to separate 'are not fringe voices.'
Article content
While she said she does not support separating from Canada, Smith is hoping to negotiate a new deal for the province with Prime Minister Mark Carney. She has said repeatedly that Albertans are frustrated that the province's natural resources are landlocked and that its oil and gas exports are sold almost exclusively to the United States at a cut rate.
Article content
Almost half of respondents in Alberta — 47 per cent — said they support separation.
Article content
Just 29 per cent of Quebecers, 22 per cent of Ontarians and 14 per cent of people in B.C. said they think Alberta should split. Though the poll's sample size for the two provinces was small, 30 per cent of people in Manitoba and Saskatchewan said they supported the idea.
Article content
At 43 per cent, Conservative supporters were far more open to the idea of separation than Liberal supporters, at only 12 per cent.
Article content
Dallaire said the results of the recent federal election 'did not satisfy everybody.'
Article content
He also said the poll suggests that Albertans are very divided on the issue of separation.
Article content
'We see that there is significant support for at least trying to shake things up,' he said, adding that previous referendums in Quebec have shown that numbers tend to move quite a bit once people learn the facts about what separation would mean.
Article content
'Is this really a hard level of support? At this time, probably not, but it's a clear indication that there's a potential for the movement to really gain a strong foothold in the province and it's something to really keep an eye on,' he said.
Article content
'There's a potential for this to grow even stronger, depending on what happens next.'
Article content
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
30 minutes ago
- National Post
John Robson: Canadians unwilling to defend themselves?
Article content The National Post reports an Angus Reid survey finding that a significant majority of us favour compulsory voluntary service by the youth of today. Which might sound like a bracingly traditional Jordan Peterson clean-your-room, stand-up-straight, shoulders-back attitude until you read the fine print, which would risk making Peterson ill if he weren't already. Because it turns out we want to conscript them to work in health care so we get stuff we didn't pay for, not to defend the country because if ye break faith and so on. Article content Article content Article content According to the survey, 74 per cent of respondents want young people to have to give a year of their lives to bolstering our failing, structurally unsound socialized medical system. Respondents were also in favour of mandatory service in support of the environment (73 per cent), 'youth services' (72 per cent), whatever it might be, and 'civil protection' (70 per cent). But when it comes to (ugh) national defence, just 43 per cent supported it, with 44 per cent opposed. Article content Article content Spending on comfort while barbarians undermine the city walls lacks prudence as well as dignity. As I observed in a long-ago graduate-school debate about American national security, it didn't matter how wonderfully progressive the Dutch social welfare system was in 1940 when the Nazis came calling. And we too seem to have our priorities backward. Article content If I might confuse the government by discussing principles of political economy, there are good reasons why national defence is considered a binding duty on those able to contribute to it. First is the 'free rider' problem that everyone benefits from successful protection of the community, especially, at least in a narrow and hedonistic sense, if you send some other chump to die for your freedom while you recline comfortably at home. Article content Article content Second is the moral consideration that, as John Stuart Mill famously if uncharacteristically put it, 'War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse.' Which comes from, yes, his 'Principles of Political Economy.' Article content Article content Mill was no warmonger. As he immediately continued, 'When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people.' Article content But not all wars are like Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine, let alone Hamas's attack on Israel. As the anything-but-bellicose Mill added, 'A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice, — is often the means of their regeneration.' Article content Arguably we could use it. Especially as, to continue quoting Mill because few have ever matched his clarity, 'A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.' Article content As when we also find polls showing that Canadians are pleased with our pitiful assistance to Ukraine, though our allies beg to differ. And of course the Carney government plans to recognize Hamas while pretending not to, speaking of degraded and miserable. Article content As for the rest of us, the Angus poll suggests that we're happy to conscript young people who are unable to find jobs thanks to our irresponsible immigration policy to … give us stuff. We want free health care and will use other people's kids as involuntary labour (a.k.a., 'slaves') to get it. And they should fix the environment while we slurp smoothies. Oh, and do something about youth, plus shoulder the burden of 'civil protection' that even the government apparently now realizes is overstretching our feeble, neglected military. Article content Article content Our emergency management minister, incidentally a preposterous job title, actually said of soldiers fighting fires: 'this is not their primary responsibility.' Though I wouldn't bet she knows what is. Or that we do. Because when it comes to handouts, we're all about enjoying the fruits of others' labour. But when it comes to stepping up to discharge a classic, and classical, legitimate public responsibility, not so much. Article content As that passage from Mill concludes, 'As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.' Or just grab the loot through the Treasury window while others toil and suffer. Article content Article content
National Post
30 minutes ago
- National Post
Terry Newman: Poilievre's win means Carney's cakewalk is over
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The Tory leader's record of tearing apart Liberal policies will ensure in September, Parliament will be a trial by fire for the prime minister Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre speaks after his win during the Battle River-Crowfoot byelection in Camrose, Alta., Monday, Aug. 18, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson Despite naysayers and a longest ballot committee, Pierre Poilievre handily won his seat in Battle River-Crowfoot Monday, which means he will be returning to Parliament in September. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Up until this point, Prime Minister Mark Carney has had it easy. The Liberals haven't faced the Conservative leader in the House of Commons since December. And due to Poilievre's loss of the Carleton riding in the federal election, Carney has never had to face the opposition leader's razor-like questioning in Parliament. That respite will be over soon. Poilievre's return means Carney and the Liberal party's cakewalk is over. So far Carney has enjoyed public support for his policies and proposals, but Poilievre could be returning to the House at precisely the right time, as it becomes increasingly obvious that this country's problems, from the gigantic deficit, to housing affordability to our relationship with the United States, are not so easily solved. With the Conservative leader grilling the prime minister day in and day out, these problems will only be magnified. This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays) By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again In fact, even out of Parliament, Poilievre has been successful at spotlighting criticisms of the Liberals EV mandate which he's described as akin 'to banning rural way of life.' The Conservatives are planning a nationwide campaign targeting the mandate, which a poll has suggested that Canadians think is 'unrealistic' and should be shelved. And there appears to be much more where that came from. Earlier this month, Poilievre challenged Carney to 'get shovels in the ground' for at least two energy projects by March 2026, a year after his swearing-in as prime minister. Carney campaigned on being committed to fast-tracking major project approvals in order to boost Canada's economy against tariff threats from Trump. Both the 'One Canadian Economy' and 'Building Canada Act' passed on June 26, but so far, no energy projects have manifested under Carney who is placing great emphasis on advancing the interests of clean growth and climate change. Poilievre has also repeated requests for Carney to repeal the industrial carbon tax and Impact Assessment Act in order to speed up private projects. Carney has explicitly refused to repeal both. Carney positioned himself as the best man for the job to fight Trump's proposed 25 per cent tariffs, later increased to 35 per cent, and to secure a new trade deal with U.S. President Donald Trump. Carney failed to reach a deal with Trump first by July 21 and then by Aug. 1. Carney claims negotiations will continue, but the elbows up facade has faded, providing more opportunities for Poilievre to criticize and differentiate his party. Carney has made clear on many occasions that he isn't a fan of being questioned, but, unless the prime minister refuses to show up to work, Poilievre will be there waiting to pounce, providing news reporters with regular punchy, quotable attacks. This advertisement has not loaded yet. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. It will much more difficult for Carney to defend obviously poor decisions such as his controversial statement that he intends to recognize Palestine as a state in September based on conditions that are not likely to be met that 'Hamas must disarm; and that Hamas must play no role in the future governance of Palestine.' Carney hasn't explained why a terrorist organization would suddenly choose to disarm after 18 years… for Mark Carney. The real test will ultimately be public opinion, and Poilievre's record of tearing apart Liberal policies will ensure September Parliament will be a trial by fire for Carney. The prime minister's polling numbers won't remain positive indefinitely. Despite a survey from early August showing Carney's approval rating at a somewhat-positive 56 per cent, only 36 per cent of Canadians seem to think the country is heading in the right direction. And of course they don't. All of the same problems that existed under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau are not only still there, and they appear to be getting worse. As Post columnist Tristin Hopper points out, capital is fleeing the country, government is collecting more tax than ever before, never before has the gap between Canadian and U.S. GDP been wider, insolvencies haven't been this high since the Great Recession, housing is still unaffordable, and somehow, there are more bureaucrats on the government payroll than ever. Some might argue that this was all a product Trudeau's leadership, even though Carney advised the Liberals on economic policy informally during COVID and formally, since September 2024 when they appointed him as the Chair of the Liberal Party's Task Force on Economic Growth until he became leader of the party. This problem will be two-fold for Carney in September. Not only will he have to face questions about policy decisions since he has become prime minister, but his relationship with Brookfield means that some of his personal interests and business relations may also be a subject for debate once Parliament convenes in the fall. Poilievre, on the other hand, is a much better known quantity — often attacked for being a 'career politician.' One of the benefits of being a career politician is that everyone already knows where he stands, and they already know his life story. It would be strange for a skeleton to suddenly emerge from Polievre's closet at this point. Carney came in as a fresh face, but the party itself, especially notable cabinet ministers, didn't change much, they were just shuffled — Joly, Miller, Guilbeault, Freeland, Anand, Hajdu, Champagne and Fraser — just shifted around in a game of political musical chairs, as if these ministers would suddenly perform better in their latest positions. This all spells political trouble for Carney. And it begs another question: Which Carney can Canadians expect in House of Commons in the fall? Brookfield Carney? Former bank governor Carney? Climate Carney? Elbows up Carney? Who knows where those elbows have gone. They certainly haven't solved trade issues with Trump nor were they invited to what is being referred to as a successful meeting in Washington, D.C. about the future of Ukraine. It looks like Carney's going to need some elbow grease to explain this and more to the returning Opposition leader in the fall.
National Post
30 minutes ago
- National Post
Opinion: Modernize the legal system to confront 21st-century organized crime
Article content The Jordan framework is a set of legal principles that determine whether a criminal trial has been delayed unreasonably, resulting in a rights violation. It enforces strict trial timelines of 18-30 months, forcing the dismissal of complex cross-border cases that in the U.S. could proceed under exceptions in the Speedy Trial Act. Article content The Stinchcombe disclosure rule requires the Crown to share virtually all evidence publicly, deterring the use of intelligence from our allies in court for fear of compromising sources. Our allies employ measures like public interest immunity or classified information procedures to protect sensitive data. Article content Our organized crime provisions are similarly out of step. The Criminal Code sections pertaining to organized crime (467.1–467.13) require proof of a rigid organizational structure and a benefit motive, a framework ill-suited to the decentralized, cell-based and digital networks driving today's transnational crime. In contrast, the U.S. RICO Act targets patterns of criminal behaviour, allowing prosecutions of crime leaders and facilitators in loosely co-ordinated syndicates. Article content Financial enforcement is equally weak. Between $45 billion and $113 billion is laundered in Canada each year, with British Columbia's Cullen Commission estimating that upwards of $5.3 billion is laundered through B.C. real estate every year. Article content The absence of a robust beneficial ownership registry leaves shell corporations and trusts as attractive vehicles for ' snow-washing ' illicit funds. FINTRAC's limited proactive authority contrasts sharply with the U.S. FinCEN 's ability to issue geographic targeting orders, freeze assets and compel cross-jurisdictional disclosure. Article content Jurisdictional gaps and enforcement silos further undermine our defences. Ports, airports and rail hubs often fall outside the authority of municipal and provincial police unless complex memoranda of understanding are in place, leaving vulnerabilities that organized crime exploits. Article content Intelligence is likewise siloed, with CSIS unable to readily convert its intelligence into admissible evidence — a problem the U.K. mitigates through closed-material proceedings. Article content Canada also lacks the means to compel internet service providers, payment processors and banks to sever support to foreign criminal enterprises, while the European Union's Digital Services Act — an overly restrictive act we should not strive to emulate overall — contains important elements, such as provisions empowering member states to force takedowns of criminal platforms. Article content To address these gaps, Canada should introduce targeted carve-outs to the Stinchcombe disclosure requirements and the Jordan timelines for organized crime and national security cases and create secure protocols for using allied intelligence in prosecutions. Article content The Criminal Code's organized crime sections should be modernized to include enforcement against decentralized networks alongside stronger wiretap and production order powers for digital and offshore data. Article content Financial transparency must be improved through a more robust and enforceable beneficial ownership registry and expanded FINTRAC powers.
