Albertans have just had a very serious discussion. Yesterday’s referendum asked whether Albertans should have a further referendum — a ‘real’ referendum — to begin the process allowed by Canadian federal law toward a binding vote on independence. The outcome of that second vote could have led ultimately to Alberta becoming a sovereign and independent country. But a majority of Albertans decided this was not the time to seek nationhood. Out of over 1.7 million votes counted in a remarkably robust voter turnout — approximately 25% — over 420,000 Albertans wanted to go forward with that ‘real’ independence referendum.While visiting Alberta, both the Liberal Prime Minister and the Conservative Leader of the Official Opposition voiced their strong support for federalism, urging Albertans to reject seeking independence.Pierre Poilievre told a conference in Calgary, “We don't just take our ball and go home. We don't walk away. We stand and fight for what we believe in, and we reflect upon all that we have. Quitting is the easy way out — and Albertans are not quitters.”He offered no support for reforming the constitution or even equalization payments. “My friends, nobody achieves greatness on their own. Not a pro athlete, not one great city on a vast prairie, not a single province. It takes a team ... Those who came before us understood that,” Prime Minister Mark Carney told a crowd in Edmonton.He likewise also offered no support for reform and even urged Albertans to reject the referendum questions that call for constitutional reform within a united Canada. Many will call the result a sound defeat for Alberta independence. In Central Canada, the legacy media and especially the Canadian government’s semi-official news agency, the CBC, are eagerly spinning that narrative. It is one they have ached to tell..Of the other nine questions, five are non-constitutional, and four seek constitutional change. Taken together, they amount to a solid mandate for constitutional reform, even though success is highly unlikely. Constitutional amendment in Canada requires broad agreement, and history suggests that even when premiers reach consensus, the public may still say no. The Charlottetown Accord of 1992 is the clearest recent example: it had the support of the federal government and all ten provinces at one stage, yet failed in the subsequent referendum. The questions Albertans have answered nonetheless record what they want — greater provincial authority over immigration and services, a rebalanced (or abolished) Senate, and priority for provincial laws in areas of shared jurisdiction. Albertans also like voter ID. If those reforms do not materialize, the independence movement retains the right to return and try again. For now, however, it must accept the verdict on the independence question. It would be unwise to simply declare the result unsatisfactory and immediately reopen the same process.There is no denying that the independence faction lost. It put up a good fight but must for now accept the verdict. There will be another day. And there will be another day because — notwithstanding this result — dispassionate observers must concede that when over 420,000 people say there is something wrong with how the federal government deals with Alberta, they cannot be written off as a fringe group.Their concerns merit consideration, not condemnation. And yesterday’s vote notwithstanding, they must be addressed. An injustice does not cease to be an injustice just because a majority accepts it. As Premier Smith recently explained in an interview with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute’s Brian Lee Crowley, when other provinces choose not to develop their own resources and depend instead on equalization payments generated in Alberta, something is wrong.So, what now?.Manifestly, the level of dissent is large enough to justify the discussion that just occurred and indeed large enough to require that the discussion not be declared finished the moment the counting ends. Independence supporters achieved a significant result. Anything above 20% is a respectable showing for a movement seeking such a fundamental change, especially when its supporters had no hand in setting the winning conditions. The threshold, the wording, and the decision that the result would be non-binding were established by the government of the day. That is the prerogative of the side that holds office. It also means the 25% was achieved under rules independence supporters did not write. Further, those who favour independence are under no obligation to disband. The independence movement is decentralized; it is not a political party with a single leader or executive that can order its supporters to pack up and go home. Its supporters can continue organizing and making their case while accepting the result. They have made their case in public and tested their strength at the ballot box. Nothing in the outcome requires them to stop arguing, organizing, or proposing further measures. A minority that commands one-quarter of the vote retains the right to keep making its case. Alberta has been poorly treated in confederation on questions of equalization, energy, democratic representation, and jurisdiction; those who feel strongly about it are not wrong to seek redress.Two more things. First, the suggestion, advanced by former premier Jason Kenney, that the United Conservative Party should now demand that its members recant any support for independence and expel those who will not is gratuitous. His proposal treats a non-binding process question as a loyalty test and proposes internal purges as the proper response to an electoral result. Coming from Mr. Kenney, that’s a bit rich. For one thing, he recruited many of them from the back of a blue Dodge pickup truck years ago, when he brought Alberta’s warring conservative factions together to form the United Conservative Party. He was happy to have their support when he needed it. .Thereafter, his own record on these questions has not been so consistent that he is well placed to administer such a test. (Mr. Kenney called a referendum on ending equalization. Albertans voted for it. Then, he did nothing with it.)If anyone on either side of the independence debate should be expelled from the UCP, it should be Mr. Kenney for advocating a purge of members whose views he dislikes. A party built to unite Alberta conservatives should have room for both federalists and independence supporters.Second, this contest was not conducted under a fair and equal application of the law. Elections Alberta’s rules on advertising, registration, and third-party activity were applied far more stringently to some participants than to others. Notably, the federalist campaign operating as Forever Canada did not have to follow the same Elections Alberta campaign finance rules that constrained the independence campaign. They were allowed to raise and spend money without any oversight from Elections Alberta. They even actively solicited donations from outside of Alberta.Rules unequally applied are still rules, but they are not neutral ones. Somebody had their thumb on the scale. The disparity does not erase the result; the result stands and must be accepted. It does, however, limit how confidently anyone can describe the process as fully even.Finally, Premier Danielle Smith faces a practical choice. With an Alberta election due in October 2027, her interest lies in redirecting public attention to the continuing contest with Ottawa over equalization, energy, and jurisdiction. It is to her benefit that this contest can be conducted within confederation, in line with the preferences expressed in the questions unrelated to independence. Significantly, it also gives her a concrete agenda that does not require her to choose between the 25% and the majority that preferred to remain.The referendum has clarified the size of the independence constituency and confirmed that a majority prefers to stay. Both facts can stand. It is important, however, for all players, both at the federal level and within Alberta, to treat that 25% as a continuing feature of Alberta politics rather than a number that disappears once the ballots are counted. Those who want independence can continue to make their arguments. Those who favour continued membership in Canada can continue to answer them. That is what the process was for.In other words, the vote is done. But the argument is not finished at all.
