CANADA HAS RECENTLY projected strength and unity in response to pressure from the US. International observers may therefore be surprised to learn that the country is now facing a looming unity crisis.

Alberta premier Danielle Smith has announced that voters will go to the polls in October on whether the province should begin the legal process toward a future referendum on leaving Canada. Smith says she wants to resolve the issue democratically.

In response, Canadian prime minister Mark Carney called the vote a ‘dangerous bluff‘ and said that the federal government would review the question to see if it triggers the Clarity Act, under which parliament can decide if a provincial referendum question is clear before it goes to voters.

Albertans will be asked to vote on 10 questions, including on immigration and access to public services. The most contentious ballot will ask whether Alberta, in western Canada, should remain a province of Canada or whether its provincial government should begin the legal process required to hold a binding referendum on separation. Another proposal being put to voters will ask if Alberta should take greater control over borders to reduce immigration levels and prioritise economic migration.

Smith herself says she would vote for Alberta to remain in Canada, but said Albertans should decide the issues directly.

But that raises a broader question increasingly facing democracies worldwide: when divisive constitutional questions arise, is asking the public directly always the democratic thing to do? The answer is more complicated than we might assume.

Tensions have long simmered between Alberta, an oil-rich and politically conservative province, and Ottawa, mainly over energy and environmental policy.

An Albertan........

© TheJournal