Leading proponent of Alberta Independence predicts provincial referendum in 2025

Jeffrey Rath

Over one third of Albertans already support Independence from Ottawa

You know that Alberta is making progress towards an independence referendum in 2025 when both Alberta Premier Danielle Smith and Alberta Communist Leader Naheed Nenshi are discussing, considering, or teasing an Alberta Independence Referendum to be held in 2025.

This level of agreement between the two party leaders on the need for an independence referendum is demonstrative of the degree to which Alberta conversations on independence from Canada have taken hold around family dinner tables and in the pubs and community halls of the Commonwealth of Alberta.

Independent Journalist Rachel Parker has recently commissioned a poll that has support for Alberta Independence at 37%. It is noteworthy that there is presently 37% popular support for independence WITHOUT Albertans being educated on the benefits of Independence from Canada. Some of these benefits include:

60,000,000,000.00 (60 BILLION) dollars a year would remain in Alberta as opposed to being sent to Ottawa for “redistribution” to the mismanaged provinces of Canada.
NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX
NO CARBON TAX
NO CAPITAL GAINS TAX
NO GST
NO EXCISE TAX
NO MORE FEDERAL GUN GRABS
NO MORE FEDERAL OVER REGULATION OF SPEECH, INTERNET COMMUNICATION, AGRICULTURE, TRAVEL, HEALTH, RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, OR OTHER MATTERS OF CONCERN TO ALBERTANS.
NO MORE MISGOVERNANCE BY FEDERAL POLITICIANS ELECTED BY MONTREAL AND TORONTO TO RULE ALBERTA.

The day Alberta declares independence Alberta’s GDP per capita would place Alberta as the the NUMBER ONE COUNTRY IN THE WORLD on the measure of GDP per capita. The end of all federal taxation and regulation will prompt an economic boom and overnight will increase the disposable income of every Albertan by at LEAST 35%.

This column is a call to action. Every Albertan fed up with having our rulers chosen by Toronto and Montreal need to forward this column to Danielle Smith and request that she pass the ALBERTA INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM ACT.

THE ALBERTA INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM ACT

Whereas successive Canadian Federal Governments have exceeded their constitutional jurisdiction through property seizures, excessive taxation and natural resource regulation aimed at the destruction of Alberta’s autonomy and sovereignty; and

Whereas the Government of Alberta has been mandated by referendum to bring an end to the payment of “equalization” dollars to provinces of Canada who continually mismanage their public finances;

The Alberta Legislature hereby enacts The Alberta Independence Referendum Act.

1. Within 6 months of every Canadian Federal Election the Government of Alberta shall call a provincial referendum on the Independence of Alberta from Canada.

2. The referendum question shall take the following form:

“Further to the over taxation and unconstitutional overreach of successive Governments of Canada aimed at harming the sovereign citizens of Alberta for the political benefit of successive governments of Canada, The Citizens of Alberta vote to remove Alberta from the Canadian Federation and form an Independent Commonwealth of Alberta.”

3. In furtherance of this legislation all Federal and Provincial taxes in Alberta shall be collected by the Government of Alberta.

4. Only such proportion of such taxes deemed by the government of Alberta to be for the common benefit of the Citizens of Alberta shall be remitted to the Government of Canada.

BY requiring a referendum following every Canadian Federal Election politicians pandering for votes from the idiots that think taxes can change the weather would have to consider the consequences of running on platforms that are based on the continued maldistribution of Alberta’s wealth.

Albertans need to understand that they would prosper by voting to confirm Alberta Independence from greedy politicians in Quebec and Ontario who claim to represent the failed colonial state of “Canada”.

An Alberta Dollar backed by the 3rd largest energy reserves in the world and the wealth of the Alberta Economy would be a stable currency with far greater value than the debt mired Canadian fiat currency.

Alberta Pensioners would see increased pension rates as Alberta could self fund Alberta Pensions out of the 60 BILLION no longer being siphoned out of Alberta by Quebec and Ontario until the 300 BILLION plus share of the Canada Pension plan was repatriated to Alberta.

Albertans need to write to Premier Smith and require her to pass the ALBERTA INDEPENDENCE REFERENDUM ACT prior to the expiry of the writ period for the next Federal Election. Regardless of whether a Conman Carney Liberal Government is elected or a Poilievre Conservative Government is elected, Federal Politicians need to be put on notice that they will continue to ignore or misgovern Alberta at their peril. By requiring an independence referendum following every Federal Election Alberta Voters will have the option of opting out of being governed by who ever Montreal and Toronto voters choose to misgovern Alberta against the will of the Citizens of Alberta.

There is no good reason or excuse for not creating a mechanism that will allow Albertans to put both the Government of Canada and the Government of Alberta on notice of their continued desire to remain in Canada following every Federal Election.

Legislation requiring a vote on independence following every federal election would give Danielle Smith and future leaders the leverage that they need to protect Alberta from globalists like Carney. Albertans should also beware that Pierre Poilievre has made it clear that a Conservative government will not stop Alberta wealth transfers to Quebec or stop ripping off Albertans for the benefit of the Laurentian Elite.

Remember, it’s all fun and games until someone loses a province.

Jeffrey R.W. Rath

Related Topics:AlbertaIndependence AlbertaIndependenseReferendum JeffreyRath

Up Next

Federal emissions plan will cost Albertans dearly

Don't Miss

Prime Minister Carney needs to clearly state his position on the federal emissions cap: Premier Smith

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta Precipitation Update

Crime / 5 hours ago

How the CCP’s United Front Turned Canada’s Legal Cannabis Market into a Global Narcotics Brokerage Network

International / 12 hours ago

First American pontiff says ‘build bridges’ to peace

Alberta

Alberta Precipitation Update

Published on May 9, 2025

Todayville

William’s Substack

William Lacey

Below are my updated charts through April 2025 along with the cumulative data starting in October 2024. As you can see, central and southern Alberta are trending quite dry, while the north appears to be faring much better. However, even there, the devil is in the details. For instance, in Grande Prairie the overall precipitation level appears to be “normal”, yet in April it was bone dry and talking with someone who was recently there, they described it as a dust bowl. In short, some rainfall would be helpful. These next 3 months are fairly critical.

Thanks for reading William’s Substack!

Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Pledge your support

Alberta

Alberta’s move to ‘activity-based funding’ will improve health care despite naysayer claims

Published on May 8, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail

After the Smith government recently announced its shift to a new approach for funding hospitals, known as “activity-based funding” (ABF), defenders of the status quo in Alberta were quick to argue ABF will not improve health care in the province. Their claims are simply incorrect. In reality, based on the experiences of other better-performing universal health-care systems, ABF will help reduce wait times for Alberta patients and provide better value-for-money for taxpayers.

First, it’s important to understand Alberta is not breaking new ground with this approach. Other developed countries shifted to the ABF model starting in the early 1990s.

Indeed, after years of paying their hospitals a lump-sum annual budget for surgical care (like Alberta currently), other countries with universal health care recognized this form of payment encouraged hospitals to deliver fewer services by turning each patient into a cost to be minimized. The shift to ABF, which compensates hospitals for the actual services they provide, flips the script—hospitals in these countries now see patients as a source of revenue.

In fact, in many universal health-care countries, these reforms began so long ago that some are now on their second or even third generation of ABF, incorporating further innovations to encourage an even greater focus on quality.

For example, in Sweden in the early 1990s, counties that embraced ABF enjoyed a potential cost savings of 13 per cent over non-reforming counties that stuck with budgets. In Stockholm, one study measured an 11 per cent increase in hospital activity overall alongside a 1 per cent decrease in costs following the introduction of ABF. Moreover, according to the study, ABF did not reduce access for older patients or patients with more complex conditions. In England, the shift to ABF in the early to mid-2000s helped increase hospital activity and reduce the cost of care per patient, also without negatively affecting quality of care.

Multi-national studies on the shift to ABF have repeatedly shown increases in the volume of care provided, reduced costs per admission, and (perhaps most importantly for Albertans) shorter wait times. Studies have also shown ABF may lead to improved quality and access to advanced medical technology for patients.

Clearly, the naysayers who claim that ABF is some sort of new or untested reform, or that Albertans are heading down an unknown path with unmanageable and unexpected risks, are at the very least uninformed.

And what of those theoretical drawbacks?

Some critics claim that ABF may encourage faster discharges of patients to reduce costs. But they fail to note this theoretical drawback also exists under the current system where discharging higher-cost patients earlier can reduce the drain on hospital budgets. And crucially, other countries have implemented policies to prevent these types of theoretical drawbacks under ABF, which can inform Alberta’s approach from the start.

Critics also argue that competition between private clinics, or even between clinics and hospitals, is somehow a bad thing. But all of the developed world’s top performing universal health-care systems, with the best outcomes and shortest wait times, include a blend of both public and private care. No one has done it with the naysayers’ fixation on government provision.

And finally, some critics claim that, under ABF, private clinics will simply focus on less-complex procedures for less-complex patients to achieve greater profit, leaving public hospitals to perform more complex and thus costly surgeries. But in fact, private clinics alleviate pressure on the public system, allowing hospitals to dedicate their sophisticated resources to complex cases. To be sure, the government must ensure that complex procedures—no matter where they are performed—must always receive appropriate levels of funding and similarly that less-complex procedures are also appropriately funded. But again, the vast and lengthy experience with ABF in other universal health-care countries can help inform Alberta’s approach, which could then serve as an example for other provinces.

Alberta’s health-care system simply does not deliver for patients, with its painfully long wait times and poor access to physicians and services—despite its massive price tag. With its planned shift to activity-based funding, the province has embarked on a path to better health care, despite any false claims from the naysayers. Now it’s crucial for the Smith government to learn from the experiences of others and get this critical reform right.