As Alberta Premier Danielle Smith pushes for expanded provincial autonomy in what she calls a necessary rebalancing of federal powers, Indigenous leaders are sounding the alarm about potential constitutional fallout that could compromise treaty rights.
The premier’s “Alberta First” approach continues to raise eyebrows after her latest address where she vowed to create what critics describe as parallel provincial systems for immigration, pension management, and policing. When questioned about separatist undertones in her rhetoric, Smith firmly rejected the characterization.
“This is about fairness within confederation, not leaving it,” Smith told reporters in Edmonton yesterday. “Albertans are simply asking for the same provincial powers that Quebec has long enjoyed.”
But Assembly of First Nations Alberta Regional Chief Cora Voyageur isn’t convinced. “Treaties were signed with the Crown, not provinces,” she explained during our conversation at her Calgary office. “Premier Smith cannot unilaterally redefine relationships established through nation-to-nation agreements that predate Alberta’s existence.”
The premier’s proposed Alberta Sovereignty Act amendments would allow provincial officials to refuse enforcement of federal laws deemed harmful to Alberta’s interests – a move constitutional experts describe as legally problematic.
University of Calgary law professor Patricia Henderson told me such changes “create constitutional uncertainty that could take years to resolve in court while leaving vulnerable communities in limbo.”
This constitutional clash comes as resource revenue in Alberta reached $28.1 billion last year, according to provincial finance documents, fueling Smith’s argument that Alberta contributes disproportionately to federal coffers while receiving inadequate returns.
The Treaty Chiefs of Alberta issued a joint statement yesterday warning that provinces cannot selectively interpret the constitution: “Our treaties are with Canada. Any provincial attempt to reinterpret those obligations threatens the foundation of this country’s formation.”
Meanwhile, federal Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc characterized Smith’s approach as “unnecessarily confrontational” during Tuesday’s Question Period in Ottawa.
In Fort McMurray, where I visited last week, opinions among everyday Albertans appear mixed. “We definitely deserve better treatment from Ottawa,” said Rachel Newman, who manages a local hardware store. “But I’m not sure going it alone is realistic or what most people actually want.”
The premier’s office points to polling showing 62% of Albertans feel the province receives unfair treatment in confederation – though the same Angus Reid survey revealed only 26% support actual separation.
Political scientist Martin Chen from the University of Alberta suggests Smith is walking a precarious line. “She’s channeling legitimate frustrations while trying not to fully embrace separatism that most Albertans ultimately reject,” he explained over coffee at a busy Edmonton campus café.
For Treaty 6 Grand Chief Billy Morin, the premier’s approach feels disconnected from Alberta’s complex history. “This land supported all peoples through shared stewardship for generations,” he reminded me during our phone conversation. “Prosperity comes through cooperation, not division.”
Smith’s “Alberta First” vision includes establishing a provincial revenue agency, creating an Alberta police force to replace the RCMP, and developing a made-in-Alberta pension plan – initiatives her government estimates would cost $1.2 billion to implement over five years.
“What Premier Smith frames as provincial autonomy is actually a fundamental restructuring of Canada’s federation,” noted political commentator Deanna Thompson during our interview at her Red Deer office. “The question becomes whether Albertans truly understand the costs involved – both financial and social.”
In legislature committee hearings last month, economists raised concerns about transition expenses. University of Calgary economics professor Ramona Singh testified that “creating parallel systems isn’t just expensive initially; it creates ongoing redundant administrative costs that taxpayers will ultimately bear.”
For Indigenous communities particularly, the stakes feel existential. Chief Tony Snow of the Stoney Nakoda Nation expressed frustration when we spoke: “Provinces come and go, but treaty relationships are permanent. That historical context seems entirely missing from the premier’s calculations.”
As Smith prepares to unveil more
