The Current - Judge quashes Alberta separation petition

Episode Date: May 14, 2026

An Alberta judge struck down a separatist petition after several First Nations challenged it in court. The petition would have put the question of succession to a referendum. Host of the CBC podcast West of Centre and the radio show Alberta at Noon, Kathleen Petty on what could come next for Alberta and why Danielle Smith has taken issue with the decision.

Does it feel like the busyness of life makes it impossible to find any time for yourself? I'm Annie Bender, a producer at Ideas, a podcast where we explore all kinds of ideas that shape our world. We're not a self-help podcast, but we do believe in slowing down so you can reclaim your time to enjoy award-winning storytelling. Think of ideas as self-care for the curious mind. Find and follow wherever you get your podcasts. This is a CBC podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway, and this is the current podcast. Thank you very, very much, everybody.

This is historic in Alberta history. This is the first step to the next step. We've gotten by round three. Now we're in the Stanley Cup final. And away we go. Thank you very much. Well, that was last week as a group in support of an independent in Alberta delivered a petition with 300,000 plus signatures supporting their cause.

Yesterday, an Alberta judge struck down that separatist petition. Several First Nations had challenged the petition in court, and now a Superior Court judge says it shouldn't have been issued in the first place. Kathleen Petty is the host of the CBC podcast West of Center and CBC Radio's Alberta at noon. She's in Calgary. Kathleen, good morning. Good morning, man. Is this petition for an independence vote dead in the water?

No, I wouldn't go that far. We'll have to see what the Premier decides to do with this. Certainly, from a legal point of view, she feels that she can appeal this. The separatists feel they can appeal this. But the other route that the separatists are arguing for at this point is that she just go forward and have the government put forward a referendum on separation to essentially bypass this ruling so that there's more certainty that it will be on a ballot on October. 19th. What is yesterday's court decision, and we'll get to what the Premier may or may not do, but what yesterday's court decision actually say? Essentially what Justice Leonard said was that the separatist petition should have triggered a duty to consult. So consultations with First Nations. And it had to happen before a process that could trigger a binding referendum. She said it was just a matter of logic and common sense because it will have an impact on treaty seven and eight. And and that a requirement to implement succession with a prior involvement of First Nations has the potential to adversely affect treaty rights. And so how are people within that movement who were behind that petition who gathered those signatures?

How are they reacting to this? Well, their reaction is in part what I just mentioned to you, that they feel that the government now has an obligation to make sure that this referendum goes forward. but further, they are going to appeal the decision, but appeals don't happen in a minute, Matt, right? That can take time. And time is getting short. October 19th is actually not that far away. And they argue that the Premier, in many respects, has essentially guaranteed them that there would be a referendum on secession in October. And so she has to figure out a way to make that happen. And further, they're talking about getting.

those who support their side who were in their camp to go out and get memberships in the UCP so they can, you know, have even more influence anticipating an AGM in November. But of course, that would be after October 19th. Was this ruling expected? Was it a surprise with what Justice Leonard said? I don't know that it was, honestly, because let's not forget, there's, there have been two rulings on this, because there was an initial ruling of the first question that, state-free Alberta had put forward, and the chief electoral officer had referred it to the court, and the court determined at that time it was unconstitutional that First Nations as founding partners and the creation of Alberta cannot be ignored or bypassed. So then what happened was the legislation was changed so that a question didn't have to meet the test of

being constitutional, and another question was then put forward and then pursued. So this essentially is the second court ruling on this question of whether a question that could be deemed unconstitutional can be put forward in a referendum in this manner, like one that would contravene the duty to consult and the rights of First Nations. So yesterday the Premier said these are her words. We believe this decision is incorrect in law and anti-democratic. What is your sense as to what she means by anti-democratic? Well, I mean, some people have suggested that it's just the fact that a judge has made this ruling. But I actually think my sense of it is she is a big believer in her says so repeatedly, Matt, that she believes in direct democracy. And that she believes that the people of this province, given that they've approved two petitions now in terms of signing them, both Forever Canadian, with over 400.

thousand signatures and the stay free Alberta petition with over 300,000 signatures, suggest that there are 700,000 Albertans plus that want a chance to vote on this question of Alberta's place in Confederation and that she wants a permissive kind of structure so that people have the opportunity to express their will and that it doesn't obligate the Premier to necessarily do anything at the conclusion of that, but that the question should. should be allowed to be asked so Albertans can have their say. She says that she will appeal this decision. And to your point, she has also been asked by those who are calling for separation,

or at the very least calling for the referendum, that she essentially put the question on the ballot for the referendum in October. When I spoke with the Premier in Calgary, she would not be drawn on that issue. But is your sense that she could do that, that she could say this court ruling is this court ruling, But to your point around we want direct representation and people to have a vote and a say that we're just going to put this out to the people. Well, I can't imagine.

I don't know how quickly the appeal process can happen. And this has to be settled pretty quickly, given the timeline. And she certainly didn't rule it out at her news conference yesterday, Matt. She didn't say she would, but she most certainly didn't say she wouldn't. what she did say was that she's going to have a discussion with her cabinet and caucus. This is the last day of the spring sitting, by the way, which is also sort of interesting in terms of the timing and the context around this, but she is going to meet with them to discuss options. And I don't think, you know, you can bet on her not choosing that option if she feels that that is the best course for her because there is a lot of pressure on her, as you know, you've seen the polling that. among those who vote UCP in the polling that we have from Janet Brown,

57% support separatism. And then, of course, there's the membership of the UCP. And then there's drive to increase that membership among dedicated about separatists. And so what is she up against? One of the things I asked her was whether she's, you know, concerned about becoming the next Jason Kenney, who was tossed out of the party by his own members because they believed that he was not far enough to their side.

Is she worried about that, do you think? Well, I think she should be because that is certainly the threat. I mean, it depends on who you're listening to. There are a number of voices in the separatist movement. So even though a lot of people sort of look to Mitch Sylvester as the head of Stay Free Alberta, there is, you know, there's also Jeffrey Roth and there are other voices in the separatist movement. They're sort of, you know, almost a circular firing squad right now because they all seem to be sort of going off in different directions on what the path forward is. but certainly that threat has been very evident and vocal,

even before this ruling, but especially now. Beyond politics, how tense are things among all of these different groups that have a stake in the future of Alberta and Confederation? Well, I mean, it is really a high pressure situation for anyone involved in politics, obviously, because, you know, there is always tension around the idea, that you would have a sort of an active and fervent discussion about separating from the country. And that has been the focus in this province for a considerable length of time.

And we've got a premier who has advocated for the, at least ability to vote on this. And I do have to wonder about the pressure at the federal level as well, Matt, because it's, you know, it's going to be an interesting week. It's sort of, you know, as the old adage goes, the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. And that's all sort of coming together this week, because let's not forget what we are expecting Friday, which is a deal on the carbon pricing aspect of the memorandum of understanding, which is all part of the path, presumably, to a new pipeline to the Northwest Coast. And so one of the things I'm going to be listening very closely for is what is Mark Carney going to say that availability? As much as there will be questions on carbon pricing, I suspect a lot of them are going to be about this. Well, and you wonder, just the last point on this is what that means for the prime minister and for that MOU.

In some ways, the premier had said, I'm paraphrasing, but this was a test as to whether the country worked in some ways. Yes, totally. I mean, it is a test, and she has been holding this up as an example of that she can make the country work and that you can have a sovereign Alberta and Saudi United Canada. So all of that remains, but it does not change the pressure from the separatists because, you know, the thing to point out is the separatists are not, you know, huge flag-waving fans of the MOU in the first place. So they reject that as being sort of an example of how Canada can work. They have concluded it doesn't work, MOU or not. This is quite a story, and it changes day by day. And no better person to talk to about it than you. Kathleen, thanks for this.

Always a pleasure, Matt. Thanks. Kathleen Patty, the host of CBC's podcast West of Center and CBC Radio's Alberta at noon. This has been the current podcast. You can hear our show Monday to Friday on CBC Radio 1 at 8.30 a.m. at all time zones. You can also listen online. at CBC.ca.ca slash the current or on the CBC Listen app or wherever you get your podcasts.

My name is Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca.ca slash podcasts.