On October 19, Albertans face a constitutional question:
"Should Alberta remain a province of Canada or should the Government of Alberta commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada?"
Order in Council 110/2026 (March 31, 2026)
The question runs to a single long sentence. Read clause by clause, it does five things.
The text frames the first option as the constitutional status quo. Under the Constitution Act, 1867 and the Constitution Act, 1982, Alberta is a province of Canada and remains so unless a constitutional amendment changes that status. A vote to "remain" does not foreclose any future referendum on this or any related question; it simply does not direct any new process to start.
The text directs the Government of Alberta to begin a legal process. It does not itself begin anything. The direction operates as a political mandate, given binding legal effect only through subsequent legislative or executive action by the province.
Which constitutional provisions are engaged depends on what changes are sought. The amending procedures that would apply are not the Section 45 procedure (which concerns amending a province's own internal constitution, not the constitutional status of the province itself) but the general amending procedure (Section 38, the 7/50 rule) and the unanimity procedure (Section 41) where matters listed in that section are touched. The Secession Reference framework also applies to any future binding separation referendum.
A binding provincial referendum is one whose result the province has, by statute, committed itself to implement. Quebec's Referendum Act, R.S.Q., c. C-64.1 is the leading provincial precedent for a binding referendum framework. The Clarity Act overlay applies federally: the House of Commons must assess whether the question is clear and whether any majority is clear before the federal negotiation obligation is triggered.
The October 19 vote is about whether to set up a future separation referendum. It is not itself a separation vote. Even a clear majority to "commence" would not, in itself, separate Alberta from Canada; it would only direct the province to begin organizing a subsequent binding referendum on separation.
Alberta remains a province of Canada under the existing constitutional arrangements. No new legal process begins as a result of this vote.
Smith's nine policy questions on the same ballot (immigration, fiscal balance, paramountcy, and the others) are unaffected. Each is counted separately and reported separately by Elections Alberta.
A "remain" majority does not foreclose any future referendum on independence or on related questions. The provincial legislature retains the authority to hold further referenda.
The Government of Alberta is directed to begin a legal process. This is not separation. It is not even a separation vote yet. It is a political mandate from the electorate to organize the steps required for a future binding referendum on separation.
The expected next steps would include: drafting binding-referendum legislation that meets provincial requirements, satisfying federal Clarity Act clarity requirements for both the question and the threshold of a majority, and holding a future binding referendum on separation.
Any future binding separation referendum would itself take months to organize. A clear majority on a clear question at that subsequent vote would then engage the negotiation obligation described in the Secession Reference. The October 19 vote does not itself engage that obligation.
Three sources of authority govern what a "commence" majority could lead to, and what a future binding separation referendum would engage.
The amending procedures separation would actually engage. Section 38 is the general procedure (the "7/50 rule"): resolutions of the Senate, the House of Commons, and the legislative assemblies of at least two-thirds of the provinces with at least 50 percent of the population. Section 41 requires unanimity for specified matters, including the office of the Queen, the Governor General, the Lieutenant Governor of a province, and the right of a province to representation in the House of Commons not less than its number of senators.
"An amendment to the Constitution of Canada may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada where so authorized by (a) resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons; and (b) resolutions of the legislative assemblies of at least two-thirds of the provinces that have, in the aggregate, according to the then latest general census, at least fifty per cent of the population of all the provinces."
Section 38(1), Constitution Act, 1982
The Supreme Court of Canada held unanimously that a clear majority on a clear question creates a reciprocal obligation on all parties to Confederation to negotiate constitutional changes in good faith. That obligation does not arise from the October 19 vote itself. It would arise from any subsequent binding separation referendum that meets the clarity threshold.
"The clear repudiation of the existing constitutional order and the clear expression of the desire to pursue secession by the population of a province would give rise to a reciprocal obligation on all parties to Confederation to negotiate constitutional changes to respond to that desire."
Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 SCR 217, para. 88
Federal legislation giving effect to the Secession Reference. It explicitly affirms every province's right to consult its population by referendum and to formulate the question. It also assigns the House of Commons the role of assessing whether the question and the majority are clear before federal negotiation obligations attach.
"The government of any province of Canada is entitled to consult its population by referendum on any issue and is entitled to formulate the wording of its referendum question."
Clarity Act, S.C. 2000, c. 26, Preamble
The Alberta Constitution Project takes a position that Alberta should have its own constitution under Section 45 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and that Albertans (not any party, premier, or single drafter) must be the ones who develop it through open public engagement. The project does not push any specific vision of what that constitution should contain.
The project takes no position on how Albertans should vote on the October 19 question. That question concerns Alberta's relationship with Canada under the Sections 38 and 41 amending procedures, not the Section 45 provincial-constitution authority. The Section 45 work proceeds either way.
The project does affirm a point of law: a clear majority on a clear question creates the negotiation obligation described in the Secession Reference, para. 88.