Grace Skogstad warns Alberta's referendum questions are too tangled to interpret clearly

As Albertans prepare to vote on 10 referendum questions October 19, a University of Toronto political scientist is flagging a fundamental problem: some questions ask two things at once, and the results will be nearly impossible to read with clarity.

Grace Skogstad, professor emeritus of political science at U of T, said question 4 is the most obvious culprit. It asks voters whether they support the Alberta government charging fees for non-permanent residents to access healthcare and education systems. That's two separate policies bundled into one question, Skogstad noted—and a yes vote doesn't tell you whether Albertans support one, both, or either.

Skogstad also raised doubts about question 7, which asks voters if they support Alberta working with other provincial governments to abolish the Senate. She pointed out a procedural obstacle: "The Senate has veto over whether it will be abolished." Alberta's government "doesn't have full authority to act" on some of the constitutional questions either, she added.

Beyond the mechanical problems, Skogstad said the referendum itself is an unusual choice for this kind of grievance. Separation movements typically coalesce around national grievances—Quebec's language and culture, for example. Alberta's discontent is rooted in economic grievances, which "are matters to be settled by public policy," Skogstad said. Holding a referendum "is very disruptive," she added. "You've got the province being divided amongst itself."

Skogstad said the results will be "difficult to interpret, in my view," leaving Premier Danielle Smith and federal officials unclear about what voters actually endorsed.