I think we're going to have an early election, Alberta

Danielle Smith and the UCP have made a big mess and there's only one way out.

Danielle Smith after winning the UCP leadership; Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press

With thanks to Danielle Smith and the unquestioning, sheep-like obedience of the UCP caucus, the separatists might be getting their referendum. They still have another 30 days to collect signatures but according to social media posts, they say they’ve managed to meet the bare minimum of 178,000 signatures in the same time Forever Canada managed 2.5 times more.

Now you see why they needed a handicap.

The separatist’s claim— which absolutely no one with any credibility can verify— comes just one week before Sturgeon Lake Cree Nation is set to ask a judge for an injunction on the collection of signatures for the separation referendum that another judge already ruled in December would likely violate constitutional rights of Treaty holders.

I would argue that it should register as a violation of the rights of every person in this province who has better things to do than chase fairytales of untold riches that will suddenly appear if only they go out of their way to cause extreme economic turmoil and uncertainty.

Yet, here we are, somehow at the mercy of the dumbest ideas to ever seep into the conspiracy-addled brains of our provincial leadership.

The same leadership that is still riding high in the polls with 48 to 50 per cent support, while their only real challengers hover around a distant 36 per cent.

That’s right; the only real challengers to this government— with their record spending on gawd only knows what because it certainly isn’t showing up in better public services— are poised to lose seats.

And that’s with the current electoral boundaries.

Since the UCP is “open” to adopting the “minority report” from their appointees to the Boundary Commission, it will almost guarantee the opposition lose seats— no matter what they’re polling at.

The “minority report” recommended changing electoral boundaries that would push more rural voters into urban districts so the party could reasonably hold onto power for generations. Because of course they did.

It’s undemocratic, unconstitutional, and not at all out of character for this governing party.

Early election?

Rumour has it that the Premier has been warned that she and her caucus have so thoroughly effed up by cowing to the separatists that they need to find a way out of the mess they’ve made.

Enter: Bill 23.

For starters, Bill 23 removes the obligation of the governing party to respond to a successful citizen-led initiative petition within a specified timeframe.

Second, it offers the governing party a “get out of separatist hell”-free card— if an early election is called.

As recently as a bare four months ago, the Premier denied she would stray from the “fixed election date” she already changed in 2024, but that was probably before some of her donors got wind of a separation referendum and began making some very angry phone calls.

In their third legislative amendments to the citizen-led initiative process, under Bill 23 (dropped Monday, March 30), the UCP added a clause regarding termination of the signature collection period for petitions (relevant sections in bold and Italics).

Prohibition re notices of intent and termination of process

1.11(1) An elector may not submit a notice of intent

(a) within the 12-month period immediately preceding the date fixed for the next general election under section 38.1(2) of the Election Act,

(b) within the period commencing with the issuance of the writs for a general election to be held on a date other than the date fixed under section 38.1(2) of the Election Act and ending at the end of election day for that election, or

(c) within the 12-month period immediately following the election day of the most recent general election.

(2) A notice of intent, application for the issuance of an initiative petition or initiative petition signing period that is in progress at the commencement of a period referred to in subsection (1)(a) or (b) is terminated.

(3) When an initiative petition signing period is terminated under this section,

(a) the initiative petition signing period ends,

(b) the initiative petition is unsuccessful,

(c) the initiative petition issued and the signature sheets originally provided under section 3(4) may not be used for obtaining further signatures,

(d) no person shall canvass for further signatures for the initiative petition,

(e) all signature sheets containing original signatures must be returned to the Chief Electoral Officer and all copies must be returned to the Chief Electoral Officer or destroyed, and

(f) the proponent must submit an affidavit to the Chief Electoral Officer confirming that all signature sheets containing original signatures have been returned and all copies have been returned or destroyed.

Back in February, the Premier announced that her own referendum questions targeting immigrants would be held on October 19, 2026. At the time, she said that any successful citizen-led petition questions would also be put to voters.

Bill 23 would cancel and deem unsuccessful each of the separatists and the Water not Coal supporters petitions, and prohibit them from filing another intent for 12 months after a general election as well.

It doesn’t get rid of the problem the UCP has, or will continue to have so long as the separatists are in control of the party, but it would secure their electoral power for another four or five years.

Of course, if they put the gerrymandered ridings to a vote in the legislature, where they have the majority vote, they will secure their electoral power for another generation or so.

What then?

My unpopular opinion

I’ve had many readers ask what they can do. While the answer to that is that you can campaign harder for the party you like, and donate, door knock, phone bank, and all of those very important things, if the UCP implements the gerrymandered electoral map and calls an election on them, it would take a lot for them to lose.

If the UCP maintains the support they have, even without a gerrymandered electoral map, it would take a lot for them to lose.

If the UCP tries to get out of the separatist referendum with an early election, the separatists will be mad. Will enough voters go to the Republicans? No.

Separatism isn’t that popular, even in rural. Weirdly, the gerrymandered ridings could also end up staving them off because there’s more urban voters in the mix. It’s a crapshoot, but we can probably safely say that this government would not have considered other possible outcomes to their preferred one.

The bottom line is that there is only one way to take down Danielle Smith and her destructive caucus if the UCP if they win again and it’s not at the doors; it’s in their house.

When people asked what they could do when Danielle Smith was running for leader of the UCP, I said: join the party and vote for someone else.

Many people declined because they decided their principles would somehow be offended by making sure she didn’t become Premier, or voting for someone less awful.

Some people thought the NDP’s chances would be better if Danielle Smith was Premier. They were probably correct. Unfortunately, it wasn’t enough.

People asked again, what could they do after the UCP won?

The answer was: join the party and show up to vote in her leadership review.

Danielle Smith managed 91.5 per cent approval from only 4,633 votes and remained leader.

People asked what could be done next?

The answer was: nothing. The only people in a position to remove her after that was her caucus.

People who aren’t happy with the direction of the United Conservative Party might have to join the party. They might have to organize and get 400 people to show up to a constituency association meeting to overtake the board, just like Take Back Alberta did.

I know it might offend people’s principles, but aside from moving someplace where the United Conservative Party and Danielle Smith aren’t your problem anymore, it will be the only option that exists.

You know what, though? A political party isn’t a static beast that never changes— it’s not the Bible.

Political parties are empty vessels that are reflective of the people who show up. They are vehicles to power— nothing more.

If you want to change a political party, you have to show up; and you have to bring friends.

Thanks to everyone who reads, shares, and becomes a free subscriber. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to support my work; to those who have, your support is greatly appreciated!