There’s a strange contradiction in how Alberta independence is criticized.
When people are criticizing Canada, we often hear that treaties were signed under duress, that Canada is a colonial project, and that its authority over the land is illegitimate.
But the moment Alberta talks about independence, the argument suddenly changes. Now the treaties are described as sacred, permanently binding, and something that must prevent Alberta from ever leaving Canada.
Those arguments pull in opposite directions.
Either the treaties are illegitimate colonial impositions, or they are binding agreements that define relationships between governments.
They can’t logically be both at the same time.
Yet despite completely different premises, the political conclusion never changes:
Alberta must remain in Canada.
That contradiction is worth thinking about — especially now.
With the Alberta independence petition likely collecting well over the required signatures, a referendum is looking increasingly likely. That means Alberta may soon face one of the most important political conversations in its history.
And that conversation must include Indigenous nations in Alberta.
Three questions are worth discussing:
1️⃣ Could independence reset the relationship?
Treaties were originally signed nation-to-nation with the Crown. If Alberta became independent, could that create an opportunity to renegotiate how those agreements are implemented — with Indigenous nations having a stronger role in shaping the relationship going forward?
2️⃣ Could decisions made closer to home work better than federal bureaucracy?
Right now many Indigenous programs are controlled by federal departments in Ottawa. Would governance closer to the communities affected allow faster solutions for housing, infrastructure, and economic development?
3️⃣ Could Alberta’s resource economy create stronger Indigenous partnerships?
Many Indigenous communities in Alberta are already equity partners in major energy and infrastructure projects. If Alberta had full control of its economic policy, could that expand Indigenous ownership, revenue sharing, and long-term prosperity?
But there’s an even bigger possibility.
If Alberta ever chooses independence, it would also be a chance to rethink the system itself.
Canada’s current framework was built in a very different era, and many people — Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike — feel it has failed to deliver fairness, accountability, or lasting prosperity for everyone.
A constitutional reset could be an opportunity to sit down together and ask a bigger question:
What would a truly fair system look like if we designed it today?
One built on real partnership.
One that respects Indigenous self-determination.
One that promotes economic opportunity.
One that protects freedom and prosperity for everyone who calls Alberta home.
If a referendum happens, Indigenous nations shouldn’t just be spectators in that discussion.
They should be partners in shaping what Alberta’s future looks like.