What Could Alberta’s Referendum Mean for Women?
Alberta's upcoming referendum includes ten questions, encompassing immigration, access to public services, voting requirements, the courts, federal-provincial relations, and Alberta’s future constitutional relationship with Canada.
At first glance, many of these questions may not appear to have much to do with women. However, policies that appear gender-neutral on paper do not always have gender-neutral effects. Women's experiences with immigration, employment, caregiving, public services, political participation and economic security can mean that changes to government policy affect women differently.
Looking at the referendum through a gender-based lens doesn't mean telling Albertans how they should vote. Instead, it means asking a few additional questions: Who will be most affected? Who has the resources to adapt to change? Who carries the cost when the public supports change? And whose voices are represented in the decisions being made?
Immigration and Precarious Status
Several of the referendum proposals focus on immigration and access to provincial programs for people with non-permanent immigration status.
Questions 1 to 4 would give Alberta greater control over immigration, reduce immigration to what the province considers more sustainable levels, prioritize economic migration, and give Albertans priority for new employment opportunities. This raises an important question about which workers and occupations Alberta would prioritize.
Women are heavily represented in sectors such as health care, education, social services, and other care-related occupations, and immigrant women make up an important part of Alberta's workforce in these areas. Changes to immigration policy could therefore affect both women seeking to immigrate to Alberta and the workforce that provides essential services to Albertans. The gendered implications are not only about who is allowed to come to Alberta, but also about who is available to provide the care and services Albertans rely on.
Questions 3 and 4 specifically would restrict access to provincially funded programs for certain people with non-permanent immigration status, introduce a 12-month waiting period before some people could access social supports, and allow Alberta to charge fees or premiums for health care and education.
For women with precarious immigration status, these changes could have particularly significant consequences. Immigration status can already create barriers to accessing health and social services, and those barriers can be compounded by financial insecurity, caregiving responsibilities, language barriers, or dependence on a partner.
Reducing access to public supports can shift responsibility from governments to individuals and families. As women continue to perform a disproportionate share of unpaid caregiving, those shifts can have particular implications for women's time, employment and financial security. At a broader level, this can affect women's ability to participate fully in the workforce, the economy and public life, making access to public supports an issue of gender equality as well as individual well-being.
This becomes particularly important in situations involving family violence, housing insecurity or unemployment. For example, a woman who is financially dependent on a partner may have fewer options to absorb a loss of income or social support than someone with stable employment and independent income. In these circumstances, immigration status can interact with gender, income and family responsibilities in ways that make the practical effects of a policy different from its intended or stated purpose.
The question is therefore not simply whether these policies would apply equally to men and women. It is whether women and men are equally positioned to navigate the consequences of those policies.
Access to Justice and Political Representation
Question 5 would require voters to provide proof of Canadian citizenship when voting in an Alberta provincial election.
Canadian citizenship is already required to vote in Alberta. The proposed change would instead add a documentary proof-of-citizenship requirement to the voting process.
That distinction matters because requiring additional proof of citizenship could complicate the voting process for some eligible voters, particularly those whose documents are missing, outdated, or do not match.
For instance, women who change their surnames after marriage can have different names on different official documents. A birth certificate or citizenship document may carry a former surname, while a driver's licence or other current identification uses a different surname.
Recent experiences with Alberta’s newly implemented 3-in-1 identification cards provide a useful example. Married women reported difficulties when their documents listed different surnames, and they were required to provide additional documentation, such as a marriage certificate, to connect the two identities.
This does not mean that married women would be unable to vote. Rather, differences between names on official documents could mean that some voters face additional steps or documentation requirements to verify their eligibility.
Additionally, Questions 6 and 7 would seek constitutional changes to allow the provincial government to appoint provincial court justices and to abolish the Senate.
Changes to the provincial court justice appointment process raise questions about representation and access to justice. Women interact with the justice system in areas including family law, child custody, sexual violence and intimate-partner violence, making the composition and diversity of the judiciary an important consideration.
The Senate is currently made up of 105 appointed members. Senators are formally appointed by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister, with the current process involving an independent advisory board that provides non-binding recommendations. Senators do not run in elections and generally serve until age 75.
Appointed senators can contribute to the representation of women and other groups that have historically been underrepresented in elected politics. Removing the Senate would fundamentally change Canada's political institutions, raising a broader question: what happens to women's representation when an entire political institution is removed?
Federalism
Several of the referendum proposals are ultimately about which order of government gets to make decisions.
Question 8 would seek a constitutional amendment allowing provinces to opt out of federal programs in areas such as health care, education, and social services while retaining associated federal funding. Question 9 would give provincial laws greater priority when they conflict with federal laws in areas of provincial or shared jurisdiction.
Greater provincial flexibility could allow Alberta to design programs around its own priorities. At the same time, it could change the role that national standards, federal funding conditions and intergovernmental agreements play in the delivery of services.
This matters for women because governments at both levels currently fund programs that address issues disproportionately affecting women, including child care, housing and gender-based violence. For example, Alberta and Canada have agreements addressing childcare affordability, including a one-year extension of all three agreements signed in December 2025. Alberta also administers federal-provincial housing funding that includes support for survivors of gender-based violence.
Greater provincial autonomy could therefore create opportunities for Alberta to develop programs that better reflect local priorities. It could also mean that federal funding conditions or accountability mechanisms play a different role in how those programs are delivered.
The broader question is not whether one level of government is inherently better positioned to support women. Rather, it is what happens when responsibility and decision-making authority shift between governments.
If Alberta assumes greater authority over health care, social services or other areas, the province would have greater ability to shape policies affecting women, and greater responsibility for the outcomes of those decisions.
And then there is independence…
The referendum also asks Albertans to choose between remaining a province of Canada and directing the Government of Alberta to begin the process required to pursue separation from Canada. Unlike the other nine referendum questions, this question is not presented as a “yes” or “no” question. Instead, voters will choose between two options:
Alberta should remain a province of Canada; or
The Government of Alberta should commence the legal process required to hold a future binding referendum on whether Alberta should separate from Canada.
Choosing the second option would not mean that Alberta would immediately separate from Canada or become an independent country. It would instead direct the provincial government to begin the legal and constitutional process required to hold a future binding referendum on separation.
For women, one area to consider is financial security. A September 2026 report from the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy examined two hypothetical scenarios for separation. This report, commissioned by the Alberta government, estimated that establishing a new country could cost between $50 billion and $170 billion over the first five years, depending in part on how negotiations with Canada unfold. The report considered costs associated with replacing federal functions, infrastructure, staffing, and Alberta's potential share of federal debt.
These changes would not necessarily affect all Albertans in the same way. For example, changes to taxation, government spending, employment and income supports, or the cost and availability of public programs could have greater consequences for people with lower incomes or less financial flexibility.
Women are more likely to experience periods of reduced or interrupted paid employment because of caregiving and, over the course of a lifetime, can have lower cumulative earnings as a result. This means that changes to financial systems could have a different impact on women's ability to build savings, maintain employment, and prepare for retirement, particularly for women who already have less financial flexibility.
The School of Public Policy’s report also considers changes to government expenditures and the replacement of federal programs and functions. From a gendered perspective, this raises questions about what happens if the cost, availability, or structure of public programs changes.
Women tend to rely on public services more than men, while also making up a large share of the workforce providing those services. This means that changes to public services can affect women as both the providers of and the recipients of said services.
Additionally, questions of citizenship and immigration would also form part of any transition. An independent Alberta would need to establish its own rules and systems for citizenship, immigration and mobility, while negotiating how existing legal statuses and rights would be handled. The effects could differ for women depending on their immigration status, family circumstances and access to public services.
These potential effects are not concrete predictions about what Alberta’s separation would mean for women. The School of Public Policy’s report examines a range of scenarios because the eventual outcome would depend on negotiations, policy decisions and other factors that cannot be known in advance. The report itself focuses on the economic and fiscal implications of separation; applying a gendered lens means considering how those changes could interact with the different economic and caregiving circumstances experienced by women and men.
Considerations
The referendum questions are broad, and their potential effects on women vary considerably. Some proposals have a relatively direct connection to women's experiences, particularly those involving immigration, health care, and social supports. Others are more indirect, raising questions about political representation, judicial diversity and who has the authority to make decisions about public programs.
A gender-based analysis does not mean assuming that a particular policy or referendum outcome will automatically be good or bad for women. It means recognizing that equal treatment does not always produce equal outcomes.
For women, the most important questions may ultimately be:
Who has access?
Who makes the decisions?
Who carries the cost?
And whose voices are included in shaping what comes next?
As Albertans consider the referendum, looking at these questions through a gendered lens can help ensure that women's experiences are part of the conversation, because women are affected by every level of government and every major change to the systems that shape our communities.
Voter Information
Alberta’s referendum will take place on October 19, 2026. Questions 1–9 will ask voters to mark “yes” or “no,” while Question 10 will ask voters to choose between two options.
To vote in the referendum, you must be a Canadian citizen, at least 18 years old, and ordinarily reside in Alberta. Voters will also need to provide identification to vote, subject to the identification and attestation rules set out by Elections Alberta.
Advance voting will take place from October 13 through October 17.
For the most up-to-date information on voter eligibility, registration, identification requirements, voting locations, and voting options, visit Elections Alberta.