If the central government wanted to stop separation referenda from occurring, it could do it quickly with a simple fix.
It’s called proportional representation.
Soon enough, me and my colleague Donal Gill will have a major article coming out on The Walrus about proportional representation. The gist? If people want Liberals to stop winning constantly, this is the only solution. If you’re left wing, if you’re right wing, the only solution to have real unity in this enormous country is to fix the electoral system.
We stood on the streets of Drumheller, the heart of the separatist movement. Battle River-Crowfoot is one of the top three most reliable conservative bastions in the country. They will vote conservative under any and all circumstances. Federally, provincially, they will vote conservative. It doesn’t matter who the leader is, it doesn’t matter what the policies are— they will elect conservatives.
When Pierre Poilievre lost his Ottawa seat in the 2025 election, he turned around and ran in Battle River-Crowfoot. He won easily.
Should Alberta Separate?
Jay and I stood outside of Vintage bar holding a sign that said “Should Alberta Separate?” The town was dead quiet. We didn’t think we’d get a single person to speak with us, but we thought we’d give it a shot nonetheless. Immediately, we caught some fish.
Two British people walked out of the bar. They’ve lived here for forty five years. They’re about as Canadian as you can get, but they have clear English accents.
For them, the question was simple. Yes, Alberta should leave the country. Why would they want to stay when taxes were so high? Their argument boiled down to “no taxation without representation.” I asked them if a better electoral system, with proportional representation, would fix their grievance. They said yes, but it would never happen in a million years.
They’re right.
A car drove past with an indigenous driver. I yelled the question at him. “Fuck no!” He yelled back. Another guy drove by. Same question. “Fuck yes!” He yelled back.
Linda walked out of the pharmacy, limping. Her leg had a brace on it to help her walk. In her hand she had a bag of painkillers. She asked us how we were doing. We told her we were journalists trying to find out what was up with the separatists in town, and if she thought people were truly separatists.
She explained that she was a pretty staunch conservative, but she didn’t find the discussion too bad. Some people wanted to separate, but most people didn’t in her opinion. She does think that Alberta has been mistreated though. She works in a correctional facility as a guard. To her shame, she didn’t injure her legs in an epic prison break or something fun like that.
“I tripped and fell while working,” she said, laughing. She left, and more people came by. We started speaking to them. Then Pete appeared.
Get outta here, boys
“You boys gotta leave,” he grumbled at us. “You can’t be in front of the bar.”
“Are you the owner?“ Jay asked.
“No. But you gotta leave. Can’t have people associating separatism with the bar. I’m no Liberal or anything though, Alberta needs to get the hell out, but you just can’t be here.”
Pete declined any association with the bar. Maybe he was the building’s landlord— we don’t know. But he certainly was no Liberal, and personally, he wants Alberta to separate. We asked him if it would be fine if Alberta was properly represented in the electoral system.
“Obviously. But it’ll never happen.”
We moved ten meters away to the other side of the road. We stood in front of the Shoppers Drug Mart (Pharmaprix) and did the exact same thing. Three people stopped. We interviewed them.
“I actually think western Canada should separate,” Teagan said. For her, the whole western half of the country isn’t represented, and should define their own destiny. “There’s no voice for Alberta in Ottawa.”
What if there was a different electoral system?
“Yep, that would be a really good thing.”
Would it be better than separation?
“Yep, I would say so.”
But she doesn’t believe it’ll ever happen. None of these people do. And for good reason. Because it probably won’t.
Canadian democracy
Canada is one of the least democratic “western democracies” in the world. We have good stability, and our systems are definitely lightly democratic, but it isn’t a system where average every day people can be involved. Donal believes in a committee based system where people help in shaping laws and systems. I don’t personally see this as realistic— I wrote an article about it.
I do think it’s realistic to change the electoral system. With the Liberals in power, it probably won’t happen. But it would be easy.
Canada is more “liberal” than it is “democratic.” These are political science terms. ”Liberal” means that a country follows the rule of law and emphasizes the rights of the individual— it often includes features such as the right to property and equality under the law. It requires that legal systems be able to be understood by all. “Democratic” means that the country participates in voting— or that power remains in the hands of “the people.” These two qualifiers are both on a spectrum. Hungary under Victor Orban was an “illiberal” democracy. Singapore is a de facto dictatorship, being essentially a one-party state, but it remains liberal since it respects human rights and the rule of law. These systems can be more democratic and less liberal, such as the United States where they vote on everything including sheriffs, judges, and a whole group of other subjects, but the rule of law is less emphasized in the country, particularly post-9/11. Meanwhile, Canada has become more liberal, but has remained relatively undemocratic. We vote during elections, and that’s about it. Other systems have greater mixes, such as Switzerland (a direct democracy) or the UK (less liberalism because they have no written constitution.)
Prior to Pierre Trudeau, Canada was extremely similar to the UK. The constitution was in Britain, and the Parliament could dictate human rights, since there was no charter In Canada enshrining these things. The repatriation of the constitution fundamentally changed Canada’s character, making the country more focused on individual rights and freedoms, although the notwithstanding clause was created to find a balance between liberalism and parliamentary supremacy.
The problem is that we call ourselves democracy, without having a representative system. We use essentially the same system that it’s been since John Diefenbaker. Canada has solidified its democratic institutions more, Trudeau strengthened some of the voting laws and has made it easy for people to vote, but representation in the country is still lacking. When a majority of Albertans vote conservative, their vote counts for less because of how the vote is concentrated. When NDP voters on the west coast wait for the election results in the evening, their vote often feels wasted since Ontario and Quebec will sometimes decide a majority before the western provinces even close their polling stations.
If the Carney government was serious about stopping separatist sentiments across the country, including Quebec, a proportional system would easily do it. Suddenly Albertans would have a voice in the parliament. The problem? It means the Liberals wouldn’t win for twenty years at a time.
The Liberals won’t change the system unless the threat of being completely destroyed in the polls exists. It seems that any party in power will avoid changing the system. Why change the system that gave you power?
The other day we wrote about cynicism becoming the dominant political culture in Canada. Many people feel cynical about democratic systems. Strengthening the system will not create a paradise of perfect unity in the country.
But at least it could make people feel like their vote matters for once.