Smith's Mean-Spirited Immigration Referendum Questions

We must start seeing the immigration referendum questions posed by the Smith-UCP government for what they are: bigoted, somewhat racist and mean-spirited. We need to reject them and rebuff the intent behind them because they are contrary to the mainstream values of most Albertans.

Immigration is a shared federal-provincial jurisdiction constitutionally. Under the principle of federal paramountcy, if there is a conflict between a provincial and federal position, the federal law prevails.

The federal government has exclusive jurisdiction to grant citizenship, issue visas, control borders, and address refugee and deportation matters. A province can pass laws to recruit, select and integrate immigrants into the local economy, but it can’t interfere with federal laws. As a result, many immigration matters operate under a system of federally negotiated immigration agreements with the provinces. For example, Alberta can select specific economic immigrants under a Provincial Nominee Program. The feds must still sign off on any security, medical, or other background clearances before granting permanent residency.

The UCP referendum question focuses on what are “friction” points in the shared immigration power structure. Mrs. Smith is asking for more provincial control over immigration “to more sustainable levels… prioritizing economic migration and giving Albertans priority on new employment opportunities.”

This is an attempt at political justification for the UCP government to challenge and pressure the federal government to rewrite existing bilateral agreements. There is nothing inherently wrong with that, but it doesn’t take a referendum vote to undertake such fed-prov negotiations. So why go the referendum route? It is appeasement of the Separatist agenda and is very separatist-supporting in its intent. That is what’s behind the first immigration question.

The second question seems to be fiscally motivated, but is that all? I seek a vote to mandate a UCP law that would deny some people access to healthcare, education, or other social services. Of course, that restriction would not apply to individuals with an “Alberta-approved immigration status.” The trickery behind this question is that it directly interferes with the exclusive federal jurisdiction over the approval of immigration status. The UCP wants to usurp that jurisdiction unto the province, which is contrary to the Constitution.

This referendum effort is an attempt to exclude temporary foreign workers, refugee claimants and asylum seekers. However, all healthcare costs for refugees and asylum seekers are already funded by the federal government, so what’s the issue? Primary and secondary education of their children is a shared fed-prov cost.

Temporary Foreign workers have full access to healthcare and education for their children while in Alberta, but they also pay taxes on any income earned there. Smith estimates the children of temporary foreign workers cost “roughly,” meaning there is no study to prove it, but the number thrown out is $600 million annually. The referendum question here suggests that temporary foreign workers pay “a reasonable fee” to enroll their children in education—about 150,000 temporary foreign workers were in Alberta at the peak in 2024. The federal government has drastically cut those numbers and is only allowing them to represent 5% of the national workforce by 2027, about six months away. It seems that most of the education expense problem Alberta is touting is now largely solved. So we don’t need this referendum question.

The other immigration referendum questions are about requiring a 12-month residency before any non-permanent resident can access public services, or charging a “reasonable fee” for access. This issue seems redundant with earlier similar questions. Again, how many people are we talking about, and why is there a 12-month residency requirement? The low-stream temporary foreign workers are paid below the current median wage for their work and only get a 1-year permit. So they would never gain access to any public services they may need while working in Alberta and paying taxes.

.