Why Alberta Keeps Talking About Separation
From prairie populism and Bible Bill Aberhart to oil booms, equalization, and Ottawa’s climate agenda, Alberta’s flirtation with going it alone has deep roots — but the consequences would be profound.
I’ve lived and worked in Alberta long enough to know that the idea of going it alone — cutting ties with Ottawa and declaring ourselves sovereign — never fully dies here. It rises and falls with the price of oil, the state of the economy, and the federal government’s willingness (or unwillingness) to listen to us. Right now, as former PM Trudeau’s climate policies continue to rankle, new pipelines seem impossible to get built, and equalization remains a sore point, separatism is once again being whispered in cafes, echoed on talk radio, and blasted across social media feeds.
But where does this separatist instinct come from? Why Alberta — a province that has benefited more than almost any other from Canada’s prosperity — so often flirts with the idea of striking out on its own? The answer is a mix of history, culture, and economics. And understanding it means looking back at the province’s religious-political origins, its long-standing grievances with Ottawa, and the seductive, but dangerous, dream of independence.
Roots in the Prairie Soil
Alberta is a young province — officially born in 1905 — but its political character was shaped much earlier, by the settlers who broke the land and planted wheat across its vast prairies. Many came from the American Midwest, bringing with them a fierce sense of independence, a suspicion of government, and a devotion to their Protestant faith. Life was hard, winters long, and the federal government seemed impossibly distant. Ottawa felt like another country.
That story isn’t abstract for me. My great-grandparents, Pete and Zella Cochran, made the trip north from Oregon in 1918, settling near Mayerthorpe. They were part of that wave of homesteaders who believed Alberta’s soil and sky held promise — if you were tough enough to wrestle a living from it. Times were brutal. They farmed through poor prices, harsh winters, and the drought of the 1930s. In 1935, worn down, they pulled up stakes and moved again, this time to British Columbia’s North Thompson Valley in search of a better life.
I remember Zella well. She was strong, independent, and a fighter to the end — the kind of woman who embodied the resilience that defined the prairies. People like her set the cultural DNA of Alberta. They didn’t expect much help from Ottawa, or anyone else for that matter. They built what they had with their own hands, their church community, and sheer willpower. That independence became not just a necessity, but a point of pride.
Into that environment stepped preachers, schoolteachers, and entrepreneurs who offered not just religion but politics wrapped in biblical certainty. William “Bible Bill” Aberhart, a Calgary school principal turned radio evangelist, harnessed the new medium of radio in the 1920s and ’30s. His Back to the Bible Hour reached isolated farmhouses where newspapers came days late and churches were scarce. On those Sunday broadcasts, Aberhart mixed evangelical preaching with economic salvation through Social Credit theory — a half-baked plan to issue monthly “dividends” to citizens to cure the Great Depression.
It sounded like manna from heaven to desperate farmers. In 1935, Aberhart swept to power, and Alberta’s long experiment with Social Credit began.
His successor, Ernest Manning, held office from 1943 to 1968, making Social Credit the longest-ruling provincial dynasty in Canadian history. Manning — and later his son Preston — gave Alberta’s conservatism a distinctly religious, prairie-populist flavour. Manning himself continued to preach on the Back to the Bible Hour every week, even while premier. The message was clear: politics and religion, morality and governance, were inseparable.
This blend of Christian nationalism, anti-elitism, and economic grievance carved Alberta’s ideological bedrock. It’s why the province has always leaned more libertarian and conservative than the rest of Canada. And it’s why separatism — the belief that Alberta is different, even destined to chart its own course — has such deep roots.
The Oil That Built Alberta
If Aberhart and Manning built the ideological foundation, oil provided the wealth to make separatism plausible.
The discovery of oil at Leduc in 1947 transformed Alberta almost overnight. Cities like Calgary and Edmonton boomed. Roads, hospitals, and universities were built with oil royalties. By the 1970s, Albertans enjoyed the highest incomes in Canada and paid the lowest taxes. The “Alberta Advantage” was born — and with it, the belief that we were pulling more than our fair share of the national load.
But resource wealth also magnified tensions with Ottawa. Pierre Trudeau’s National Energy Program (NEP) of 1980 — designed to wrest control of oil revenues for the federal government and consumers in Central Canada — was received in Alberta as nothing short of a betrayal. To this day, mention of the NEP sparks anger. It’s remembered as Ottawa’s raid on Alberta’s lifeblood, proof that the federal government would always look after Ontario and Quebec first.
That scar still burns. Every time oil prices dip, or Ottawa announces new climate measures, the old NEP wound reopens. And every time it does, talk of separation gets louder.
Equalization and the Ottawa Question
No issue fuels separatist sentiment more than equalization. Alberta sends billions more to Ottawa in federal taxes than it gets back in transfers. In good years, those dollars subsidize health care and education in provinces like Quebec, while Alberta faces layoffs in the oil patch and cuts to its own hospitals.
For many Albertans, it feels like an unfair deal: we take the risks of a boom-and-bust resource economy, and Ottawa takes the rewards. Federal politicians, dependent on votes in Ontario and Quebec, rarely pay a political price for angering Alberta.
This sense of exploitation — of being milked but not respected — is at the heart of Alberta’s separatist impulse. It isn’t just about money. It’s about dignity.
Modern Separatism: From Wexit to Sovereignty Acts
Alberta separatism has never been as organized or serious as Quebec’s. There’s no Parti Québécois, no long history of referendums. But there are always voices keeping the flame alive.
In the 1980s, after the NEP, separatist groups like the Western Canada Concept popped up. In the 1990s and 2000s, Preston Manning’s Reform Party flirted with separatist sentiment under the banner of “The West Wants In.” More recently, the “Buffalo Declaration,” authored by Alberta MPs in 2020, warned that if Ottawa didn’t respect Alberta’s place in Confederation, separation could follow.
Groups like Wexit Alberta, the Alberta Republicans, and the Alberta Prosperity Project explicitly advocate for independence. And Premier Danielle Smith, while stopping short of separatism, passed the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act — a symbolic shot across Ottawa’s bow.
These movements thrive in times of anger: pipeline delays, carbon taxes, oil price crashes, or Liberal majorities in Ottawa. They fade when oil revenues rebound or when a Conservative prime minister takes office. But they never fully disappear.
What Independence Would Really Mean
It’s easy to see the appeal of independence. Albertans imagine keeping all our oil wealth, cutting Ottawa out of our lives, and governing ourselves without interference. On paper, a sovereign Alberta looks like a prosperous, low-tax, high-freedom frontier state.
But the reality would be far harsher.
Economy: Alberta is landlocked. Our oil and gas must pass through B.C., Saskatchewan, or the U.S. Losing Canadian leverage would leave us at the mercy of neighbours. Investors would see an independent Alberta as risky. Our credit rating would drop. The “Alberta Advantage” would vanish under the weight of higher borrowing costs and new taxes.
Currency: Would we invent an “Alberta dollar”? Peg it to the loonie or the U.S. dollar? Either way, we’d have little control over monetary policy, and our currency would swing wildly with oil prices.
Indigenous rights: Treaties in Alberta were signed with the Crown, not the province. Many First Nations leaders have already said they would not leave Canada. Independence would trigger legal chaos over land and sovereignty.
Social programs: Without Ottawa’s transfers, Alberta would have to fund pensions, unemployment insurance, and Old Age Security alone. That means either higher taxes, massive cuts, or both.
Geopolitics: Would Washington welcome us? Maybe, if it meant a bigger say over our oil. But we’d risk becoming a client state of the U.S., our sovereignty in name only.
And here’s the biggest problem: oil itself is a waning asset. The world is already shifting away from fossil fuels. Demand may plateau this decade and decline after 2040. Alberta’s prosperity is not infinite. An independent Alberta would be tying its future to a resource whose best days are behind it.
Why We’re Better Off in Canada
I understand the anger that fuels separatism. I’ve felt it myself when another federal program seems designed for central Canada, or when Ottawa uses our wealth as a political piggy bank. But the sober truth is this: Alberta is stronger in Canada than out.
Canada provides stability: Our currency, our banking system, our global trade agreements, and our military defence all shield Alberta from the worst volatility of a resource economy.
Canada amplifies our voice: Alberta alone would be a small, landlocked country of 4.5 million people. In Canada, we’re part of the world’s ninth-largest economy, with leverage on the global stage.
Canada cushions the busts: Equalization stings, but Ottawa’s transfers and fiscal power also help us ride out recessions. When the next oil crash comes — and it will — we’ll be glad to be part of a larger federation.
Canada is our community: Millions of Albertans have family ties in B.C., Saskatchewan, Ontario, and beyond. We may feel alienated, but we are not alone. Our identity is both Albertan and Canadian, and that dual identity gives us richness, resilience, and belonging.
The Dream and the Reality
A sovereign Alberta will always be a tempting dream — especially when oil is high and Ottawa seems far away. It appeals to our frontier spirit, our religious-political legacy, and our frustration with being taken for granted. But dreams can be dangerous when they blind us to reality.
The reality is that separation would weaken Alberta economically, politically, and socially. It would fracture Indigenous relations, destabilize our finances, and leave us isolated in a world moving past oil.
So yes, Alberta has a separatist movement. It’s part of our history and our DNA. But when we look clearly at where it leads, the conclusion is unavoidable: Alberta is better off in Canada. The challenge is to make Confederation work better — to demand fairness, respect, and reform — while holding on to the advantages and stability of being part of this imperfect but enduring country.
Because in the end, Alberta’s strength comes not from breaking away, but from standing tall within Canada. That’s the country I’ve reported on, lived in, and loved for decades. I am Terry. And I am Canadian.
And love the column by the way...great job...learned a lot about AB separatist movement.
Thank you for a good brief history lesson on the roots of Albertan Conservatism. However, that Conservatism ideology runs deeper as introduced by the founding fathers who milked the Indigenous people through broken or misunderstood Treaties or claimed BC through no consent process. Canadians have to reexamine history to understand how to heal the festering wounds of the unjust nation building that still plague the Nation on being a true democratic society. Strengthening the Reconciliation process is one measure all Canadians can contribute to.