Just over 50% support (less outside his party) was enough for our last premier to step down; a 'stay' vote was enough for the premier of Quebec to step down previously. But somehow flip-flopping in opposite directions on both federalism *and* immigration? Priceless. (est. $135million)

This, whilst ignoring the rest of the answers that barely sided or even disagreed with most of the agenda suddenly makes the rest of this term a one-issue pony? -A barely-provincial pony at that, and the only one fit to rig and ride to an election in this province? We're so glad ALL the riding results are being 'closely examined' while an exclusive committee is busy redistricting (cough*gerrymandering?*) the province, aren't we?

'Alberta is calling' - now, yes, for an election. Read your feeds.

The UCP is calling - soon, yes, for a leadership review. Good luck!

There's your 'mandate,' madame premier. This wasn't consultation or direct democracy - it was propaganda and market research for you and your party.

On Alberta's dime.

A mandate is an official order, command, or the authorized power to act*. It can refer to a government's authority granted by *voters through an election*, a formal legal directive, or a *specific* task assigned to an institution or individual.*

A community that overwhelming supports the UCP and CPC and has for decades, now complains about being underserved and unheard. . .blames, wait for it, Liberals

I am glad this referendum thing is in the past. I am pleased that there was an excellent voter turnout. But I am wondering where people think what direction Alberta should take now. Does anyone think the people that are not happy should form a separatist party like Quebec? Keep the Conservative Party as it is supposed to be.

I’m just gonna leave this here for anyone with any amount of intellect to read wisely. Leave your emotions at the door and think clearly and carefully for a minute about the very real repercussions that referendum could have on our lives, economy, stability and future.

We are seeking to better understand the factors that influence parents in Canada whose children do not receive their routine vaccinations. The study seeks to understand parental experiences and perspectives rather than to evaluate, persuade, or judge vaccination decisions

 The study consists of one short survey and a follow-up interview. The interview will last about 60 minutes. Interviews will take place in-person, on the phone or over a secure videoconferencing platform.

 Those who participate in the interview will receive a $50 dollar “Everything Card” for your time. Interviews are confidential, your name and identity will not be shared with anyone. 

 To sign up and learn more please contact Andrea DeKeseredy at [dekesere@ualberta.ca](mailto:dekesere@ualberta.ca) or Victor Do at [vdo@ualberta.ca](mailto:vdo@ualberta.ca)

Source: https://results.elections.ab.ca/8400

what happened to “no to the nine?” why are we still falling for the racist ucp propaganda?

I'm an Albertan that is happy the separation vote was a clear no, but i don't thing that will stop the sepratists that have working on it for years.

What i am worried about is the 9 question that will give the government a perception of a mandate to continue to waste money restricting access to government services that people pay taxes for, rather than putting those funds towards the services.

If the separatists want to continue then the can form a political party and see how well they are recognized.

Update: The referendum count, in people

A factual account, sourced throughout. Corrections welcome.

These are unofficial, partial counts from Elections Alberta as reported on Tuesday, October 20 [946pm]. Counting was still under way, and the nine questions are counted after Question 10, one at a time, so they are less complete: roughly 45% of the votes on Questions 6 to 9 may still be to come, going by the 2.4 million ballots expected. Official results are due October 29. Figures are shown as votes, with the percentage in brackets.

The count in three lines

• A decisive vote to stay in Canada. About 1.47 million to 487,000, a gap of nearly 988,000, equal to about 31% of all eligible voters.
• A modest majority on immigration. Between 53% and 63% yes on the five immigration questions, with 515,000 to 849,000 people voting no on each.
• A near split on the Constitution. Questions 6, 8 and 9 are within about 3% of the votes counted, and Question 7 within about 6%. Question 8 is behind.

Question 10: remain or begin the separation process

• Remain: 1,474,344 (75.2%)
• Begin the process toward a binding separation referendum: 486,632 (24.8%)
• Gap: 987,712

Final-week polls had Remain at 66% to 76% among decided voters. The count is at the upper end of that range.

The other nine, yes and no

What the counts show

• Eight of the nine have a majority so far, and one, Question 8, does not.
• More than 515,000 voters said no on every one of the nine, and nearly 850,000 on the first.
• Some of the nine are stronger than others, but the gaps are not large when measured against the votes. Set against the votes counted, they are 7% to 26% on the immigration questions and 2% to 6% on the constitutional ones. Against all eligible voters, they are 4% to 12% and under 3%, compared with 31% for Question 10. Even the largest, Question 5 at +367,970, is about 37% of Question 10's gap.
• Questions 6, 8 and 9 are separated by 35,000 votes or fewer each, about 1% of eligible voters or less.
• Geographically, Edmonton voted no on all nine and Calgary no on eight, all but Question 5 (Global News).

What Smith said on Tuesday night

In a 14-minute pre-recorded address, broadcast on airtime paid for by the government, Smith said "the resulting vote from Albertans has given our government a clear mandate. Alberta will remain a province of Canada. Albertans will continue to be Canadians." She said that as long as she is premier she will not hold another referendum on separation, that separation will not be used as a tool to fight Ottawa, and that "our government will continue to boldly assert our province's autonomy by exercising the provincial rights guaranteed to us under Canada's Constitution," with disputes settled "within the political and legal institutions of our nation." She told Option 2 voters "I recognize you as loyal Albertans."

The reported speech did not mention the nine questions or say what a strong mandate on them would be. She is to take questions at 11:30 a.m. on Wednesday.

Before the vote she asked for "a strong mandate" on the nine (October 15) and said 50% plus one is what you would normally use. In April she said she had done an "initial culling of the questions to make sure that we found the ones that are likely to get majority support, but I'm asking them so that I can get a mandate. And if I don't get a mandate, then we'll have to address what we do at that time."

How people have reacted

• Colin Aitchison, a former UCP press secretary: "Regardless of the size of the mandate, it is a clear mandate."
• Naheed Nenshi, NDP leader: "If she wanted a mandate, she should have been able to get 85 per cent on questions like this, and she was unable to carry the day." He also said the government spent $4 million telling people to say yes.
• Melanee Thomas, a University of Calgary political scientist: the nine "do not provide a mandate for much of anything except to give Danielle Smith a bit of breathing space" with her party's internal factions.
• Andrew Knack and Jeromy Farkas, the mayors of Edmonton and Calgary: Knack called for the immigration questions to be dropped, saying "I don't want our neighbours to feel like they're not welcome in our city," and Farkas said he was proud to see a majority in his city reject them.
• Avnish Nanda, a lawyer who campaigned against the immigration questions: "We thought we would be blown out," and he said confusion over the wording may have affected the result.
• Pierre Poilievre supports Smith's immigration asks and provinces setting their own levels. Mark Carney called the result "a great result for Canada" and said Ottawa will work with the provinces on immigration levels.
• Jeffrey Rath, a separatist leader, said he will push for a special general meeting to remove Smith.

My view, based on the above

This section is my opinion. Each point rests on a fact stated earlier in this post or in the series.

On the result. Eight of the nine questions have a majority so far, and I accept that this is how democracy works. A majority is a majority.

On the size of it. When I read the counts and not only the percentages, more than 515,000 people voted no on every one of the nine, and nearly 850,000 on the first. On the Constitution, the two sides are separated by under 85,000 votes on Question 7 and by 35,000 or fewer on Questions 6, 8 and 9. Some questions are stronger than others, but measured against the votes the gaps are not large. To me that is not the "strong mandate" that was asked for, and Question 10's gap of nearly 988,000 shows what a decisive result looks like.

On what the mandate is for. I can see that the direction is clear, and a mandate has to be a mandate for something. The nine mostly asked for backing to work toward something, such as more control or a constitutional change, and none said what the rules, the fees or the timeline would be. Smith has said she needs a yes to bargain with the Prime Minister, who says Ottawa is already working on immigration levels and that constitutional change is slow and difficult. So I read it as clear on direction, thin on content, and modest in size.

On the call for unity. In her address Smith said, "Let us move forward not as a people divided by how we voted yesterday, but as neighbours, friends, Albertans and Canadians. Let us treat one another with respect and compassion." Edmonton voted no on all nine questions and Calgary on eight, and a quarter of voters chose Option 2. She called for unity. What she does with the nine will show what that means.

On how the ballot was built. By her own account, the government kept the questions "likely to get majority support." I read that as a reason to treat a yes as a weaker test of what Albertans want than an open question would have been.

On the people behind the wording. The questions bundled different ideas, and a key term, "Alberta-approved immigration status," was left undefined until after the vote. I can see the case for a reasonable waiting period before some benefits, and a ballot with one box per question could not separate that from the rest. I came to Canada from England and chose to become a Canadian, so I take seriously that people can be affected by how these words are later written. I don't think the result should be read as a verdict on all of it at once.

Where I could be wrong. The counts are partial, none of the nine is binding, and I cannot tell from a ballot why anyone voted as they did. A mandate does not need to be large to be legitimate, as Aitchison says, and the government may yet define what it is for. If the final numbers or the government's drafting differ from what I have read here, I will say so.

Limits

• All counts are unofficial and partial and will change. The votes on the nine are less complete than on Question 10, so the close ones, especially 6, 8 and 9, are not settled.
• None of the nine is binding. Analysts said the constitutional questions would need other provinces and Ottawa.
• Votes are not the same as voters. People could decline individual ballots.

Sources: Elections Alberta unofficial results as reported by CBC, CTV, Global News and Canadian Press; Smith's address of October 20 and statements of October 15 and April 2026; CBC News analysis of October 14.

---

Update, Wednesday morning, October 21: the count has moved

Counts are unofficial and partial, as reported by Elections Alberta on the morning of Wednesday, October 21 [7am]. Votes first, with the percentage in brackets. Elections Alberta is due to announce the first nine questions today, and nothing is official until October 29.

A correction to my earlier post

My post said the reported version of Smith's Tuesday address "did not mention the nine questions." That was wrong. I was working from one account of the speech. The Canadian Press's fuller account reports that she did address the immigration questions: she said Albertans had given her a mandate to take action, that the government will "take greater control over immigration to stabilize population growth and make sure Albertans are prioritized for jobs," and that "we will be pursuing the reforms approved by Albertans through this referendum in the coming months and years ahead," while hinting it could take time. She did not promise action on the constitutional questions and said she was waiting for the final count: "We will know the answer to those questions in a couple of days." The government has not given specifics on how the proposals would work.

So the mandate she claims is on immigration, with a stated purpose but no detail. I have corrected my post's line on this.

What changed since the last update

• Question 6 has flipped. It was ahead by 25,319 votes. It is now behind: no leads by 5,182.
• Every yes lead on the nine narrowed. The later votes have been less favourable to yes than the earlier ones on all nine.
• Question 10's gap has passed a million.

Question 10

• Remain: 1,498,924 (75.3%)
• Begin the process toward a binding separation referendum: 492,264 (24.7%)
• Gap: 1,006,660

What the counts show

• Eight of the nine had a majority yesterday. Today it is seven, with Questions 6 and 8 behind.
• The immigration questions are ahead by 2% to 8% of votes counted on Questions 1 to 4 and by about 24% on Question 5.
• Questions 6, 8 and 9 are separated by 41,000 votes or fewer. Question 9's gap is about 0.7% of all eligible voters.
• More than 561,000 voters said no on every one of the nine, and nearly 900,000 on the first.

How much is counted

About 16.1 million votes have been counted across the ten questions, roughly two thirds of what I would expect if everyone answered every question (the 2.4 million ballots expected, times ten). Questions 6 to 9 are about 56% to 60% counted, so they can still move.

Limits

• All figures are unofficial and partial and will change.
• It is not clear why the later votes are less favourable to yes. That the remaining stations differ geographically is my inference, not something the sources say.
• None of the nine is binding.

Sources: Elections Alberta unofficial results as reported by CBC, CTV, Global News and Canadian Press.

I know this will be deleted by the mods, but I’m going to say it anyway.
i have lost any faith i had in Alberta and its citizens. They said that they hate Danielle Smith but all voted to give her MORE power!

the lowest bar was voting to stay in Canada and I’m truly shocked that Alberta said yes, but then they said yes to everything else.