By July 2025, Canada had more than 3.02 million non-permanent residents, equal to roughly 7% of the population. Work permits, study permits and temporary immigration status are overwhelmingly issued and controlled by the federal government. 

Yet a new Policy Magazine column frames Alberta’s referendum questions on temporary residents as a province suddenly turning against people within its borders.

Olakunle Adeniran argues that Alberta has historically complained about being excluded by Ottawa, but the first five referendum questions now turn “that problem of belonging inward.” According to the column, Alberta is moving from asking whether it belongs in Canada to deciding who belongs in Alberta.

That is a tidy philosophical argument. It ignores who created the policy problem.

Ottawa controls the work permits, study permits and most other temporary immigration streams that determine how many non-permanent residents may enter Canada. Alberta must then provide hospitals, classrooms, housing infrastructure and social services for the population Ottawa admits.

Immigration is technically a shared constitutional jurisdiction. However, section 95 of the Constitution Act states that provincial immigration laws operate only when they are not inconsistent with federal legislation. Federal law wins in a conflict.

Go Ad Free

Alberta can nominate some economic immigrants for permanent residence and regulate provincially funded services. It cannot independently control the number of temporary residents admitted through federal programs.

The referendum questions are therefore not divorced from Alberta’s dispute with Ottawa. They ask how the province should respond after the federal government makes immigration decisions carrying high provincial costs.

Question 1 explicitly asks whether Alberta should seek increased control over immigration.

Question 2 would preserve access for Canadian citizens, permanent residents and people holding an “Alberta-approved immigration status.”

Question 3 proposes a 12-month residency requirement for some social programs, while Question 4 asks whether non-permanent residents should pay a reasonable health care or education premium.

These questions concern legal status and responsibility for public costs. They do not ask voters to define belonging by race, ethnicity, religion or birthplace. A permanent resident born abroad would remain eligible under the proposed rules, while a temporary resident from Britain, France or the United States could face the same waiting period or premium as anyone else.

The column also inaccurately says voters will encounter the 10 questions “on one sheet of paper.” Elections Alberta says each question will appear on a separate, numbered and colour-coded ballot, except mail-in ballots, which will all be white. Questions 1 through 9 are also non-binding.

Alberta did not create the surge in temporary migration. Ottawa issued the permits while the province was left managing much of the resulting pressure on provincially funded systems.

Calling Alberta’s response “turning inward” reverses the order of events. 

The pressure came from outside provincial control. The referendum asks Albertans what authority and financial responsibility their province should have after Ottawa has already made the decisions.