That\u2019s the quote everybody noticed. More consequential was his statement that Ottawa will review Smith\u2019s two-pronged question to see if it conforms to the federal Clarity Act.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe have an obligation as the federal government to look at the question and determine whether it\u2019s consistent with the Clarity Act,\u201d Carney said in Ottawa.<\/p>\n
\u201cUltimately, if there are questions around that, questions about the clarity of the question . . . that would be a role for Parliament.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019m not saying that\u2019s the case, but we\u2019re just in the process of doing our due diligence.\u201d<\/p>\n
Under the act, Parliament can declare a question improper and therefore refuse to deal with it. There could also be legal action to declare the question invalid.<\/p>\n
That has already happened twice. Why not now?<\/p>\n
Related<\/p>\n
Smith seems to think her question is shielded because it only asks if people want a later binding referendum on independence. Legal experts were consulted on how to keep the question out of court.<\/p>\n
But if clarity is the test, this question might not do so well: \u201cShould Alberta remain a province of Canada or should the Government of Alberta commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cLook, is it helpful to ask these fundamental questions?\u201d Carney asked.<\/p>\n
\u201cNo, it\u2019s not helpful. Of course it\u2019s not.<\/p>\n
\u201cIs it the democratic will of Albertans? Did they vote for this in the last provincial election?<\/p>\n
\u201cNo, they didn\u2019t. It wasn\u2019t on the ballot, wasn\u2019t in the mandates or platforms of any of the governing party and the official Opposition.\u201d<\/p>\n
Carney also cited Britain\u2019s Brexit example<\/a>, which seems ever more relevant.<\/p>\n \u201cI saw first-hand what happened in the United Kingdom when the view was, vote for this, it\u2019ll be soft and then we\u2019ll negotiate,\u201d the PM said.<\/p>\n \u201cAnd they\u2019re still \u2014 10 years later \u2014 trying to undo what people didn\u2019t think they were voting for but ended up having.\u201d<\/p>\n Prime Minister Mark Carney in Vancouver, B.C., on May 20, 2026.<\/p>\n Carney said he\u2019ll join the federalist campaign, not with speeches but with pro-Alberta economic actions.<\/p>\n Smith says she\u2019ll vote to remain in Canada and promises to campaign across the province all summer.<\/p>\n The premier has drawn a line in the sand with her own caucus. MLAs are expected to toe the pro-Canada line. Some may not.<\/p>\n Also, Smith is in league with Liberal Carney<\/a>, who collaborates with her but thinks her referendum question is dangerous.<\/p>\n In the long-running Alberta-Ottawa barn dance, there\u2019s rarely been a weirder clash of contradictions.<\/p>\n A new Angus Reid poll shows deep discontent with how Smith has handled the referendum issue through three attempts to get it to a vote.<\/p>\n Fifty-six per cent of all Albertans say she\u2019s done \u201cvery poorly.\u201d Twenty-eight per cent of UCP supporters agree.<\/p>\n Also, 58 per cent say she\u2019s only pushing ahead to appease the separatists in her own party. Thirty-three per cent of UCP voters think that\u2019s true.<\/p>\n Nearly 20 per cent of Albertans believe she wants Alberta to leave Canada, despite her pro-Canada declarations.<\/p>\n Another 40 per cent feel she doesn\u2019t care what happens, as long as she stays in power.<\/p>\n Sixty-four per cent of her party members want the binding vote on separation.<\/p>\n Stay Free Alberta delivered the signature documentation to Elections Alberta headquarters in Edmonton on Monday, May 4, 2026, surrounded by a sea of supporters with Alberta flags.<\/p>\n Smith is now in the bizarre position of campaigning against the wishes of those people<\/a>, while also infuriating many federalists<\/a>.<\/p>\n Questioned about this, she says the people who signed referendum petitions are the ones responsible.<\/p>\n Smith insists that she can\u2019t ignore the wishes of 700,000 people who wanted to have a referendum.<\/p>\n In her math, that includes the 301,000 who are alleged to have signed the separatist petition.<\/p>\n Those signatures have not been counted and verified, if they even exist. It\u2019s possible that the leak of data on three million Alberta voters<\/a> led to many signatures, essentially corrupting that whole campaign.<\/p>\n Smith caused this mess because of the separatist threat to her party. She changed the law to make things easier for the separatists. She pulled one ruling out of court.<\/p>\n Now that the premier\u2019s in a jam, she doesn\u2019t get to pin her decisions on honest people who cared enough to sign a petition.<\/p>\n Don Braid\u2019s column appears regularly in the Herald<\/p>\n![\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/cdcc0149deeccb8f2536c4b23a8a5a7f.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n![\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/canada\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/e4ab6f3a7a4cad49e8397f41e8e8a5c2.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n