A government-commissioned report from the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy estimates that Alberta would face between $50 billion and $170 billion in costs during the first five years if it were to separate from Canada, while establishing a new country could require roughly 70,000 additional civil servants.
The report, released Wednesday, examines the financial and administrative requirements involved in creating an independent Alberta. The estimated costs include new infrastructure, staffing to manage and oversee the transition, and Alberta’s share of Canada’s federal debt. (Calgary Journal)
The study emphasizes that separation would involve considerably more than establishing a new border and government. It would require major changes to the way public services, taxation, trade, laws and other government functions operate.
Among the issues that would have to be addressed are negotiations with First Nations, Canada and other countries. Alberta’s position as a landlocked province with an economy heavily dependent on exports would add another layer of complexity to the transition.
The report says even under favourable conditions, building a fully functioning new country could take several years and involve substantial costs. Difficult negotiations or disputes over relationships with Canada, First Nations or international partners could extend the process and increase the economic burden.
The study also outlines a potentially significant shock to Alberta’s economy during the transition, including lower economic output and an annual budget deficit exceeding $30 billion. (Richmond Sentinel)
Premier Danielle Smith’s government commissioned the report in June, saying the objective was to provide Albertans with information about the financial implications of separation ahead of the referendum.
Finance Minister Jason Nixon said the findings demonstrate why Alberta’s government is advocating for residents to remain in Canada. He said the province continues to support what he described as “a strong and sovereign Alberta within a united Canada.” (paNOW)
The report also recognizes that the eventual outcome would depend heavily on negotiations and other circumstances outside Alberta’s control. An expert advisory panel reviewing the study said separation would create short-term economic costs while the longer-term benefits remain uncertain. (Global News)
The transition would also require Alberta to assume responsibility for federal programs currently provided in the province, establish its own monetary and international trade arrangements, negotiate issues surrounding Canadian debt and acquire or develop facilities and systems needed for a new national administration. The report estimates an additional 70,000 public servants would be required as part of that process. (Global News)
Albertans are scheduled to vote on Oct. 19 on whether Alberta should remain in Canada or proceed toward a second, binding referendum on separation. The referendum was called earlier this year by Smith. (Global News)
Smith has argued that years of federal government interference have constrained Alberta’s economy and contributed to frustration among residents, with some increasingly viewing separation as an option that should be addressed through a referendum.
At the same time, polling conducted during 2026 has generally shown more Albertans supporting remaining in Canada than advancing toward separation. An Angus Reid Institute survey conducted in August found 61% favored staying in Canada, while 33% supported beginning the process toward a future binding separation referendum. An Abacus Data survey conducted Sept. 4–7 found 64% would vote to stay in Canada on the Oct. 19 question. (Angus Reid Institute Canada)
Smith’s critics have pointed to that polling while questioning the rationale for holding the vote. They argue that the premier is simultaneously presenting herself as a defender of a united Canada while allowing the separation question to proceed, and contend that the referendum is partly intended to satisfy hardline separatist voices within the United Conservative Party. Those claims are disputed political interpretations rather than findings established by the report itself. (Calgary Journal)
