Alberta votes 'yes' to immigration measures, but critics warn of costs, constitutional wrangles

As we got closer and closer to the referendum, the messaging from Premier Danielle Smith became clear — she wanted Albertans to support remaining in Canada but to answer “yes” to the other nine questions.

And, when it comes to question one to five, it looks like the premier got her wish. Yes votes hold substantial leads on the questions that deal with immigration policies. The questions asked if Albertans would support the province taking more control over immigration and if residency terms should be set in order for newcomers to qualify for provincially funded social programs. Albertans are also leaning yes to having those with non-permanent status pay health and education premiums.

Despite their popularity province-wide, the immigration measures didn’t do as well in Edmonton, As of 2 p.m. Tuesday, only three Edmonton ridings had majority “yes” votes for the question on charging premiums to non-permanent residents — Edmonton-Castle Downs, Edmonton-McClung and Edmonton-West Henday. And, in those ridings, with polls still to come, the margins were very thin.

Alberta Jobs, Economy, Trade and Immigration Minister Joseph Schow won’t comment on the questions until after Smith’s Tuesday evening address to the province.

But critics and scholars are warning that while these “yes” answers give Smith some political leverage, they may be difficult to implement. And, in some cases, the province doesn’t have the constitutional power to do some of the things outlined in the immigration questions.

One thing the province does have the power to do is charge health-care and education premiums to non-permanent residents. Smith had floated a $1,900 annual fee in the run-up to the referendum. But, University of Alberta political science professor Jared Wesley said that number might be unworkable. Why? Because, a lot of the time, employers bear the costs — and they would likely rail against having to pay extra premiums.

Wesley said that Albertans are more likely to encounter temporary foreign workers in hospitals or as teaching assistants than they would in line at a coffee shop. He said they are vital to the function of many of our institutions.

“The question that lies ahead for the premier is, ‘Does that make economic sense, and does it make sense from a social services perspective?'” said Wesley. “She has thrown out a number of $1,900 a year. That’s a major barrier for employers who might have paid the fee on behalf of workers that they need. But for folks who would have to pay it themselves, it could very well mean the difference between living in Alberta and not, and while far-right populists in her base may appreciate the exodus of these folks from our communities, these are the same folks who are working in those overcrowded schools and hospitals in which they’re being scapegoated.”

That was echoed by the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees.

“Forcing one group of people to pay out-of-pocket for health care is the first step to making us all pay out-of-pocket for health care,” said AUPE president Sandra Azocar in a release. “On top of that, suggesting some people should be excluded from public services is incredibly cruel and un-Canadian. Imagine going to work in a continuing care facility, providing care for seniors, but not being allowed access to the same health care you provide. The very idea is shameful.”

NDP deputy leader Rakhi Pancholi wrote on her social media feeds that she is “deeply” disappointed with the yes votes on questions one through five.

“Alberta has always attracted people from around the country and the world. People who work hard, raise families, build lives,” Pancholi wrote. “How we treat them when they get here is a reflection of who we are.

“A society that denies a child education or any person health care is poorer and weaker for doing so.”

Wesley said the government didn’t need to put the immigration questions to Albertans. Smith could have simply gone to Ottawa to ask for changes. She could have curried favour with fellow premiers who also would want a bigger say in their provinces’ immigration numbers. But Wesley said Smith wanted the political wherewithal, because “yes” answers to these questions would help soothe the far-right reaches of her base that would be smarting from a separation-vote loss.

“I suspect the broader strategic imperative was to have a set of policies that she could work on alongside far-right populists in her base who might be upset at a ‘remain’ vote,” said Wesley. “So this provides her with a set of discussions for potentially disgruntled UCP members who are not happy with remaining in Canada. Well, she hasn’t said that explicitly. It doesn’t take reading between the lines very, very far to find that that was the strategic objective.”

Reza Hasmath, a fellow political science prof at the university, said the questions are meant to give Smith political leverage, because they don’t hold constitutional power.

“There’s two ways to think about this,” said Hasmath. “There’s one in terms of political calculations, and one on the basis of constitutional calculations. From a constitutional standpoint, there’s very little the province can do. Let’s be very frank. This is more of a political calculation.”

He said that the irony is that these questions are based on old problems, which the federal government under Prime Minister Mark Carney is working to solve. Oversubscribed immigration was an issue when Justin Trudeau was prime minister, but the numbers are already easing.

“Alberta no longer has as much of an immigration issue,” said Hasmath. “It was presented two, three years ago, particularly at the tail end of the Trudeau government, where we were getting half a million immigrants to Canada, and Alberta was getting a higher proportion than our services could actually support. That was an issue. A couple years down the road, not so much.”

This was echoed by Carney Tuesday morning.

“This government has recognized from the start the need to take back control on immigration, and and we’ve done so,” Carney said.

Carney said there has been a 70 per cent reduction in asylum seeker and an 80 per cent reduction in foreign students. These changes came into force over the past 18 months.

“Now, where we go from here, and I’m not saying that that stabilization is complete, but where we go from here needs to be established in co-operation with the provinces, and that’s very much the spirit of at least one of the one of the questions.”

Bookmark our website and support our journalism:Don’t miss the news you need to know — add EdmontonJournal.com and EdmontonSun.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters here.

You can also support our journalism by becoming a digital subscriber. Subscribers gain unlimited access to The Edmonton Journal, Edmonton Sun, National Post and 13 other Canadian news sites. Support us by subscribing today: The Edmonton Journal | The Edmonton Sun.