Separatism—Do your own research!
I read a post that someone made saying do your own research. Having nothing to do, I decided to take on the task.
TLDR:
The separatists' numbers are willfully misleading. They depend on removing a legally mandated negotiation from the accounting. The $22–45 billion surpluses vanish entirely once Alberta's share of the federal debt is included, as every independent analysis confirms.
The law says that there is no timeline and no end date in which any deal with Canada must be negotiated, & Canada wouldn't ever sign on to any agreement that allowed Alberta to leave without paying their share of the debt.
| Group | One-Time Transition Cost | Annual Budget Impact | Debt Assumption | Key Omissions & Misleading Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) | ~$2.8–5.7 billion | Surplus of $23.6–45.5 billion (incl. setup) | Excludes federal debt share; assumes $167B CPP transfer | Omits any share of the ~$1.2 trillion federal debt. Assumes a $167B CPP transfer that Canada has no obligation to grant. Excludes trade disruption and military spending at NATO targets. |
| Alberta Transition Council (ATC) | ~$5 billion | Surplus of $22.2–32.1 billion | Excludes federal debt share entirely ("speculative") | Explicitly excludes the federal debt because it "cannot be known in advance"—yet includes optimistic assumptions for every other variable. This is a selective application of skepticism designed to produce a predetermined surplus. |
| U of C School of Public Policy | $50–170 billion over 5 years | Deficit of >$30 billion annually | Alberta debt balloons to $324–442 billion | Attempts to model a "difficult scenario" with unfavorable negotiations. Acknowledges uncertainty but includes all known costs. |
| Canada West Foundation | >$200 billion | Ongoing costs >$50 billion annually. | Includes Alberta's share of federal net debt | N/A |
The Core Misleading Tactic
The separatists' numbers rely on a single, deliberate choice: exclude the largest cost of separation while including every optimistic assumption.
The Clarity Act requires that negotiations address "the division of assets and liabilities." The Supreme Court of Canada confirmed in 1998 that secession would require negotiations over "the division of assets and liabilities." Any fiscal plan that assumes Alberta can walk away without taking on a share of the federal debt contradicts the known legal framework.
The ATC's own justification—that the debt figure "cannot be known in advance"—is the tell. If the debt outcome is genuinely unknown, then presenting a surplus that assumes zero debt is not a forecast. It is a fiscal model built on an assumption that the law does not support. The surplus exists only if you accept the premise that the debt question doesn't apply. The Clarity Act says it does.