Behind every immigration debate are real people who left everything behind in search of safety. Budgets may matter, but they should never come at the expense of human dignity.
Yet immigration has increasingly become a political talking point rather than a human reality. In a 13-minute video posted on Feb. 11, Danielle Smith addressed Albertans about the province’s financial challenges, pointing to growing budget deficits that she linked to federal immigration policies, a claim rooted in political rhetoric rather than reality, and one that risks undermining immigrants and asylum seekers’ dignity and constitutional rights.
To clamp down on immigration, Smith wants to hold an October referendum on measures to limit immigration to Alberta. The proposed questions would ask whether Alberta should take more control over immigration, give preference to economic migrants, and give Albertans priority for new employment opportunities. Another would ask whether access to provincially funded programs, including health care, education, and social services, should be limited to citizens, permanent residents and people with an “Alberta-approved immigration status.” Smith didn’t specify how the government would define this criterion.
Smith emphasized that while sustainable immigration has long been a key part of Alberta’s growth, allowing unrestricted entry from around the world has, in her view, overwhelmed classrooms, emergency rooms, and social support systems.
However, describing immigrants and asylum seekers as “flooding” the province perpetuates harmful stereotypes and demonizes people whose only “fault” is being born in countries with instabilities that forced them to leave and seek safety in Canada.
But she continued to double down, saying, Albertan taxpayers shouldn’t be expected to subsidize the rest of the country’s through equalization and federal transfers, while the federal government “flood our borders with new arrivals, and then give free access to our most-generous-in-the-country social programs to anyone who moves here.” She argued that unless the province takes greater control over immigration and program eligibility, Alberta will face ongoing financial strain and declining quality in health care, education, and other public services.
There are two issues with her claims. First, she argues that Alberta’s borders are being “flooded” with new arrivals, which isn’t accurate. According to the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), from January to June 2025, only 270 asylum claimants were processed in Alberta out of 16,935 people entering the country. The language she uses suggests that immigrants and asylum seekers are overwhelming Alberta’s borders, but the actual numbers tell a very different story.
The second issue is with the idea that newcomers have free access to Alberta’s “most-generous-in-the-country” social programs. Eligibility for health care, education, and other social services is governed by provincial and federal rules. For example, the Alberta Health Care Insurance Plan (AHCIP) requires newcomers to be legally entitled to live in Alberta, make it their permanent home, and register within three months of arrival.
Refugee claimants aren’t automatically covered by AHCIP and instead rely on the and instead rely on the federal Interim Federal Health Program while their claims are processed. Temporary residents, such as students or workers, may only qualify if they meet specific residency and immigration requirements.
There is no clear evidence that newcomers are responsible for overwhelming Alberta’s social systems; the data simply doesn’t support that claim. Continuing to frame newcomers as the source of the province’s problems risks justifying harsher state policies and further discrimination against people seeking safety and opportunity.
Although the referendum doesn’t directly change Canada’s Constitution, every Albertan must confront the reality of immigration by engaging with immigrant communities and understanding the reality rather than being swayed by misleading claims.
Misrepresenting newcomers as a threat not only distorts the facts but also risks deepening division and justifying unfair policies against people who are simply seeking safety and opportunity.
Meghrig is a fourth-year Philosophy and Gender Studies student and one of The Journal’s Editors in Chief.
Tags
Alberta, Danielle Smith, immigration
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.