This is a draft prepared by one contributor, published for public discussion. Nothing here is an adopted position of the project or a proposal it endorses. The purpose is to learn where Albertans agree, disagree, and want changes.
Article XI · Revision 1 · 2026-05-20
federal
Intergovernmental Agreements and International Obligations
Provinces routinely enter into agreements with one another, with municipalities, and with Indigenous governments on matters within provincial jurisdiction. Immigration is a concurrent head under Constitution Act, 1867 s.95, where federal law prevails; Canada-Alberta immigration cooperation operates through the Canada-Alberta Immigration Agreement and the Provincial Nominee Program. Agriculture is also concurrent under s.95.
Source of contention
Question 1: Provincial control over immigration levels
Immigration is a shared jurisdiction under Constitution Act, 1867 s.95, where federal law prevails if provincial and federal laws conflict. A province can expand its role through a negotiated immigration agreement with the Government of Canada; it cannot set binding levels unilaterally.
Proposed
The Government of Alberta shall have the exclusive authority to enter into intergovernmental agreementsQ1 with other provinces, territories, municipalities, or Indigenous governments, provided such agreements do not infringe upon the rights guaranteed by this Constitution.
No agreement or memorandum of understanding shall be valid if it delegates legislative or executive authority to any body not accountable to the people of Alberta through their elected representatives.
Federal and International Commitments
/
What Alberta can do now
Alberta can decline to implement treaty obligations in provincial heads of power under the Labour Conventions doctrine (AG Canada v. AG Ontario, [1937] AC 326). The federal government cannot force provincial legislation to carry out a treaty in areas of provincial jurisdiction. What Alberta cannot do unilaterally is veto the treaty itself or prevent its ratification.
Current Law
International treaty-making is a federal Crown prerogative under Constitution Act, 1867 s.91. Treaty implementation in matters of provincial jurisdiction requires provincial legislation; the federal government cannot unilaterally implement a treaty in a provincial head of power (Attorney General of Canada v. Attorney General of Ontario (the Labour Conventions Case), [1937] AC 326).
Proposed
No international treaty, federal-provincial agreement, or supranational accord shall have legal effect within Alberta1 unless it has been tabled before the Legislative Assembly of Alberta, its provisions are consistent with the Constitution of Alberta, and it has been ratified by a vote of the Legislative Assembly or approved via binding provincial referendum.
Classification note1Provincial veto over treaties and federal-provincial agreements. The clause as drafted denies legal effect within Alberta to any international treaty, federal-provincial agreement, or supranational accord that has not been tabled, vetted, and ratified by the Assembly. International treaty-making remains a federal prerogative under Constitution Act, 1867 s.91; the federal government can ratify treaties without provincial consent, although treaty obligations in areas of provincial jurisdiction require provincial implementation under the Labour Conventions doctrine. Resolution path: no single Part V procedure reaches the treaty-making prerogative. The constitutional power that is fully available to Alberta is the power to decline to implement treaty obligations in provincial heads of power.
Withdrawal from Unconstitutional Obligations
/
What Alberta can do now
Alberta can withdraw from federal-provincial agreements that are terminable on notice, and can decline to implement treaty obligations in provincial heads of power. Where the obligation is created by federal legislation or is not terminable, Alberta cannot unilaterally exit.
Current Law
Provinces can withdraw from federal-provincial agreements that are terminable on notice. Provinces cannot unilaterally withdraw from binding federal treaty obligations or from federal statutes that apply in provincial heads of concurrent jurisdiction subject to paramountcy. Cost-shared federal program funding is governed by individual transfer agreements and federal legislation.
Source of contention
Question 8: Provincial opt-out of federal programs with retained funding
Opting out of a cost-shared federal program while keeping the funding depends on the terms of federal-provincial transfer arrangements and requires a negotiated agreement with the Government of Canada. The federal government is not constitutionally obligated to maintain funding for a province that opts out.
Proposed
The Government of Alberta shall have the right and duty to withdraw1Q8 from any intergovernmental or international agreement, program, or compact that violates the Constitution of Alberta, undermines the democratic will or rights of Albertans, or imposes financial, legal, or regulatory burdens beyond the consent of the Legislative Assembly.
Such withdrawal shall not relieve the Province of Alberta from moral or humanitarian responsibilities undertaken voluntarily by the people or the Legislature.
Classification note1Right to withdraw from federal commitments. The clause as drafted lets Alberta withdraw from any intergovernmental or international agreement or program that violates the Constitution of Alberta or undermines the rights of Albertans. Where the agreement is terminable on notice, withdrawal is straightforward. Where the obligation is created by federal legislation or treaty, the province cannot unilaterally terminate the obligation, though it can decline to implement treaty obligations in provincial heads of power. Resolution path: agreement-by-agreement; the clause is enforceable only against agreements the province is constitutionally free to terminate.
Transparency and Consent
Alberta alone
Alberta can adopt this now under its own authority (Constitution Act, 1982, s.45).
Current Law
Publication of intergovernmental agreements in Alberta is governed by practice and by the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. F-25. There is no entrenched transparency rule for federal-provincial agreements.
Proposed
All agreements with foreign governments, international organizations, or federal entities shall be published in full and made available for public review.
No binding agreement shall be negotiated, signed, or enacted in secret or without public disclosure, except where national security concerns demand temporary confidentiality as approved by a vote of the Legislative Assembly.
Authority to enter intergovernmental agreements with other provinces, territories, municipalities, and Indigenous governments
Requirement that federal and international commitments be tabled, vetted, and ratified by the Assembly
Right to withdraw from agreements that violate the Constitution of Alberta
Transparency in all intergovernmental and international agreements
Why this article is proposed
Alberta enters into many agreements: with other provinces (trade, mobility, health-card portability), with the federal government (immigration, infrastructure funding, equalization-adjacent transfers), with Indigenous governments and municipalities, and with foreign sub-national governments (sister-province arrangements, education-cooperation memoranda). Most of this happens without a constitutional rulebook. The article would create one.
What it would change
Section 1 confirms Alberta's authority to enter agreements within its jurisdiction. Section 2 requires Assembly tabling and ratification before any treaty, federal-provincial agreement, or supranational accord has legal effect within Alberta. Section 3 creates a right to withdraw from agreements that violate the Constitution of Alberta or that impose burdens not approved by the Assembly. Section 4 entrenches transparency in all intergovernmental and international agreements.
The legal basis
Most of the article is within Alberta's existing authority. The complications are in Sections 2 and 3:
International treaty-making is a federal Crown prerogative under Constitution Act, 1867 s.91. Alberta cannot constitutionally veto the federal government's treaty-making power. What Alberta can do is decline to legislate in provincial heads of power to implement treaty obligations; that is the constitutional rule from Attorney General of Canada v. Attorney General of Ontario (the Labour Conventions Case), [1937] AC 326.
Withdrawal from federal-provincial agreements is straightforward where the agreement is terminable on notice. Withdrawal from federal legislation or treaty obligations is not unilaterally available to a province.
Open questions
Three referendum questions on the October 2026 ballot relate to this article:
Question 1 asks whether Alberta should have increased control over the number of immigrants settling in the province. Immigration is concurrent under s.95; Alberta's role is set through the Canada-Alberta Immigration Agreement. A larger provincial role can be negotiated; it cannot be set unilaterally by Alberta.
Question 8 asks whether provinces should be able to opt out of federal programs in health, education, and social services while retaining federal funding. The right to opt out exists in some programs and not others; the right to retain federal funding while opting out depends on the terms of the transfer arrangement and is not constitutionally guaranteed.
Article IV s6 and Article XII s4 deal with Question 9 (priority of provincial law over federal law). The clauses in this article that condition the in-force effect of federal commitments on Assembly ratification are related but separate.
Albertans will also need to consider whether the entrenched right to withdraw from agreements is workable given that many federal-provincial programs are deeply integrated with federal funding.
Revision 12026-05-20
major
Initial draft of Article XI from the v2 draft constitution, with per-section classification, current-law context, and editorial notes.