| Question | Yes | No |
|---|
| Province takes more control of immigration | 54.86% | 45.14% |
| Limit provincial programs to citizens, permanent residents and those with Alberta-approved status | 52.46% | 47.54% |
| 12-month Alberta residency before social supports for non-permanent residents | 53.12% | 46.88% |
| Fee or premium for non-permanent residents using health care and education | 51.78% | 48.22% |
","layout":"text"},{"role":"body","format":"markdown","text":"A fifth question, on proof of citizenship to vote, passed with 58.06 percent. The same ballot asked whether Alberta should start the legal process toward a binding separation referendum. Voters said no, 74.95 percent to 25.05 percent. Turnout was 70.4 percent.\n\nThe margins on the immigration questions were narrow. Mount Royal University political scientist Lori Williams told CBC the results do not give Smith the mandate she wanted. [CBC reported](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-referendum-questions-immigration-constitution-9.7394465) that the questions were less popular in Calgary and Edmonton than in rural areas. Smith said her government will \"proceed with caution\" and will focus first on changes affecting economic migrants. The Angus Reid Institute's [March survey](https://angusreid.org/alberta-referendum-immigration-danielle-smith-social-services-temporary-residents/) of 433 Albertans found 66 percent would support restricting temporary residents' access to government-funded social services. The institute noted a margin of error of about 5 points. Before the vote, Smith had said that \"throwing the doors open to anyone and everyone across the globe has flooded our classrooms, emergency rooms and social support systems with far too many people, far too quickly.\"\n\nOpponents made a different case. Stephen Carter, a strategist who ran a campaign against the nine non-separation questions, said immigrants \"create jobs and do jobs\" and do not come to take advantage of health care or schools. Carney said immigration cooperation with the provinces can be achieved \"without constitutional change.\"\n\n**Quebec.** The province already has its own plan. Its [2026 to 2029 plan](https://www.quebec.ca/en/news/actualites/detail/tabling-orientations-immigration-2026-2029-plan-2026-complementary-measures-66844), tabled in November 2025, sets 45,000 permanent admissions in 2026. It plans 84,900 to 124,200 temporary admissions in 2026, ends the two main streams of the Quebec Experience Program and extends a pause on some temporary worker applications in Montreal and Laval through the end of 2026.\n\nQuebec's politics changed on October 5. The Parti Québécois, led by [Paul St-Pierre Plamondon](https://567politics.com/politicians/paul-st-pierre-plamondon), won 59 seats and will form a minority government, [CBC reported](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/parti-quebecois-victory-quebec-election-2026-9.7370571). The Coalition Avenir Québec no longer has a single seat. [Fragomen's summary](https://www.fragomen.com/insights/canada-incoming-quebec-government-proposes-lower-immigration-targets-and-stricter-french-language-requirements.html) of the Parti Québécois platform says it proposes the following, none of which is yet in effect:\n\n* Cut non-permanent residents from more than 500,000 to 250,000–300,000 by the end of the term.\n* Cut permanent admissions from about 45,000 to 35,000 a year.\n* Pause permanent economic immigration directly from abroad, selecting from temporary residents already in Quebec.\n* Reduce temporary foreign workers to about 40,000 and students to about 50,000.\n* Ask that Quebec receive 22 percent of the country's asylum seekers.\n\nThe next annual Quebec plan is expected after the National Assembly returns in November. Polling shows a split picture in the province. Environics found Quebec had the lowest share saying Canada has too much immigration, but Leger's March 2026 survey found 71 percent of Quebec respondents supporting more provincial control. The [Leger report](https://leger360.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Immigration_and_deficit_March_2026.pdf) surveyed 1,627 adults online from February 27 to March 2. It found 65 percent of Canadians support giving provinces significantly more control, with 94 percent of Bloc voters and 77 percent of Conservative voters in favor. Environics noted that its Quebec result refers to immigration to Canada as a whole, and does not measure support for Quebec's own targets.\n\n## Incidents and organized activity\n\nThe sources reviewed describe organized activity on the edge of the debate, not mass street protest. Polling gives no sign that most people who want lower numbers support such groups. This article does not treat the two as the same thing.\n\nThe Dominion Society of Canada, a non-profit registered in 2025, advocates what it calls \"remigration.\" [CBC News reported](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/what-is-the-dominion-society-9.7315829) that its website lays out a plan to deport five million to nine million people, including temporary workers, permanent residents and some people born in Canada to non-citizen parents. The group planned a conference in the Hamilton area on August 29. [CBC later reported](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/only-the-beginning-anti-immigration-group-says-ottawans-should-brace-themselves-9.7362341) that it moved to Burlington after community protests and statements against it.\n\nOpinions about the group differ sharply. Evan Balgord, who directs the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, calls it \"the political arm of the white nationalist movement.\" Barbara Perry of Ontario Tech University told CBC the group's arguments are \"inherently racist and xenophobic.\" The group's founder, Daniel Tyrie, a former executive director of the People's Party, denies that its policies rest on ethnicity. He told CBC the membership \"includes Canadians from a wide variety of political backgrounds and associations.\" He also told CBC that \"posters and stickers are only the beginning\" and \"we are organizing, we are growing, and we are not going away.\"\n\nOttawa police said they received 18 public reports about the group's posters and stickers as of early October. They said none of the reported content constitutes a possible hate crime and that the posters, on their face, have not met the legal threshold. The city's bylaw office received four complaints and removed the materials. Balgord said he believes the group's message violates the law and asked why its leaders have not been charged. Police, in the statement CBC reported, did not say that.\n\nFormer Conservative cabinet minister Jason Kenney, who was federal immigration minister from 2008 to 2013, drew a line within the debate. He said there are \"totally legitimate concerns\" about \"imprudent or irresponsible immigration policy,\" but that this is \"categorically different than basing our immigration policy on race.\" He said the group tries to turn public concern into \"a racist message.\" Tyrie rejects that description.\n\nThis article did not find verified national data on hate crimes or attacks against immigrants in 2026, so it makes no claim on that point.\n\n## What economists, business groups and settlement groups say\n\nEconomists broadly agree that cutting immigration slows growth in total output, but they disagree about how much that should worry policymakers.\n\nA May 2026 paper from the C.D. Howe Institute by Don Drummond and Parisa Mahboubi [projected](https://cdhowe.org/publication/resetting-expectations-canadas-economy-in-a-lower-immigration-era/) that employment would fall about 0.3 percent in 2026, roughly 54,000 jobs, in a normally working labor market. It projected real GDP growth of 0.4 to 0.5 percent in the near term and about 1.2 percent over the long run. It estimated the level of real GDP in 2060 would be about 11.5 percent lower than under official projections. The authors wrote that these outcomes reflect \"demographic constraints, not economic weakness.\" They added that \"Canada's economy is not broken. It is adjusting,\" and that immigration's contribution depends on \"absorptive capacity\" and the mix of newcomers. They also call for higher productivity and better credential recognition.\n\nSkuterud, a member of the institute's targets council, takes a different view of the labor argument. He cautioned that business lobbying could lead the government to treat immigration as a fix for businesses. He said firms facing a tight market could offer \"higher wages\" or \"more attractive jobs.\" Business groups disagree. When the 2025 to 2027 plan was announced in October 2024, the [Canadian Chamber of Commerce](https://www.chamber.ca/news/canadian-chamber-statement-on-immigration-targets-cuts/) said the cuts would shrink the labor pool and reduce Canada's ability to attract foreign investment. The [Canadian Federation of Independent Business](https://www.cfib-fcei.ca/en/media/cfib-statement-on-the-latest-immigration-cuts) said at the time there were 379,000 persistent private sector job vacancies. It called it appropriate to turn the immigration dial up or down with labor market needs, but said any \"huge swings\" hold significant implications for employers, workers and the economy. Both statements are from 2024, and neither group's reaction to the 2026 to 2028 plan was reviewed for this article.\n\nThe Canadian Council for Refugees welcomed a measure to give permanent residence to 115,000 protected persons but criticized cuts to refugee resettlement. It said privately sponsored refugees fall from 23,000 to 16,000 and government-assisted refugees from 15,250 to 13,250. The council also urged focusing on pathways to permanent status and open work permits for temporary workers, not cuts, citing \"high levels of exploitation.\"\n\nA fallacy check applies on both sides. Poilievre's remark that the Liberals pursued a \"failed experiment with open borders\" is a phrase CBC noted does not describe the policy: the previous government had no open-border policy, though CBC also noted admissions reached levels not seen in decades. Saying that the arrival of large numbers of newcomers caused the housing shortage ignores other factors, such as supply, which CMHC names as the main reason rents are now easing. On the other side, an argument that opposition to levels is simply prejudice does not fit the Environics and Abacus findings, where respondents mostly cite housing, jobs and management of the system. Pointing to a flawed argument does not show that its conclusion is wrong. It shows that the argument needs better evidence.\n\n## Limits of the evidence\n\nPolls from different firms ask different questions, so cross-firm comparisons carry uncertainty. The Environics series is the cleanest trend because it repeats the same question by the same method, and it shows 58 percent in 2024 and 48 percent in 2026. No poll reviewed here was taken after the levels plan is released. Population estimates are preliminary and were revised upward this year. The Hub's account of the revision and the CMHC supply figures come from a secondary source. Parties' claims about each other, including the claim that the government lied about the population count, are attributed and not verified.\n\n## What to watch\n\nThe budget on Thursday will give the first official figures for 2027 to 2029. Quebec's new government is expected to table a plan that could move toward its campaign proposals. Alberta must decide how far to act on non-binding referendum results. For the federal political context, see 567politics coverage of [Poilievre's budget demands](https://567politics.com/news/canada-poilievre-budget-letter-fundraising-by-elections-november-2026) and the [December 7 by-elections](https://567politics.com/news/canada-carney-byelections-december-7-trump-trade-call-november-2026).","textStyle":"body","layout":"text"}]}