COMMUNIQUE FROM CHIEF TRAVELLER PLAITED HAIR ON BEHALF OF BLOOD TRIBE COUNCIL
Communique on Question 10 in Alberta’s October 19 Referendum
STAND OFF, ALBERTA — OCTOBER 2, 2026
On October 19, 2026, citizens residing in Alberta can vote in a provincial referendum on a series of public policy and constitutional questions posed by the Government of Alberta (the “Referendum”). Voters participating in the Referendum will be asked to choose between the options presented in each of the ten referendum questions.
There is one question in the Referendum that has significant implications for the Blood Tribe and Blood Tribe Members. This will be Question 10 and as such, is referenced throughout this document as “Question 10”.
This Communique will provide a recommendation on how Blood Tribe Members should vote in relation to Question 10 and provide information and context to assist Members in understanding that recommendation.
WHAT IS QUESTION 10
Question 10 has two options. Option 1 asks whether Alberta should remain a province of Canada. Option 2 asks whether the Alberta government should begin the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether Alberta should separate from Canada.
From the outset, it is important to note that Question 10 is non-binding, meaning the Government of Alberta is not legally required to implement the results. It is also important to note that the October 19 Referendum and the vote on Question 10 do not decide whether Alberta will separate from Canada. Question 10 only asks whether the Government of Alberta should begin the legal process toward a future, binding referendum on separation – it does not ask whether Alberta should separate immediately.
Canadian law is clear that Alberta cannot unilaterally leave Canada. If a clear majority eventually voted for separation on a clear referendum question, this would trigger negotiations on a constitutional amendment concerning Alberta’s potential separation and the terms on which Alberta would separate. Those negotiations would involve the Government of Canada and the other provinces, and the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta has confirmed that First Nations would have a seat at the table.
RECOMMENDATION FOR BLOOD TRIBE MEMBERS
The Blood Tribe’s recommendation to Blood Tribe Members is to vote in favour of Alberta remaining a province of Canada when responding to Question 10. To do this, Blood Tribe Members must vote OPTION 1 on QUESTION 10.
REASONS TO VOTE OPTION 1
The Treaty Relationship
The Blood Tribe and the Crown entered into the Blackfoot Treaty (Treaty 7) on September 22, 1877 – nearly thirty years before the Province of Alberta was created. Alberta is bound to observe the Blackfoot Treaty and fulfill certain obligations under the Blackfoot Treaty (e.g. enabling Blood Tribe members to hunt off the Blood Reserve on Crown land owned by Alberta) but is only bound to observe those obligations and fulfill them because Alberta is part of Canada.
The Blood Tribe has taken part in two recent court cases about proposals for Alberta’s separation from Canada. In December 2025, the Blood Tribe and the other Blackfoot Nations intervened in a court case where the Court found that Alberta independence would contravene the Numbered Treaties, including the Blackfoot Treaty.
In May 2026, the Blood Tribe, together with Siksika Nation, Piikani Nation and the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, succeeded in having the approval of a second separation petition set aside. In that decision, the Court also found that Alberta had a duty to consult the Blood Tribe and the other applicant First Nations, and that no consultation occurred. That decision is currently under appeal.
Practically and legally speaking, Canada is the government that is primarily responsible for fulfilling the Treaty relationship and the promises made at the Blackfoot Treaty. The Court has found that First Nations are not required to accept an independent Alberta as their Treaty partner or to enter a replacement arrangement with Alberta, and that the consent of First Nations is required to change a party to the Treaty. The Court concluded that removing Canada and substituting an independent Alberta as the government responsible for fulfilling Treaty obligations would contravene the Treaty.
The Treaty relationship has important considerations that affect the Blood Tribe and its Members. The potential for Alberta’s separation from Canada raises questions not only about how the Treaty relationship will be observed, and who will be responsible for observing it, but also how the Blood Tribe and its Members would exercise the Treaty and Aboriginal rights that are recognized and affirmed by the Constitution of Canada and which arise from the Blood Tribe’s Treaty relationship with the Crown.
Exercise of Blood Tribe’s Treaty and Aboriginal Rights
Question 10 does not address how the Treaty and Aboriginal rights of the Blood Tribe and its Members would carry over and be enforceable in Alberta if it were to separate from Canada. The exercise of the Blood Tribe’s Treaty and Aboriginal rights is based in the Treaty relationship, and in constitutional protections that are part of Canada’s legal order – not Alberta’s. The Courts have noted that even if an independent Alberta adopted similar protections, it could not take over the Treaty without the consent of First Nations. None of the proposals for Alberta’s separation from Canada that have been advanced through the Citizen Initiative Act address this question. These issues continue to be a concern as a result of the ongoing discussions regarding Alberta’s separation. A vote in favour of a future referendum on Alberta’s separation would put at risk both the Blood Tribe’s Treaty relationship, and the meaningful exercise of the Blood Tribe’s Treaty and Aboriginal rights, which is why we should choose Option 1 in Question 10 .
Blackfoot Territory and the Alberta Border
As Blood Tribe Members are aware, the exercise of the Blood Tribe’s Treaty and Aboriginal rights across Blackfoot Territory is not confined to Alberta’s current provincial boundaries. As the Court recognized in May 2026, Blackfoot oral history and traditional knowledge describe Blackfoot Territory as extending from what is now British Columbia east into what is now Saskatchewan, including the Great Sand Hills region, and south beyond the Canada-United States border. The Court found that the Treaties confirm the right of First Nations to move around the Treaty territory for purposes such as hunting and fishing, and that turning Alberta’s borders into international borders would contravene the Treaties by significantly impairing the exercise of Treaty rights.
For the Blood Tribe and its Members, any separation process could raise practical questions about harvesting, hunting and fishing in Blackfoot Territory, access to Blackfoot Territory generally, and the continued exercise of Treaty rights across Blackfoot Territory.
Summary
The Treaty relationship between the Blood Tribe and the Crown is not Alberta’s to assume or redefine. The Blackfoot Treaty established a relationship with the Crown, and the Blood Tribe cannot simply be required to accept an independent Alberta as a replacement Treaty partner. The Blood Tribe entered Treaty as a Nation, and its rights, lands, and relationships are not dependent on the political boundaries or constitutional choices of Alberta. As the Court has said, the Blood Tribe, as founding partners in the creation of Alberta, “cannot be ignored or bypassed as Alberta contemplates its future.”
FUTURE COMMUNIQUES LEADING UP TO REFERENDUM
Leading up to the Referendum, the Blood Tribe will provide further information to explain the other questions being posed in the Referendum. We encourage Blood Tribe Members to exercise their right to vote in the Referendum, and to use that vote to help protect their Treaty and Aboriginal rights on October 19th.
| Aakaayaamihtsinima Chief Traveller Plaited Hair On behalf of Blood Tribe Council |
