- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Monday 19 October 2026 is referendum day in Alberta. 
For one moment, just imagine yourself to be a voter in Alberta.
You want to be informed. You want to do the right thing.
You are asked to decide on the following questions, marking “x” next to the options of your choice on the ballot paper. The referendum is non-binding.
Brow furrowed. Pencil poised.
Should Alberta remain a province of Canada, or should the Government of Alberta commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada?
Option 1: Alberta should remain a province of Canada.
Option 2: The Government of Alberta should commence the legal process required under the Canadian Constitution to hold a binding provincial referendum on whether or not Alberta should separate from Canada
Do you support the Government of Alberta taking increased control over immigration for the purposes of decreasing immigration to more sustainable levels, prioritizing economic migration and giving Albertans first priority on new employment opportunities?
Do you support the Government of Alberta introducing a law mandating that only Canadian citizens, permanent residents and individuals with an Alberta approved immigration status will be eligible for provincially-funded programs, such as health care, education and other social services?
Assuming that all Canadian citizens and permanent residents continue to qualify for social support programs as they do now, do you support the Government of Alberta introducing a law requiring all individuals with a non-permanent legal immigration status to reside in Alberta for at least 12 months before qualifying for any provincially-funded social support programs?
Assuming that all Canadian citizens and permanent residents continue to qualify for public health care and education as they do now, do you support the Government of Alberta charging a reasonable fee or premium to individuals with a non-permanent immigration status living in Alberta for their and their family’s use of the healthcare and education systems?
Do you support the Government of Alberta introducing a law requiring individuals to provide proof of citizenship, such as a passport, birth certificate or citizenship card, to vote in an Alberta provincial election?
Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to have provincial governments, and not the federal government, select the justices appointed to provincial King’s Bench and Appeal courts?
Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to abolish the unelected federal Senate?
Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to allow provinces to opt out of federal programs that intrude on provincial jurisdiction such as health care, education, and social services, without a province losing any of the associated federal funding for use in its social programs?
Do you support the Government of Alberta working with the governments of other willing provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution to better protect provincial rights from federal interference by giving a province’s laws dealing with provincial or shared areas of constitutional jurisdiction priority over federal laws when the province’s laws and federal laws conflict?
That's quite a fistful of questions.
And to help voters make their minds up we have a bunch of organisations offering advice. Elections Alberta doesn't provide any information on the issues themselves. Voters may choose to rely on information from the Government of Alberta, the separatists, the Federalists and sundry others. And here is a snapshot on Alberta separatism from wikipedia.
So where do I stand?
On the main question I tend to agree with Professor Kent McNeil at York University's Osgoode Law School who wrote in the Globe and Mail on 23 February 2026:
"Some Albertans seem to think that separation from Canada can be achieved by a majority vote in a provincial referendum. It’s not that simple."
"The minority of Albertans who appear to think they can just walk away and take all this with them are deluding themselves. They have no unilateral right to do so under the Canadian Constitution or international law. Nor could they do so without the consent of the Indigenous peoples in Alberta."
(Click "Read more" to read the Globe and Mail piece.)
Professor McNeil's argument is developed in much greater detail here: Alberta’s Creation: A Historical and Legal Analysis:
"Unlike the four original Canadian provinces or the provinces, such as British Columbia, that joined later, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta were carved out of the North-West Territories that were already part of Canada. At the time of their creation, it would have been unthinkable that any one of the Prairie Provinces would have had the right to separate from Canada. Likewise, when Canada transferred public lands and resources to the Prairie Provinces in 1930, it would have been on the clear understanding that they would remain in Canada and contribute to the national economy. Alberta cannot simply walk away and take all this with her.
Moreover, Canada and Alberta both owe constitutional obligations to the Indigenous peoples of the province, including obligations to respect and protect First Nation treaty rights. If Alberta were to become independent, the treaty territories of most of the First Nations in Alberta would be severed by international borders, restricting access to constitutional hunting and fishing rights. First Nations would also lose the rights they now have under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples because Alberta has not adopted the Declaration and would be under no obligation to do so.
A unilateral declaration of independence by Alberta would be illegal. In the Secession Reference, the Supreme Court decided that the Constitution of Canada does not permit provinces to secede. The Court found as well that Quebecers do not have a right to self-determination that would allow them to leave Canada without a negotiated agreement grounded in Canada’s foundational constitutional principles of “federalism, democracy, constitutionalism and the rule of law, and respect for minority rights”, despite the fact that Quebec is a distinct society with its own culture and language. Respect for minority rights includes the rights of the Indigenous peoples of Canada. If Quebec does not have a legal right to secede from Canada, a fortiori Alberta does not either."
The UK's recent experience of referendums
The Brexit Referendum shows how easily things can go off the rails when the voters are not given detailed information on the alleged benefits and drawbacks of the proposition put before them.
People were told they - and the country - would be better off outside Europe. Indeed, Boris Johnson promised £350M a week for the National Health Service as a direct result of leaving the EU. This figure was plucked out of thin air but never challenged by the nation's most trusted source of news, the BBC. It sat on the fence, terrified of being accused of bias.
When he was Governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney had a front row seat in the Brexit drama.
He warned that leaving without a deal would shrink the UK economy by about 8% in the first year. In the event, a deal was struck but it turned out to be truly disastrous. The economy is now about 6%-8% smaller than it would have been if the UK had remained in the EU.
Scottish Independence
A referendum on Scottish independence was held on 18 September 2014. The "No" side won 55.3% of the vote and the "Yes" side 44.7% on an 84.6% turnout.
Unlike Alberta, Scotland was once an independent country in its own right. The Union of the Crowns 1603 was followed by the Union of the Parliaments in 1707 to create a new state called Great Britain.
But even if a future referendum on Scottish independence were successful, the job of unravelling the UK state after 300+ years would be an administrative nightmare quite beyond parallel.
Alberta is part of Canada and must remain so.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
See also: The Globe and Mail's Andrew Coyne: Canada is a historically successful country. Now malcontents are trying to destroy it.
York Regional Council is taking down on-line video recordings of its meetings. They must go back up.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
York Regional Council is removing an irreplaceable archive of Council and Committee video recordings from the internet under a policy adopted in 2017 which requires videos to come down at the end of each Council term plus 6 months. 
This policy is crazy beyond words.
We need to see and hear what our elected politicians say and do on our behalf.
It wasn’t very long ago that York Regional Council was a closed book. A decade ago I was calling on the Council to video stream its meetings. I was complaining that Council meetings were live audio streamed but no video. And Committee meetings were not broadcast or streamed at all. If you wanted to know what was happening you had to be physically present. I often was. It was all straight out of the 1950s.
I said the College of Cardinals was more open and transparent than York Region.
Not Pretty Enough
I recall Markham’s Mayor Frank Scarpitti fretting that he wasn’t pretty enough for the cameras. He was worried they would zoom in on him. That his balding head would reflect the bright lights. He believed audio was more than adequate. (Photo: Frank "Pretty Boy" Scarpitti on the left with King Township's Steve Pellegrini.)
Things have moved on since then but the policy is still stuck in a 25 May 2017 time warp. The resolution the Council adopted back then concerned how long recordings would remain online; it did not explicitly require their destruction. I don’t know if the videos are destroyed or if they are piled up somewhere in the basement of the Regional HQ.
The staff report that went to the 25 May meeting said there was no technical impediment to archiving all meetings.
A video (or audio) archive is hugely important if we are to keep tabs on our elected officials and discourage them from gilding the lily and re-inventing their past.
Authenticity
We all crave authenticity in the politicians who make important decisions on our behalf. We don't want them to pretend to be someone they are not.
The rolling deletion of the video archive is removing key evidence showing how members of York Regional Council deal with the business before it. Whether they sit on their hands, say nothing and gaze out of the window like Tom Vegh. Or participate actively, shaping and leading the debate.
After reading the Newmarket Today interview with Tom Vegh I was struck by the extravagant claims he was making about himself.
“I take representing Newmarket seriously, and being present, prepared and engaged is fundamental to that responsibility. Involvement goes beyond attendance. At Newmarket council, I participate fully in discussions and decision-making… At York Region, much of the detailed work takes place through committees and boards before matters reach Regional Council.”
So I turned to the video record of the York Regional Council debate on 29 September 2022 on the funding the Inn From The Cold, the charity Vegh used to run as Executive Director.
The Minutes record decisions and show who was present but now the video has come down we have lost the record of who said what. I have the clearest possible recollection that Vegh was silent throughout the entire debate.
Attendance Record
Why is this is important? If Tom Vegh can lie about his attendance record he can lie about pretty much anything else.
He tells us:
“Involvement goes beyond attendance."
Prove it.
We can’t. Not until the videos go back on-line.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
In his interview with Newmarket Today on 12 October 2026, our Deputy Mayor and Regional Councillor, Tom Vegh, said he had missed two Newmarket/York Region meetings in the 2022-2026 term, when he missed 18.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
The use of uniformed York Regional Police officers as stage props in election campaigns is more widespread than I thought.
This one from Tom Vegh looks innocent enough. Who would be against a Neighbourhood Watch scheme? No-one could possibly be against the idea of keeping residents safe.
But the photo showing Vegh with York Regional Police Officer Riczard Wojtulewicz explicitly promotes Vegh's re-election as Deputy Mayor and Regional Councillor.
I am left wondering if Constable Wojtulewicz
- Was aware that the photograph was being used in Tom Vegh’s re-election campaign
- Was asked by Vegh or anyone acting on his behalf for his permission to use the photograph for election campaign purposes
- Consented to its use in this context
And, importantly, were York Regional Police aware of, or did they authorise, the use of this photo in Tom Vegh's campaign?
I am in touch with York Regional Police about this.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Update at 13.10 on 13 October 2026: This morning I received a reply from the Regional Solicitor which says the photo above is in order.
I have now filed a complaint with the Inspector General of Policing in Ontario. (Click 'Read more" to see both.)
Update on 14 October 2026: Email from the Inspectorate of Policing saying the matter is outside its jurisdiction. (See below)
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Let's not beat about the bush. 
Newmarket’s Deputy Mayor and Regional Councillor Tom Vegh lies through his teeth.
Newmarket Today asked Newmarket’s Deputy Mayor and Regional Councillor, Tom Vegh, how he would rate himself on both his attendance and involvement at the council table.
Vegh claimed he has only missed two Newmarket council or committee of the whole meetings and regional council meetings.
“I take representing Newmarket seriously, and being present, prepared and engaged is fundamental to that responsibility. Involvement goes beyond attendance. At Newmarket council, I participate fully in discussions and decision-making.”
“At York Region, much of the detailed work takes place through committees and boards before matters reach Regional Council.”
Vegh’s figures are out by a mile.
I calculate that Vegh missed six York Regional Council meetings during the 2022-2026 term (27 April 2023, 21 December 2023, 21 March 2024, 25 April 2024, 26 March 2026 and 24 September 2026) and one Committee of the Whole meeting (13 June 2024).
In addition, Vegh missed five Newmarket Council meetings (on 23 January 2023, 24 April 2023, 28 June 2023, 20 November 2023, 25 March 2024) and six Committee of the Whole meetings (on 23 January 2023, 17 April 2023, 23 October 2023, 26 February 2024, 18 March 2024 and 23 February 2026).
The dissembling Tom Vegh takes us all for fools. He is a complete disgrace.
We pay him handsomely for turning up to work. Even though he has nothing significant to say when he gets there.
The Inn From the Cold
Some things continue to intrigue me. Why was he absent on 13 June 2024 when his successor as Executive Director of the Inn From the Cold, Ann Watson, was making a deputation. If I were in his position I would have bust a gut to be there. In the same way he sucked his thumb and said nothing at York Regional Council in September 2022 when John Taylor called for additional funding for the IFTC.
What is the point of Tom Vegh if he can't speak out for a homelessness charity he used to run. What's the story there?
Anyway... we know the absent-minded Tom Vegh has a very bad memory. Or he is an accomplished liar.
Probably both.
I think he owes Newmarket Today and its readers an apology.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
I didn’t have to wait 24 hours to get Tom Vegh’s response to my invitation to discuss the future of Newmarket Public Library in front of an audience of interested members of the public.
I learn he is too busy campaigning for re-election to his third term as our Deputy Mayor and Regional Councillor to fit me into his busy schedule. 
Thank you for your email and for your interest in the future of the Newmarket Public Library. I agree that the library plays an important role in our community, and I believe it is important to look at how we can best meet the needs of Newmarket residents as our town continues to grow.
As I noted in my questionnaire response, I believe a second library, be it a satellite or branch, should be a priority. Decisions about future library facilities, however, need to be considered in the context of the library board's strategic plan, our community's evolving needs, long-term planning and financial responsibilities.
Thank you for the invitation. With the municipal election approaching, my campaign schedule is already committed and I'm unable to take on any additional public events before election day. I appreciate you reaching out and sharing your interest in this important community issue, and I wish you the best this Thanksgiving weekend. Tom
Tom Vegh told Newmarket Today that a new branch library was a priority of his for the coming term. (Right top: What Vegh said during the 2018 election. And below, what he should have said.)
We’ve been here before
As we know, in 2018 Vegh made an explicit commitment to build a new library and seniors’ centre.
Vegh won that key election with two big unconditional promises – and eight years later neither has materialised.
When he spoke about the library back then he said the time for talking was over. But he didn’t tell the voters he wanted a new study or “needs assessment” to see whether a new library was really needed. There was no talk about a “needs assessment” or anything like that. His headline grabbing unconditional promise was totally dishonest.
It is impossible to know what drew people to vote for Vegh but common-sense tells us these dramatic, explicit pledges about a new library and seniors’ centre are likely to have shifted votes his way.
Getting Elected: Promising the Earth. Delivering Dust. 
That election in 2018 was a three-way contest that included Chris Emanuel and Joan Stonehocker. It was an open election with no incumbent. Vegh believed he had to spend more – and promise more – to boost his chance of winning. On 30 September 2022 he told Newmarket Today:
“I was not an incumbent last time (2018), and it was a vacant seat. In this case, I’m the incumbent, so it’s a different type of campaign.”
Why was the promise abandoned?
At the "Meet and Greet” on 29 September, Vegh told me he ditched his promise for a new library
“because the Board took a new library off their strategic plan”.
Three years and four months after Vegh’s promise of a new library the Board decided in February 2022 it was going to focus on outreach. But it did not unambiguously abandon the prospect of a new library at some stage. In July 2022 the Town's financial planning still explicitly provided for a 65,000 sq ft new library but pushed it out to 2028-30.
Newmarket Today reported in February 2022 that there was "no mention" of a new building and quoted Board member Darryl Gray:
“We didn’t go straight to the idea of a new library because we [have] a great library right now to continue to work on.”
And, earlier, Darryl Gray, told Newmarket Today:
“We may get to that point, where we decide as an organization and in partnership with the municipality, we need a new library, but we’re certainly not there.”
Flaccid
So what did Vegh do to press the case for a new library and seniors’ centre from his election as Deputy Mayor in October 2018 to February 2022 when the Library Board unveiled its new strategic plan?
Nothing. His advocacy was flaccid to non-existent.
His limp attempts to locate a new library and seniors' centre at the Hollingsworth arena site went nowhere. Why? Because no-one listens to Vegh. He is irrelevant. 
I recall sitting in on a Library Board meeting in May 2019 when the (then) Library Chief Executive Todd Kyle was updating Board members on the Town’s latest strategic priorities exercise and the implications for new or enhanced library facilities.
At the time I posted this:
"In the course of these exchanges no-one mentions Regional Councillor Tom Vegh or his proposed new library. This must be the ultimate insult. A Library Board choosing not to discuss a proposal for a new Library from the Town’s Deputy Mayor."
Strategic Policy workshops
The Town ran a series of workshops early in 2019 to decide on its “strategic priorities” for the new Council term: 2018-2022.
The first of these was on 29 January 2019. Others followed on 11 February 2022 and 26 March 2022.
On the first of these, on 29 January 2019, the newly elected councillors – steered by a professional moderator, Erik Lockhart - put forward their priorities for the new term and then started ranking them. The library and seniors’ centre appeared in the initial list but after ten minutes' discussion their ranking slipped and both dropped out of contention as a top priority.
At no point during this exercise did Tom Vegh make the case for a new library and seniors’ centre.
The new Mayor, John Taylor, told members they were setting a blueprint. The agreed strategic priorities would guide the staff over the next four years.
Taylor wants a "needs assessment"
Taylor told councillors that even if the new library didn't make the cut as a top priority:
"I fully expect, regardless of where this lands, that the Library Board will advance a needs assessment on the library."
And Vegh agrees:
"That was the comment I was going to make. For example, the Library Board have just over $200,000 already in their budget allocated for a needs assessment, and to look, after a needs assessment, at what locations and options are available in the town.
The library certainly works very closely with the Town, but you’re correct that, in discussions with the Town, they can go ahead and do this, frankly, without being on our priority list, if the Library Board feels it’s a priority.
They can act independently on it, then present that information, and then we as a council have to make decisions. But they’re certainly able to go on with that needs assessment."
Pocket Full of Mumbles
Vegh was given a platform to argue his case for a new library and seniors’ centre.
Instead, we got a pocket full of mumbles about a "needs assessment".
We are on the cusp of an election and, as always, we bow the knee before the will of the people.
But if Tom Vegh is returned as our Deputy Mayor and Regional Councillor some things will stay the same.
For as long as I can remember, Vegh has been irrelevant when it comes to setting the direction of the Town of Newmarket and York Region.
And that won't change.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Click "read more" for the Mayor's introduction to the strategic policies workshop on 29 January 2019.
The clip below shows the library and seniors' centre not making the cut as "top priorities". The full video is here.
Page 1 of 293