As talk of Alberta separation gains traction online, the Alberta Prosperity Project has pointed supporters to a draft fiscal plan titled Value of Freedom as evidence the province could afford independence.
The Border Pulse reviewed the document in full. What follows is a plain-language breakdown of what the plan shows, what it assumes and what it does not answer.
What the plan does show
At its core, the APP document works by reallocating money.
Using historical data from 2021 to 2024, the plan assumes federal taxes collected from Albertans would remain in Alberta following separation. Those revenues are then offset against the estimated cost of replacing federal programs and services currently delivered by Ottawa.
On paper, this creates a large revenue pool. That portion of the document is internally consistent. It answers a narrow question: how much revenue Alberta would control if federal taxes stayed within the province.
The plan also makes clear oil and gas would remain the dominant revenue source for decades. Despite claims that independence would reduce reliance on energy, the projections rely heavily on continued and expanded oil and gas production through at least 2045.
Where the assumptions begin
To make the numbers work long term, the plan assumes significant expansion of Alberta’s energy sector.
Oil production is projected to rise from roughly 3.8 million barrels per day today to approximately 9.5 million barrels per day. Natural gas production is also assumed to nearly double. Achieving this would require large-scale capital investment, major infrastructure approvals and expanded export capacity.
Historically, Alberta’s oil production has grown in cycles tied to global prices, capital availability, infrastructure approvals and market access constraints. The draft does not model those cyclical limits or provide a stress test for delays or investment pullbacks.
What the plan does not show
Most notably, the document does not include a near-term fiscal stress test.
There is no stated oil price required to balance the budget in the early years of independence. There is no sensitivity table showing what happens if prices fall to $55, $65 or $70 WTI for an extended period. Governments routinely publish this type of analysis because commodity volatility is unavoidable. It is absent here.
The plan assumes Alberta’s landlocked status can be addressed through future pipeline and port access but does not include costed or enforceable agreements to secure that access. Instead, it assumes infrastructure approvals and expanded market access proceed without delay or political resistance.
That omission is notable given Alberta’s current fiscal reality. The provincial government has already signalled that its upcoming budget will require difficult decisions, in part because oil prices have recently come in below prior assumptions. In other words, volatility is not hypothetical, it is affecting public finances today.
On diversification, the document outlines ambitions for technology, agriculture and venture capital growth. What it does not provide is quantified revenue showing when or how those sectors would replace oil revenue at scale within five to ten years. Diversification is discussed but not budgeted.
The draft also attributes large savings to deregulation, efficiency gains and technology adoption, including artificial intelligence. Those projected savings are not independently audited, phased in over time or stress-tested.
Process and response
The Border Pulse contacted the Alberta Prosperity Project through its published channels seeking clarification on near-term oil price assumptions, downside scenarios and export risk modeling. As of publication, no response has been received.
If updated models, sensitivity tables or third-party analysis are released, they will be reviewed and reported in full.
What this means for voters
None of this means Alberta separation is impossible.
It does mean the current draft functions as a projection document rather than a fully stress-tested fiscal framework.
Referendums are not symbolic events. Markets react, capital moves and borrowing costs can shift long before any final constitutional outcome is known.
Albertans considering whether to support a separation referendum deserve to know not only what could work in a best-case scenario but what happens if prices fall, projects stall or timelines slip.
Those answers are not in the document.
Read more: Column: Ignore Herr Trump at your peril
It seems to me APP is making extremely optimistic projections about the cost of replacing the services provided by the Federal Government today. They also seem to be ignoring that the Federal Government does provide capital $ for major projects, which would no longer happen. Alberta already has an infrastructure debt which is not being addressed and under funded education system and healthcare system. It seems to me their projections for how Alberta would function as a country and without all the things federalism bring to the table are hubris at best and drug-addled fantasies at worst.