October at the KEI Network is about sovereignty: our ability to retain meaningful control over the decisions shaping our lives. But control carries responsibility. Whether we are debating Alberta’s future or developing artificial intelligence, safety should come first.

On October 3, I moderated “Why Alberta, Canada?” at Calgary’s WeUnify conference. Constitutional lawyer Keith Wilson argued for independence. Bill Jones presented the “prepare” position. The audience served as our third panellist, bringing the case for “stay” into the discussion.

Wilson’s argument was that Alberta is already ready. Its infrastructure, workforce and institutions exist. In his view, independence would largely mean transferring authority from Ottawa to Edmonton rather than building a country from nothing. He also argued that beginning a legal process could give Alberta greater negotiating leverage. Continued below.

Last week’s Podcast Recording:

Take It Personally: What the Referendum Means to You – HERE

Continued from above

Jones urged a different sequence: strengthen the institutional foundations first, then decide. Their disagreement centred on readiness. One saw a house already built, awaiting a transfer of the deed; the other wanted more work on the foundations. It was a serious exchange, conducted without a shouting match. That alone deserves encouragement.

The audience’s role mattered. A discussion of sovereignty needs space for people who disagree, including those who wish to remain in Canada. Listening is part of exercising responsibility for power.

An essential distinction emerged. Alberta’s October 19 referendum includes ten questions. The sovereignty question offers a choice between remaining in Canada and beginning the legal process required to hold a future binding referendum on separation. That question’s result is non-binding. The vote itself does not create an independent Alberta.

That distinction deserves to survive the noise. So does another: wanting greater control does not establish that we are ready to exercise it safely. Whatever our preference, we should ask how essential services would continue, how rights would be protected and who would carry the costs if expectations proved wrong.

Those are questions for every position. Staying also carries responsibilities. Institutions must earn trust by responding to the people they serve. Preparing should strengthen our capacity to manage change, whether Alberta stays or goes. Safety cannot mean refusing every change; it means understanding consequences and protecting people through them.