These questions are presented like practical housekeeping: fix the courts, reform the Senate, protect provincial powers, get more control from Ottawa. But they are not administrative tweaks. They are some of the hardest constitutional changes possible in Canada. Abolishing the Senate, changing judicial appointments, rewriting federal-provincial powers, and giving provinces priority over federal law would all require major constitutional negotiations involving multiple provinces and, in some cases, unanimous national consent. These are changes that depend on the agreement of the rest of the country, not simply the will of Alberta voters.
The government site makes these proposals sound like simple acts of political will: if Alberta wants it badly enough, it can happen. That is not how constitutional law works. These are not policy adjustments. They are national constitutional fights being presented like routine provincial management. And when voters are led to expect outcomes that were never likely to happen, the failure can be reframed as another story about Ottawa blocking Alberta, rather than an honest explanation of how difficult and unlikely these changes were from the start.
