Marc Henry: Most Albertans seem okay with changes to Alberta's Bill of Rights

This week, the Smith government introduced Bill 24, the Alberta Bill of Rights Amendment Act.

Public reaction to the bill and its proposals is not especially controversial, but it has left more than a few voters scratching their heads regarding its intentions.

A Bill of Rights was introduced to Alberta under the first term of the Progressive Conservatives, described by premier Peter Lougheed at the time as "a shield to the citizens from government abuse of its power."

This came before the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enshrined in the Constitution in 1982.

• The information you need to know, sent directly to you: Download the CTV News App

Alberta's original composition laid out rights and freedoms existing in the province without discrimination by race, national origin, colour, religion or sex, including:

• Right to liberty, security of person and enjoyment of property, and right not to be deprived thereof except by due process of law; and
• Right to religion, speech, assembly and association, and the freedom of the press.

The Bill of Rights has not been subject to significant amendment since 2015, when references to sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression were included, along with the right of parents to make informed decisions about their children's education.

Bill 24 would essentially make three substantive amendments to the current Bill of Rights:

• Right to make one's own choices over vaccinations and all medical decisions;
• Right to not be deprived of one's property without due legal process and just compensation; and
• Right to legally acquire, keep and safely use firearms.

The UCP government offers no concrete examples of when anybody was forced into medical treatment in recent memory, or when property rights were infringed.

And firearms, of course, are covered by federal jurisdiction.

Testing any of these would be a matter left to the courts to sort out.

No matter.

Public reaction to strengthening "property rights" is overwhelmingly positive.

Almost three-quarters (73 per cent) of those interviewed in our October provincewide survey agreed with this provision of the bill (46 per cent strongly).

Views on the remaining two are a bit more mixed, but nothing that would be of great concern to a government.

A majority of Albertans (56 per cent) approve of measures to protect one's ability to make their own medical decisions (including vaccination).

A thinner majority (52 per cent) also approves of enshrining rights to own and use firearms (legally, of course), although this proposal garners the most opposition (44 per cent disapprove).

The proposals are very well received outside the two biggest cities, while sentiment is most tepid in Edmonton.

They are also heartily supported by UCP voters.

A majority of NDP voters support the property rights provisions, but vaccine/medical rights and firearms rights are decidedly unpopular with these voters.

While all the individual proposed amendments are reasonably well-received (with some variation) by most Albertans, the overall reaction to the substance of Bill 24 is more subdued.

In fact, when asked to gauge their views on proposed changes as a package, Albertans are evenly split – 45 per cent approve and disapprove.

There is a partisan lens applied here.

Only eight per cent of NDP voters support the proposed changes overall, compared to nearly four-fifths (79 per cent) of UCP voters.

But it's odd that even among UCP voters, the suite of amendments receives a slightly more muted response than even the least popular individual component.

The most likely explanation is that respondents judge the motives behind the amendments with greater cynicism than the substance of the changes themselves.

• Sign up for breaking news alerts from CTV News, right at your fingertips

Almost six-in-ten (57 per cent) Albertans believe the UCP's proposals for the Bill of Rights are more about "political theatre and pandering to the premier's base before a leadership review" than any genuine policy requirement.

Meanwhile, just over one-third (35 per cent) endorse the contrary view that these amendments are "meaningful, important and necessary to protect citizens' rights in an ever-changing world."

Again, perceived motives are highly polarized among the public.

NDP voters almost universally (97 per cent) believe these proposed amendments are driven by the premier's "pandering."

In comparison, two-thirds (67 per cent) of UCP voters feel a genuine societal need for these amendments to find their way to the legislature's floor.

That said, almost one-quarter (24 per cent) of UCP voters view them as "political theatre."

This weekend, nearly 6,000 UCP members gather in Red Deer to pass judgment on the premier's leadership.

Whether or not Bill 24 will influence the outcome of that vote is highly debatable.

But after the leadership vote and after this legislative session ends in December, the rights captured in the bill will be enshrined in Alberta's most paramount law – and most Albertans seem okay with that, even if the enhanced rights don't actually change anything or solve any specific problems.

Sometimes, symbolism is enough.