At least not until this current year, 2026, when the Canadian province of Alberta catapulted the word into the spotlight.
Nine questions it was, at first, then ten – as if the provincial government under Danielle Smith had hesitated while drafting it. No, not with itself, but with the Albertians, that is, the citizens living in Alberta. The original thinking behind this political action was that Alberta no longer belongs to Canada like a teenager among the provinces. A province strikes out on its own.
Before this ten-question referendum was launched, a court had struck down the separatist petition. Now, the referendum has failed clearly, with almost 75% against.
Yet the term “referendum” stays lodged in the synapses. Naturally, as with most people of Swiss stock, the thought surfaces at once: “Who invented it?” This question, on endless loop, has a genealogy behind it. Spoiler alert. Switzerland did not invent the referendum, but in the 16th and 17th centuries the Three Leagues of Grisons and Valais would take decisions “ad referendum.” They could not decide themselves, but the local administration could refer the matter back.
The referendum as a term was, once again, a forerunner from antiquity. The ancient Greeks and Romans apparently had time to spare – enough, at any rate, to dream up new words for old questions. The ancient economy of Athens and Rome consisted of philosophies and their generations of words. Yes, a manual for application was included.
The referendum as a basic idea is a popular vote on a concrete question of substance. This covers small matters like a law, a correction to the constitution, or, should it need to be a bit bigger, even a state treaty. The word “referendum” itself comes from Latin – where else? – and means to briefly refer back to the one who gave the task, to ask what is meant or wanted by it.
The referendum, in practical and theoretical application, is not identical everywhere. Of course not – that would be almost Swiss-simple. No, in Switzerland, for example, the referendum is an instrument of the people, used to slow down and brake decisions of parliament with loud tones. The ingredients are fairly simple. Take 50,000 signatures standing under the referendum text, and the vote gets cranked up.
Outside Switzerland, a referendum is often launched by the government itself. The aim is to gather possible backing from the people for its plans. “Hey folks, can we do this or that?” With this motivation, the referendum comes dangerously close to the plebiscite.
So what, then, is a plebiscite? The term sounds more like a contagious disease than a political concept. The plebiscite picked up considerable fame when Brexit went down in Great Britain in 2016. But it’s true, the plebiscite has carried a bad reputation ever since its introduction by Napoleon the Third. Because he wanted to use the instrument to legitimise his power.
Back to the referendum. In modern times there are plenty of examples of how the term becomes active in political practice. The American state of Massachusetts had its constitution confirmed by the municipalities in 1780. With that, the referendum became one of the first ratifications of a constitution by the people.
And in modern Switzerland? There, in the middle of the 19th century, the right of veto arose in the cantons of St. Gallen and Basel-Landschaft. Well, look at that. In 1848, the canton of Vaud introduced the constitutional referendum.
Conclusion: Switzerland did not invent the referendum. It made it its house brand all the same.
And in Alberta, Canada, the referendum was put to a dramatic and nearly divisive test on October 19, 2026.
Refer to an End. Ummm...
