Recall law being used exactly as UCP wrote it, says expert

By Lethbridge Herald on December 30, 2025.

Alexandra Noad
Lethbridge Herald
Local Journalism Initiative Reporter

While many are saying the actions – or lack thereof – of those behind the recall petition against Lethbridge East MLA Nathan Neudorf are unethical and antithetical to democracy, there’s little that can be done about it from a legal standpoint it due to gaping holes in the legislation.

Trevor Harrison, a political scientist and former professor of sociology at the University of Lethbridge, says the recall legislation, created and passed by the UCP government in 2019, is a good example of why governments should consider expert opinions when creating legislation.

“This is not the first time the (Alberta) government brought in some form of legislation without thinking it through and without getting expert opinion on these things.”

More than a month has passed since Elections Alberta approved the recall petition for Neudorf, submitted by Ryan Tanner. Despite the Herald’s best efforts, they haven’t been able to reach him or others who have been rumoured to be involved in the campaign.

Elections Alberta told the Herald that petition organizers are not required by law to recruit canvassers or collect signatures once a petition is approved.

Harrison says the lack of due diligence and expert advice on the Recall Act, and other legislation, has resulted in the government having to go back and fix the legislation after the fact.

There are currently 26 recall petitions taking place across the province, including against Premier Danielle Smith in her home riding of Brooks-Medicine Hat. However, only the Neudorf recall campaign appears to have someone take advantage of the legal loopholes that allow for inaction. As it stands, the petition is required to have 13,000 signatures by Feb. 23 in order to be valid; as of Monday, and it was assumed no signatures have been collected, give the fact that no one has been able to get in touch with Tanner directly.

Harrison says if the government does decide to keep the recall legislation, they will have to give it a good thinking over to ensure it’s airtight in the future so it won’t backfire on them like it did this time.

“If they do decide to keep it then, presumably, they’ll go back and get these kinds of situations dealt with, so they’re not a problem in the future. 

“But the bigger question is whether or not having this type of legislation on the books is a very wise thing to do in the first place.”

Neudorf, along with many others in the UCP caucus, have claimed these recalls are abusing the legislation. However, Harrison points out that people are using the law as it was written.

“The fact is, this is the way the legislation was actually written, so that’s on the government. If they don’t get it right, people are following the way it was actually set up, so using the term abused doesn’t fit this case.”