A constitutional crisis is brewing. Andrew Coyne writes:
As of this week we will have not one but two provincial governments in this country formally committed to act in defiance of the Constitution, legitimate federal authority and the rule of law.
François Legault’s Coalition Avenir Québec government in Quebec is the first. Returned to power with an increased majority after a campaign filled with appalling attacks on immigrants, Mr. Legault will be looking to build on the signature policies of his first four years – Bill 21, imposing an effective hiring bar on observant members of religious minorities across much of the public sector, and Bill 96, which broadly outlaws the use of English in either the public or the private sector.
Still, Mr. Legault is the soul of legality compared with what we may expect from Danielle Smith as leader of the United Conservative Party and premier of Alberta. Where Mr. Legault at least pretended to rewrite the Constitution, Ms. Smith would openly repudiate it; where Mr. Legault’s government took the trouble to preserve its bills from the Charter’s reach by means of the notwithstanding clause – itself a part of the Charter – Ms. Smith’s would excuse itself altogether from federal authority, on the strength of nothing more than its own legislative say-so.
We have yet to see the precise wording of that bill, the preposterous Alberta Sovereignty Act, but as advertised it would pretend to empower the province to ignore any federal law it chose – after a “free vote” of the legislature, speaking of fig-leafs – and to defy any federal court ruling that went against it. Companion legislation would assert the right to replace all federally appointed judges with provincial appointees, to expel the RCMP in favour of a provincial police force, and to collect the tax from the province’s businesses and public employees that they now send to the feds.
It’s nonsense, of course: utterly, vapidly unconstitutional. So is Bill 96. And so both will be found in good time by the Supreme Court of Canada. But whereas the Legault government would probably yield before an inclement Supreme Court ruling – even the Parti Québécois accepted the court’s jurisdiction in the secession reference – the Smith government would more or less be bound to defy a court finding that the Alberta Sovereignty Act was ultra vires the Constitution: The whole premise of the law, after all, is to free the province from such constraints.
Mr. Legault has more demands up his sleeve: for full control of immigration, for example, or for more money for health care with even fewer strings attached. The immigration file is particularly fraught: The Legault government aims to reduce immigration to the province, even as immigration to Canada has soared. Over time, that promises to further reduce Quebec’s already dwindling share of the population, and with it the province’s influence. No problem: Mr. Legault has a solution. Quebec must be guaranteed its current share of the seats in the House of Commons, in perpetuity – as befits its status as a “nation.”
Things do not bode well for the future.
Image: psychologytoday.com
8 comments:
Perhaps the Alberta sovereignty act should be renamed the Alberta ship dilbit at any cost act? for the rest is but smoke and mirrors.
TB
Lots of sound and fury, TB. Lots of grievance.
I get the affinity of the conservatives for Diagolon.
Both want to burn it to the ground.
Couldn't help catching an echo of the 1982 movie Poltergeist
With her "I"M BACK" on the TV
As Altabeque (Albequeia?) will be built on the graves of our original population
It becomes all too fitting
There was a fundamentalist preacher buried with them too.
Reality imitating art? Iterations of the fractal universe? History rhyming?
It was bad enough 1984 became a political playbook now we are remaking horror stories in our image.
Fun times.
*Happy Thanksgiving* (greeting void where possibly considered as cultural appropriation due to native content or as misrepresentation of actual cultures or original violation of land claims or inaccurate portrayal of actual history due to discovery of continent by previous explorers. Feel free to fast and grieve if necessary. Happiness is not mandated by Ottawa.)
Happiness has never been mandated by Ottawa, lungta. And we have lots of unhappy people.
Things won't be boring!
Alberta's chain can be yanked because they do not have the "protections" Quebec does and Legault is smarter than the Premier of Alberta. For Alberta to pass a bill which basically gives Ottawa the middle finger, won't work. Federal law will still supersede Provincial law. We will have to wait and see what Trudeau does if alberta decides it can ignore Canadian law. He may do as his father did, which would be the way to go, but who knows.
Of course Ms. Freeland is not a power to be ignored.
Some of the alberta's ruling party may think she has gone a step too far as will some voters. Now she does have a majority, but that could change.
The easiest way to "yank" their chains is simply to reduce or stop transfer payments. If Quebec's population continues to decline so will their economy and big business will move out as will others, including french speakers. As to Quebec holding on to the seats in the House of Commons regardless of how few voters they have, the rest of Canada may make that very very difficult for whomever is P.M.
In B.C., a blogger, Harvey Overfeld, Keeping it Real, recently wrote an article on how much money Quebec receives from the feds each year and how large their population is. He then compared it to B.C. We ought to be receiving more or Quebec less, to even things out. Quebec is not the only province which is "guaranteed" their number of seats in Parliament. Some of the Maritime provinces are also.
Legault is a Premier who'd like to be a king and Danielle is just a nutbar, in my humble opinion. Legault also knows how to play the game, as do Quebec's voters. Alberta has an alternative, Notley
The problem with "permitting" a province from ignoring federal law is it may become a fascist state, allow criminal activity, etc.
It maybe time for Quebec to have its control over immigration reduced.
Whatever happens, it'll probably be ugly, e.a.f.
Only BC, Alberta and Ontario don't get freebie extra federal electoral ridings. All of which were negotiated at time of entry into confederation by grandfatherinf and other nonsense.
https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red&document=index&lang=e
By the ime our population hits 100 million or so, the riding representation will be evened out so that anomalies will no longer exist. We;ll also have about 900 MPs! By then, Quebec will be a rump of nobodies because if one province stands out as deciding to delude itself it's ever so special and needs to isolate itself and examine its navel in excruciatingly xenophobic detail, Quebec is the one. Alberta is populated by rurals unable to read existing laws and acts, so makes up fibs about equalization and federal overreach and thus believes in the tooth fairy and old wives' tales.
BM
We need proportional representation, BM. When I voted for Trudeau, I thought we'd get it.
Post a Comment