P.E.I. premier says he would use notwithstanding clause to secure Lands Protection Act
Social Sharing
Premier Rob Lantz says he will do whatever it takes to protect P.E.I.'s Lands Protection Act amid concerns about how that legislation would be affected by the governing Progressive Conservatives' proposed bill to eliminate trade barriers between provinces.
"I will never compromise our Lands Protection Act," Lantz said Wednesday in the legislature, as PC MLAs applauded loudly.
"I would go so far as using the notwithstanding clause to protect our Lands Protection Act here on Prince Edward Island."
Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms — known as the notwithstanding clause — allows for premiers or prime ministers to override rulings on legislation that judges have determined would violate sections of the Charter for a five-year period.
The clause can only override certain sections of the Charter — including Section 2 and sections 7 to 15, which deal with fundamental freedoms, legal rights and equality rights — but can't be used to override democratic rights.
'Critically important'
The PC government's proposed interprovincial trade bill introduced last Friday, would ease the flow of goods to and from other provinces that enact similar legislation, and make it easier for workers in some regulated professions to find employment on the Island.
The opposition parties are concerned the legislation would supersede all other laws, including the Lands Protection Act, which limits non-residential land ownership in the province.
Green MLA Matt MacFarlane said Wednesday that the lands act is "one of our most unique and important pieces of legislation," adding that it is up to the PC government to ensure nothing is removed from the "critically important protections on land."
He noted that Erin McGrath-Gaudet, the province's deputy minister of intergovernmental affairs, said on the floor of the legislature Tuesday that she was only reasonably confident that the Interprovincial Trade and Mobility Act would not negatively impact land protections.
"Islanders expect the premier to ensure, without a shadow of a doubt, that our land protection laws are going to be secure," MacFarlane said.
When asked whether he would commit to reviewing the interprovinical trade bill to guarantee that no part of it can override or weaken P.E.I.'s land protection laws, Lantz said he is committed to doing so.
Federal free trade
Prime Minister Mark Carney said last month that he's committed to removing all federal exemptions under the Canada Free Trade Agreement by July 1.
MacFarlane asked Lantz whether he is willing to gamble the protection of Island land to be first out of the gate when it comes to removing trade barriers between provinces.
"I have heard the federal government — the prime minister and the trade minister — commit to removing federal exemptions from the Canada Free Trade Agreement. I have heard provincial premiers talk about removing all of their party-specific exemptions from the Canada Free Trade Agreement. You haven't heard me say that," Lantz said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
17 hours ago
- CBC
When absence of consultation can become a political headache
In the afterglow of his party forming government in 2021 on the strength of a promise to fix health care, Premier Tim Houston and other senior officials set out on a tour across Nova Scotia to hear directly from health-care workers about how to help an ailing system. Those consultations would lead to a variety of programs and initiatives, based on feedback from people directly involved, that helped the Tories begin to make progress on a file that had become a political headache for previous governments. In the second term of Houston's Progressive Conservative government, however, people could be forgiven for being skeptical about just how interested the Tories are in consulting with the public, and whether feedback they receive will be reflected in policy and programs. Houston came off a resounding election win in November only to go into the next session at the legislature with a number of bills that caught most people off guard because none of it was discussed during the election. That included a bill that would have clipped the powers of the auditor general and privacy commissioner, give the government the power to fire non-union civil servants without cause, and lift bans and moratoriums on uranium exploration and mining and hydraulic fracturing for onshore natural gas. As the natural resources bill was making its way through the legislature, Houston responded to criticism about a lack of consultation by saying that bans had to be removed before conversations could be had. But since the Tories passed the bill, Mi'kmaw chiefs and municipal government officials continue to feel left out of any discussions, and Natural Resources Minister Tory Rushton announced a call for proposals for uranium exploration before letters could even land in the mailboxes of potentially affected property owners. Unintended consequences There was also an absence of conversation on the government's plan to make parking free at health-care sites. Sources say the Tories were warned of potential implications at hospitals in Halifax Regional Municipality, but the government pushed ahead anyway before steps could be taken to lessen impacts on health-care staff. In the face of major blowback, the government retreated on increased parking fees for health-care workers and is now scrambling to find whatever new spaces it can, including spending $1 million to upgrade land it already owns on South Street near the IWK Health Centre and Victoria General Hospital. A lack of consultation caused the Tories headaches even on legislation that should have been an easy public relations win. Houston's bill to help knock down interprovincial trade barriers was lauded by other provinces and premiers who said they would follow his lead. The problem for the premier was no one bothered to talk to professional regulators before the bill was introduced. They quickly pointed out flaws that, had the government not amended the bill, would have prevented regulators from being able to provide oversight and detect people posing as professionals. A government's prerogative Houston and his team will say that change, along with changes to the bill that would have affected the auditor general and privacy commissioner, are signs of a government willing to listen to feedback. But consultation ahead of time would have identified the flaws that created problems for the Tories in the first place. When it wants to, this government can lead a thorough and thoughtful consultation process. Along with the health tour and other efforts to get feedback from health-care workers, the recent work related to the new student code of conduct was mostly well received. The government is also in the midst of consultation about the potential of changing the rules governing where alcohol can be sold. But then there is the process used for the Coastal Protection Act, where the government disregarded documented results in favour of a different direction. That's its prerogative, but it can risk creating widespread cynicism. Much is made of the supermajority Houston won last November, and what it means for his government's ability to advance its agenda. But that supermajority also means that when the government does something that upsets the public, there's an increased chance a PC MLA will be the one fielding angry telephone calls, office visits or emails from constituents. The next election might be three or four years away, but an accumulated perception that a government won't take the time to ask questions or seek feedback before pushing ahead with plans can be difficult to overcome when voters next turn their minds to casting a ballot.
CBC
a day ago
- CBC
Matt MacFarlane chosen as leader of P.E.I. Green Party
Matt MacFarlane has been elected leader of the P.E.I. Green Party. The Borden-Kinkora MLA got 507 of the 647 votes cast. He was running against former Green Party MLA Hannah Bell. The leadership convention took place at Bluefield High School in North Wiltshire Saturday. It was originally scheduled for a smaller venue, but was relocated after the party's membership quadrupled to 800 in the lead-up to the vote. The Greens have been without a leader since Peter Bevan-Baker left the position after the 2023 provincial general election. That vote saw the party tumble from Official Opposition status. Their eight seats were cut to two — Bevan-Baker and Karla Bernard, who stepped up as interim leader. The Greens added a third seat in the legislature after MacFarlane won a February 2024 byelection in Borden-Kinkora. That was triggered by the resignation of former Progressive Conservative MLA Jamie Fox, who stepped down to run for the federal Conservatives. Byelections are set to be called before the end of the summer in Charlottetown-Hillsborough Park and Brackley-Hunter River. Those seats were left vacant when former PC cabinet minister Natalie Jameson stepped down to run in the federal election for the Conservatives, and Dennis King stepped down as premier and MLA. The Greens and the P.E.I. Liberal Party each have three seats in the legislature, so the upcoming byelections could decide which party becomes the Official Opposition.
Montreal Gazette
2 days ago
- Montreal Gazette
Libman: On death, taxes and the future of minority rights in Quebec
Benjamin Franklin famously wrote: 'In this world nothing can be certain, except death and taxes.' Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, however, comes pretty close. It is the ironclad constitutional protection of minority-language education rights in this country. It has consistently been interpreted by Quebec courts to uphold the right of the English-speaking minority to control and manage its school system. And it's exempt from the application of the notwithstanding clause. After the Coalition Avenir Québec government adopted Bill 40 in 2020, abolishing and replacing school boards with service centres under greater government control, the province's English boards challenged the law as unconstitutional. In 2023 Quebec Superior Court Judge Sylvain Lussier agreed, ruling in no uncertain terms that much of Bill 40 infringes on the English-speaking community's constitutional rights to govern and control its educational institutions. The CAQ government, however, appealed the judgment. In April of this year, Quebec Court of Appeal judges Robert Mainville, Christine Baudouin and Judith Harvie handed down their ruling. They also concluded that parts of Bill 40 infringe on the section of the Charter of Rights that guarantees minority-language education rights and couldn't be demonstrably justified as a reasonable limit on charter rights in a free and democratic society. Another slam dunk for minority education rights. Yet this week, the Legault government went ahead anyways to request leave to appeal this judgment by Quebec's highest court to the Supreme Court of Canada. The irony here shouldn't be lost: Quebec's nationalist government is asking Canada's highest court to overturn rulings from the two Quebec courts. I have little doubt Quebec's lawyers have advised the government they cannot possibly win this case at the Supreme Court. This appeal seems purely political. No one would expect the CAQ to dare show any surrender in assailing minority language rights at the risk of giving a drumstick to their more nationalist rivals, the separatist Parti Québécois. The Supreme Court should refuse to hear the appeal considering how categorically the two Quebec courts unanimously ruled in what seems an open-and-shut case. For several reasons, the ideal scenario would be for the Supreme Court to say the Quebec courts composed of Lussier, Mainville, Baudouin and Harvie have already made an irreproachable decision. Case closed. This, in fact, could even benefit the CAQ (which they might be secretly hoping for) because if the Supreme Court does take the case and inevitably invalidates sections of the law sometime next year, around Quebec election time, it would help provide ripe fodder for the PQ to condemn Canada for 'again' crushing Quebec's aspirations and ignoring its 'distinctiveness' — while conveniently glossing over the fact that Quebec francophone judges had also unanimously struck it down. But watch out for another concern. Within days of the appeal court's ruling, coincidentally or not, Quebec Justice Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette announced his intention to launch negotiations with Ottawa about amending the Constitution so that Quebec judges are chosen from among members of the Quebec Bar, recommended by the Quebec government. Currently, superior and appeal court judges are appointed by the federal government. Judges in this country act as a check and balance for government legislation, if challenged. They are impartial arbiters, interpreting the charters of rights to balance individual or minority rights against political objectives. In Quebec, where an important linguistic minority relies on constitutional protections, the courts are their only redress at times, often against the backdrop of a highly charged language environment. We need only look across the border at the U.S. to see what can happen when the court system becomes politicized. If certain Quebec governments started to exert influence on the courts by appointing judges known for favouring collective rights over individual rights, or harbouring secessionist sympathies, for example, the last vestiges of protection for minority communities, including the certainty of Section 23, could vanish.
