Roundup: Ford turns to the Notwithstanding Clause – again

Posted on by

The sudden comfort with which premiers are deciding to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause is getting a bit uncomfortable, as Doug Ford decided he needed to invoke it after a court struck down his attempts to limit third-party spending in provincial elections in a somewhat arbitrary fashion (given that unions get together to form American-esque political action committees in this province). While you can find a great explainer on Ford and his particular legal challenge in this thread, the more alarming part is the apparent need to reach for the “emergency valve” of the Clause before even appealing the decision to the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court of Canada.

There is a perfectly legitimate reason why the Notwithstanding Clause exists, which as to do with keeping a certain amount of parliamentary supremacy in lawmaking, and it gives governments an avenue of recourse if there is a fundamental disagreement with a court’s interpretation of legislation. But lately, it’s being invoked by premiers who know they are trying to push through objectionable legislation – François Legault did it with Bill 21, which the courts have essentially said blocks their ability to strike down any portion of the law, and he’s doing it again with his Bill 96 on trying to obliterate any bilingualism in the province (the same bill that seeks to unilaterally amend the federal constitution). Ford had threatened to invoke it to ram through his unilateral changes to Toronto City Council while they were in the middle of an election, but ultimately didn’t because of a court injunction, and his decision this time is similarly dubious. This willingness to invoke the Clause at the first sign of court challenge or on the first defeat is a very big problem for our democracy, and we should be very wary about this abuse of power, and punish these governments appropriately at the ballot box during the next elections for these decisions.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1402715067083280387

In the meantime, here’s Emmett Macfarlane with more thoughts on the court decision that led to this turn of events.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1402712563960455173

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1402713058913525761

Good reads:

  • Justin Trudeau heads off for the G7 leaders’ meeting in the UK today.
  • Moderna will be shipping seven million doses, primarily from their US supply chain, in June, fulfilling their contract and getting us much closer to full vaccination.
  • The government says that fully vaccinated travellers could avoid two-week quarantines by as early as next month.
  • The federal government has reached a settlement in the class-action lawsuit by First Nations children who attended day schools instead of residential schools.
  • The current head of personnel in the Canadian Forces says the failure to deal with sexual misconduct feels like an existential threat to the institution.
  • As military police probe allegations that our troops were training Iraqi war criminals, a memo emerged of the Chief of Defence Staff being warned about this.
  • The International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group says that the CRA is unfairly targeting Muslim charities for audits and revoking charitable status.
  • Maclean’s talks to two of the economists who have been making COVID charts throughout the course of the pandemic.
  • The NDP have agreed to help get the climate change accountability bill passed.
  • The Keystone XL is officially dead as the proponent abandoned it, leaving questions as to just how much the Alberta government sunk into it.
  • Professor Fenwick McKelvey muses on Bill C-10 and net neutrality.
  • Kevin Carmichael parses the Bank of Canada’s latest thinking on interest rates and bond purchases, which remains more hawkish than some of their peers.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.