SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 31

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 15, 2022 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 31 - Feb/15/22
Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)
  • Feb/15/22 2:12:12 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, last week, my Conservative caucus colleagues and I had the distinct privilege of carrying through our motion to review and amend our Canadian Constitution. By unanimously removing a long-standing tax provision that granted special treatment to a large corporation, all members of the House played a critical role in opening up and fixing that error in our Constitution. Although not necessarily a headline-grabbing initiative, removing red tape and unfair provisions of our Constitution is an important task, and part of the responsibility our constituents have entrusted us with in sending us all here. Tensions have been running high in the House for weeks as we debate issues that are important and have a direct impact on the future of all Canadians. Given the fraught environment we currently find ourselves in, the rarity of finding unanimous consent on any issue is not lost on me. I thank members of the House, especially my 13 Saskatchewan Conservative colleagues, for the show of unity in getting this important work done. We will always be on Saskatchewan’s side. After all, if we do not respect the Constitution, do we have respect for anything?
195 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 31 - Feb/15/22
Mr. Don Davies (Vancouver Kingsway, NDP)
  • Feb/15/22 4:30:42 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree very much with my hon. colleague about the importance of the Canada Health Act and federal spending. I also worked for a union for 16 years, so I appreciate her contributions to working people. However, I must take issue with the member's inaccurate statement that health care is provincial. I am going to read from the Library of Parliament paper on the jurisdiction. It states that “...the Constitution Act, 1867 does not expressly include “health” as a legislative power assigned either to Parliament...or to the provincial legislatures....” The Supreme Court of Canada has not interpreted section 92 as giving provincial legislatures exclusive jurisdiction over health care. The Supreme Court of Canada, in Schneider v. The Queen, stated: ...“health” is not a matter which is subject to specific constitutional assignment but instead is an amorphous topic which can be addressed by valid federal or provincial legislation, depending in the circumstances of each case on the nature or scope of the health problem in question. The Schneider decision also says that the national concern doctrine is a basis for a federal health jurisdiction, saying: ...federal legislation in relation to "health" can be supported where the dimension of the problem is national rather than local in nature.... Therefore, when my hon. colleague says that it is not the federal government's business to be in health care, she is constitutionally wrong. Is the member aware that the phrase “health care” does not occur in the Constitution and that the Supreme Court of Canada has said that health care is federal—
272 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border