SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 157

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 9, 2023 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 157 - Feb/9/23
Ms. Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, NDP)
  • Feb/9/23 4:08:52 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, like the minister, I am very worried about the increasing use of the notwithstanding clause, and my focus will be on human rights. In 2000, in Alberta, Ralph Klein tried to use the notwithstanding clause to take away the rights of the SOGI community to same-sex marriage. He was not successful because the Supreme Court was able to speak to that. I wonder if the minister could talk a bit about some of the risks posed to individual human rights if people like Danielle Smith were given this tool to use more frequently.
96 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 157 - Feb/9/23
Hon. David Lametti
  • Feb/9/23 4:09:33 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, if one uses the notwithstanding clause at the beginning, one acts as if there is no charter. That was not the intention of the framers in 1981. It was there as a safety valve, as the last word, when Allan Blakeney and other western premiers advocated in its favour. It has a terrible impact. The judge in the first instance decision in the Bill 21 case, the Hak case, in Quebec noted that the pre-emptive use of the charter cut off both judicial scrutiny and political debate. That is a tragedy for our democracy because it puts minorities at risk.
103 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 157 - Feb/9/23
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
  • Feb/9/23 4:25:34 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about one of the greatest minds in multiculturalism, Will Kymlicka. Regarding the Quebec nation and its desire to have access to certain tools, such as the notwithstanding clause, Kymlicka wrote: “Had Quebec not been guaranteed these substantial powers—and hence protected from the possibility of being outvoted on key issues by the larger anglophone population—it is certain that Quebec either would not have joined Canada in 1867 or would have seceded sometime thereafter.”
89 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 157 - Feb/9/23
Mr. Mario Beaulieu (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ)
  • Feb/9/23 4:58:39 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his speech. I believe, and I think he said something similar, that the notwithstanding clause is a kind of defence against the tyranny of the Canadian majority. As long as Quebec is not independent, we are a minority. We had a Constitution imposed on us against our will, and we often have an Official Languages Act imposed on us against our will. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on this.
80 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 157 - Feb/9/23
Mr. Luc Thériault (Montcalm, BQ)
  • Feb/9/23 5:10:52 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I heard my colleague say that we had better things to do than to talk about the notwithstanding clause. However, I would point out to him that the notwithstanding clause ensures two things for the Quebec nation and the Quebec National Assembly: the separation of church and state, in the case of Bill 101, and the continued existence of the French language, thanks to Bill 96. On behalf of a nation that intends on passing the test of time, I want give my colleague the chance to reconsider his words because if he still maintains that it is a lost cause for Quebeckers, I want to make sure that he and his party face the political consequences of their position in Quebec.
126 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border