,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Hmm. I find myself in fundamental disagreement with a lot of this @DwightNewmanLaw piece on the federal-provincial fight over the carbon tax. c2cjournal.ca/2019/04/wrecki…
My disagreement extends to first principles. Here's Dwight on Confederation: "From the beginning, Canada’s constitutional arrangements envisaged a relatively loose federation in which provinces hold many areas of exclusive jurisdiction."
This is simply not how I see 1867.
This is simply not how I see 1867.
Yes, the 1867 division of powers gave provinces a list of exclusive areas. But what was established - at least what most framers thought was established - was a highly centralized federation, with the feds holding most of the "important" powers.
Over time federalism in Canada has evolved, through a provincial rights movement, through (bad) JCPC rulings, through informal constitutional change, to make Canada one of the most decentralized federations in the world. But it certainly wasn't designed that way initially.
On the case itself, I don't take issue with Dwight's analysis that the feds may not be making strong arguments (today in Ontario's case didn't seem to go especially well either).
But on the fundamentals of whether the objective, purpose, and design of federal policy is valid federal law, I remain in the "no brainer" camp.
