“in the event of clear approval of the question [to repeal s. 36] in a referendum, this would not guarantee the removal of equalization from the Constitution, or any reworking of the equalization formula.”
This is a fundamental misstatement of constitutional law.
Second, s. 121 does not, in fact, guarantee barrier-free trade in Canada.
The SCC upheld the law.
New seats are added to the House of Commons regularly based on the census. Alberta has gained from this over the years.
The Federal Court, the Federal Court of Appeal and the Tax Court of Canada are all based in Ottawa. They are itinerant courts, though, which means they travel to different parts of the country to hold hearings.
This is a bonkers idea.
The panel noted a “perceived unfairness” with Quebec entering into a carbon offset agreement with California. QC developed its own carbon price program.
In fact, Alberta *did* have a market-based carbon price. But the current government made its first Bill to repeal it.
It is bold, however, to just assert that the Impact Assessment Act and carbon levy are unconstitutional.
The panel recognizes that Parliament wouldn’t support a constitutional amendment. Why, then, would it support an agreement?
The merits may be somewhat questionable.
Mind you, appointing a CFO isn’t a large cost—maybe no more than 2 Matts™️.
The federal government can enter into any international agreements. But it can’t always implement the entire agreement.
Hence, the federal government involves provinces in trade negotiations.
Anyone who ever paid or received an allowance knows this doesn’t happen.
It just doesn’t work that way in families or in confederation.
The federal government certainly has the right to make sure its contribution to health care means those principles are met.
The panel notes Alberta has a “rich history with direct democracy.” It notes the two referenda that have been held since Alberta became a province; the more recent one happened 38 years ago.
This is vague and meaningless. Alberta is already unique insofar as Alberta laws and policies are not exactly copied in any of the other provinces.
Nor do I feel it was good value for the tax dollars that went into making it.