Thank you, Madam Chair.
My question is again for Professor Mendes.
The central point I was trying to get at in the response I had to the third of the hypothetical questions he posed to the Senate committee was that it seems to me the Prime Minister's prerogative is not what's being discussed here, constitutionally speaking; it's the royal prerogative, the Prime Minister being a legal construction and the crown being a constitutional construction. That's why I cited the precedent of the 1919 reference case vis-à-vis the Manitoba Initiative and Referendum Act.
He didn't have the opportunity in his response to comment on that, so I would be grateful if he could now indicate the degree to which he thinks that precedent is or is not applicable.