Finally, I'm going to read to you from the working paper for Bill C-77, as it was called, from 1987, which I dug up. It is the document that surrounded the act that became the Emergencies Act in 1988. It starts off by saying this:
The constitutional responsibility for dealing with emergencies is divided between the federal government and the provinces. The Constitution Act, 1867 does not delineate in specific terms the authority of each level of government over emergencies, but...the federal government has primary and ultimate responsibility to provide for the safety and security of Canadians during national emergencies. Its constitutional jurisdiction over such national emergencies stems from the power of Parliament to legislate for the “Peace, Order and Good Government of Canada” and the emergency doctrine which has evolved from it.
That doctrine invests the Parliament of Canada, during times of national crisis, with temporary plenary jurisdiction to legislate on all matters, including those normally reserved exclusively to the provinces. It operates, as Mr. Justice Beetz of the Supreme Court of Canada stated in the Anti-Inflation Reference, as a “partial and temporary alteration of the division of powers between Parliament and the provincial legislatures”...which gives to the Parliament of Canada in times of national crisis, “concurrent and paramount jurisdiction over matters which would normally fall within exclusive provincial jurisdiction”. And, as he also observed, “the power of Parliament to make laws in a great crisis knows no limits other than those which are dictated by the nature of the crisis”.
Those are the opening words of the instruction of parliamentarians prior to the introduction of the Emergencies Act. Does that jibe with your constitutional understanding of the way the Emergencies Act flows?