I want to make three points.
First of all, the member will recognize that the Constitution does not grant the federal government a plenary power with respect to treaties.
Second, when Canada obtained what could be called an international personality on the international scene, the Statute of Westminster of 1931 resulted in no change to the distribution of powers.
Third, it seems quite clear to me that executive powers are distributed in the same manner as legislative powers. That has been confirmed on at least two occasions. The Privy Council confirmed it first in 1892, and at least 50 Supreme Court judgments have confirmed it as well. I will only cite one, the 1978 judgment in Her Majesty in right of the Province of Alberta v. Canadian Transport Commission, in which it held that the executive powers, or prerogatives of the Crown, are distributed in accordance with the distribution of legislative powers.
Having regard to the constitution, the international personality attributed to Canada under the Treaty of Westminster, the Privy Council decision and the some 50 Supreme Court decisions on the matter, it seems to me that there is material to inform us, to enable us to come to the conclusion that the bill is entirely constitutional. I understand that it may give rise to various opinions, but it at the very least merits debate in the House of Commons.