Madam Speaker, I cannot do anything about the Ontario government's slippery slope, but it is questionable. The important thing to understand about the pre-emptive use of section 33 is that it is neither preventive nor curative. That is how the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is set up.
For the sake of argument, let us assume that the notwithstanding clause is not written into the bill. The legislation will remain in force unless and until the Supreme Court rules that it is no longer in force and that it is invalid. When that happens, the government will just add the notwithstanding clause and it will come back into force. The legislation will therefore remain in force the entire time. The problem is that some people will have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars challenging it, engaging in a years-long legal battle and creating chaos in society just to reach the same outcome.
In its wisdom, if any, the government of the day allowed the use of the notwithstanding clause from the outset, and I believe that we must continue to do so—