Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  Conventions are not practices. Conventions are not law. I think when it comes to the question of constitutional amendment, we live—Mr. Reid, I agree with you—in a legal world, in a world of law: the provisions of part V of the Constitution Act of 1982, the elaboration of that in

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  Madam Chair, with respect to Ms. Fry's concern about provincial objection, there would be the general concern that arises around the central accommodation of Canadian federalism being altered unilaterally. The very specific concern is to remember that clause 13 of Bill C-20 all

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  This is fairly technical. I think that this present bill creates a selection process for senators that when implemented will not be able to sustain the constitutional commitment in section 22 of the 1867 act that the senators either hold property or reside in the appropriate on

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  I have nothing additional, thank you.

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  I don't want to undercut anyone here, Madam Chair, but I do want to say that Mr. Reid mentions two cases, and they are both extremely interesting in this discourse. One is the Senate reference, which he says has been trumped by the 1982 Constitution. It's a good question whether

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  We absolutely could if we sat down and asked what we want our upper house to do. When you have bicameral legislatures, the first reason is to get a second thought. Sometimes it is structured so that you get a second sober thought, a less partisan thought. Finally, it normally has

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  It makes sense, of course, to reform the Senate all at once and not to be electing people for life or fifteen years or eight years--we don't really know what. It doesn't make sense to be limiting terms to fifteen years or eight years when we don't know how they'd be chosen. It's

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  Yes, gridlock will affect a constitutional principle, although not necessarily badly. It's not necessarily worrisome. The constitutional principle is that the government is responsible to the legislature. It is the core of parliamentary democracy. And when a government is not a

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  Well, I don't want to be charged with unrealism. I think Canada should engage in a constitutional discussion about its national Parliament. It's time Canada engaged in that discussion—it's past time. I know there are horribly intense interests that will hold that discussion up, b

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  As you know, a lawyer is someone who can think of a thing or a concept without managing to think of the thing that is inextricably bound to it. That is what we are witnessing here. This act puts in train a process of selecting senators, and we are managing to think of the cabinet

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  Under section 55 of the Supreme Court Act, the prerogative of reference to the Supreme Court belongs to the Governor General in Council alone. That doesn't mean, of course, that there could not be a resolution of the House of Commons recommending that the cabinet make that refere

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  I'm not interested in saying that this bill is unconstitutional because it breaches convention. I'm interested in saying it breaches the Constitution because it is illegal. Those lawyers who say this is just the Government of Canada--and the House of Commons and the Senate, if i

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  What a steep threshold to get over. With respect to two electorally legitimate houses coming to different conclusions on a measure, clearly that would pose a threat to the theory of responsible government and the fundamental constitutional requirement that the government be abl

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  As subclause 2(2) of the bill states, “Words and expressions used in this Act have the same meaning as in the Canada Elections Act unless a contrary intention appears.” Well, it doesn't. Thank you.

Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) committee  I have one more sentence.