No cute metaphor today, folks. We’ve seen the Alberta Sovereignty Act, and it’s not pretty. I’m not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt. And I’m just working through what it might mean. (And I know the law profs at ablawg.ca are hard at work on their analysis, so watch for it).
Thank you for the quick analysis! I’m becoming increasingly alarmed by Danielle Smith and the UCP. It’s becoming clear to me that we must be expressing our concerns to our MLAs and the appropriate ministers. My MLA wouldn’t bend the knee, so I hope that he’s at least part of some sort of voice of moderation in the party.
Very troubling! An opinion can also be offered if the Legislative Assembly thinks a federal initiative “causes or is anticipated to cause harm to Albertans” (in addition to the two reasons you give in your first “bullet”).
This is an incisive and sharp analysis, thank you. Along with the obvious implications for gun, resource, and environmental laws I'm wondering how long before it gets applied to things like the Canada Health Act and protection for LGBTQ people and other minority groups? The implications of where this bill can be used are frightening.
An observation, by moving judicial functions to the legislature this bill also goes after a favorite bugbear of conservatives in this country; what Stephen Harper and others have called 'judge made law' when the SCC and other courts have interpreted and applied the Charter. This solves that problem for them.
Hi Lisa, I'm interested in your commentary on this part of the act:
-----
5(1) Subject to subsection (2), the Lieutenant Governor in Council ceases to have an authority to make an order under section 4(1), and any order issued by the Lieutenant Governor in Council or a Minister under section 4(1) expires and ceases to have any force or effect, on the earliest of
(a) the date on which the Legislative Assembly rescinds the resolution referred to in section 4(1), or [...]
-----
So the Legislative Assembly can, at any time, rescind the resolution, with the consequence that any order (previously) issued in response to the resolution, ceases to have force or effect. I'm not seeing any discussion on why this is an insufficient check on Cabinet powers. Thanks,
Thank you for the quick analysis! I’m becoming increasingly alarmed by Danielle Smith and the UCP. It’s becoming clear to me that we must be expressing our concerns to our MLAs and the appropriate ministers. My MLA wouldn’t bend the knee, so I hope that he’s at least part of some sort of voice of moderation in the party.
Very troubling! An opinion can also be offered if the Legislative Assembly thinks a federal initiative “causes or is anticipated to cause harm to Albertans” (in addition to the two reasons you give in your first “bullet”).
This is an incisive and sharp analysis, thank you. Along with the obvious implications for gun, resource, and environmental laws I'm wondering how long before it gets applied to things like the Canada Health Act and protection for LGBTQ people and other minority groups? The implications of where this bill can be used are frightening.
An observation, by moving judicial functions to the legislature this bill also goes after a favorite bugbear of conservatives in this country; what Stephen Harper and others have called 'judge made law' when the SCC and other courts have interpreted and applied the Charter. This solves that problem for them.
Hi Lisa, I'm interested in your commentary on this part of the act:
-----
5(1) Subject to subsection (2), the Lieutenant Governor in Council ceases to have an authority to make an order under section 4(1), and any order issued by the Lieutenant Governor in Council or a Minister under section 4(1) expires and ceases to have any force or effect, on the earliest of
(a) the date on which the Legislative Assembly rescinds the resolution referred to in section 4(1), or [...]
-----
So the Legislative Assembly can, at any time, rescind the resolution, with the consequence that any order (previously) issued in response to the resolution, ceases to have force or effect. I'm not seeing any discussion on why this is an insufficient check on Cabinet powers. Thanks,