Conservatives side with Bloc in supporting pre-emptive use of notwithstanding clause

Article content

OTTAWA – Conservatives sided with the Bloc Québécois in voting for the right to provinces to pre-emptively use the notwithstanding clause.

The motion, put forward by the Bloc in an attempt to “remind the (federal) government that it is solely up to Quebec and the provinces to decide on the use of the notwithstanding clause”, was ultimately defeated by a vote of 142 yays and 174 nays during Monday’s vote.

Article content

The Liberals and the NDP voted against the motion, as did Green Party MPs Elizabeth May and Mike Morrice and independent MP Kevin Vuong.

Article content

Motions are meant to initiate a discussion on a given subject and to give a signal on the will of the House of Commons, as they are non binding even if they are adopted. They can also force different parties to take a stance on the issue at hand, as it was the case on Monday.

In last week’s debate, Conservative MPs were noncommittal in their position on the use of the notwithstanding clause and sometimes deviated from the subject at hand, which made Liberals accuse the official opposition of not being concerned with Canadians’ rights and freedoms.

“We in the Conservative benches have always stood for the rights and freedoms of Canadians,” replied Conservative MP John Nater.

He and his colleagues mostly laid the blame on the Liberal government, which they said is deeply divisive and is to blame for the provinces’ increased use of the notwithstanding clause in recent years – and for the Bloc trying to stoke division by introducing this motion.

Article content

The Conservatives’ Quebec lieutenant, Pierre Paul-Hus, even accused the separatist party of being “disconnected” from Canadians’ real concerns which do not include the constitution.

But Nater also stressed that Conservatives have a tradition of respecting provincial jurisdiction and believe in a separation of powers “where each province has their right to do as they see fit.”

Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms — the notwithstanding clause that allows to override certain portions of the Charter for a five-year term – has been used by provinces on a more frequent basis since 2017 to pass contentious legislation.

Quebec has used it to restrict people wearing religious symbols from certain public sector jobs and to restrict the use of English in the public sphere; more recently, Ontario used it in a back-to-work bill meant to quash a labour strike but ultimately repealed the entire bill.

Article content

Speaking on Monday, Bloc leader Yves-Francois Blanchet said that his party’s support of the notwithstanding clause does not mean he endorses Ontario’s attempt last fall to prevent labour negotiations – not should it be an excuse to restrict the use of the clause.

“In democracy, sometimes we have good governments, sometimes we have terrible governments, but we can’t give up on democracy,” he said.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Justice Minister David Lametti would be looking into referring the matter to the Supreme Court – prompting Quebec Premier François Legault to call it a “frontal attack” on his province’s ability to protect its collective rights.

Federal Liberals argue that the notwithstanding clause was never intended to be used in a pre-emptive manner.