Soverignty Acts

[jazz]

Good thing that act will be on the books shortly. ABs going to need it right away.

Here are some details on a northern AB land grab by the feds.

https://www.westernstandard.news/alberta/major-changes-to-public-lands-in-northern-alberta-being-discussed-by-trudeau-liberals/article_9832e6ce-6f76-11ed-81a6-a76ddc0f0f98.html

[tweety]

The SA is fantastic. Gets rid of that pesky democracy by representation that stands in the way of progress by allowing changing of laws without going through the legislature.

Long live the Queen. At least the 1% of Albertans that voted for the Queen

You got to know its bad when someone like Kenney quits citing concern over political polarization.

[jazz]

The SA is fantastic. .

You can read right.

Its exactly the same clause evoked in s45 of the constitution that Quebec has used time and again.

During the EMA this year, Quebecs govt passed a resolution that they would not recognize it. And nobody said a word.

Quebec has used that clause and the NWC to ban hijabs. Nobody said anthing.

In fact Trudeau has endorsed the use of s45 for provincial autonomy.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-canada-constitution-changes-language-bill-1.6031828

[tweety]

You can read right.

Its exactly the same clause evoked in s45 of the constitution that Quebec has used time and again.

During the EMA this year, Quebecs govt passed a resolution that they would not recognize it. And nobody said a word.

Quebec has used that clause and the NWC to ban hijabs. Nobody said anthing.

In fact Trudeau has endorsed the use of s45 for provincial autonomy.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-canada-constitution-changes-language-bill-1.6031828

Well we know i can read, but you can't read between the lines. Kenney said it best.

To his credit, outgoing premier Jason Kenney understands the risks involved with Smith’s strategy. As he asked rhetorically during the most recent episode of his weekly radio show, “If the government proposes (a law) saying that we will rip up contracts, we won’t enforce court orders, we’ll ignore the rulings of the Supreme Court, we’ll choose which laws we enforce, we’ll ignore the Constitution, well, what investor in their right mind would put money at risk in Alberta?”

No longer will the courts decide what is constitutional, Alberta will skip that step and let the exalted ruler decide.

Quebec seriously ruined their economic path allowing by their separatist actions to ruin their economy, instead Ontario became the economic leader.

You're a short term, me-me-me thinker, so the SA fits for you. Still want to be just like Quebec? You probably do.

Edit: and also the Quebec Premier still has to amend legislation through the National Assembly. Quebec Premier cannot order provincial entities to violate federal laws.

Edit Edit: and to their credit, SK has not changed their democratic legislative structure.

[sumdumguy]

Danielle hasn’t gone far enough. Out mit the shcrap. My father always said there will be a revolution in this country, provinces against Ottawa. I think he was right now.

[tweety]

Danielle hasn’t gone far enough. Out mit the shcrap. My father always said there will be a revolution in this country, provinces against Ottawa. I think he was right now.

Where should she have gone to?

[WiltonRanch]

The SA is fantastic. Gets rid of that pesky democracy by representation that stands in the way of progress by allowing changing of laws without going through the legislature.

Long live the Queen. At least the 1% of Albertans that voted for the Queen

You got to know its bad when someone like Kenney quits citing concern over political polarization.

At least Saskatchewan first act works within the Canadian constitution. Hard for the SCC or Feds to shoot it down. The Alberta act though I agree with in principle doesn’t pass the smell test. The rule of law is necessary wherever you sit politically. We complain about how the rule of law was broken when the ema was enacted. To the credit of Alberta if the law is considered to be enacted the legislature has to debate and agree before it is sent to cabinet. This is what I’ve gathered.

[tweety]

At least Saskatchewan first act works within the Canadian constitution. Hard for the SCC or Feds to shoot it down. The Alberta act though I agree with in principle doesn’t pass the smell test. The rule of law is necessary wherever you sit politically. We complain about how the rule of law was broken when the ema was enacted. To the credit of Alberta if the law is considered to be enacted the legislature has to debate and agree before it is sent to cabinet. This is what I’ve gathered.

Yes, but....

MLAs would be given a free vote on the motions, which will describe the alleged infraction and how it hurts Alberta. Once passed, the resolutions become non-binding recommendations to cabinet.

The legislation would allow cabinet to direct provincial entities, including municipalities, municipal police forces, post-secondary institutions, school districts and regional health authorities not to enforce federal laws. Cabinet could also direct a minister to issue an order or directive.

The bill is silent on what happens if any organization refuses to follow cabinet's directives and continues to follow federal law.

Any measures made by cabinet must be in line with the Constitution, nor can they undermine Indigenous rights. The government says it will respect court rulings that find its actions are unconstitutional.

Powers used by cabinet would end two years after a resolution is passed. Cabinet could decide to extend them for an additional two years.

The bill also limits the time frame an organization can ask for a judicial review to 30 days, instead of the usual six months.

The court must judge the government's actions using the standard of "patent unreasonableness" instead of the less stringent and more common thresholds of unreasonableness or correctness.

The bill also aims to protect the government and provincial entities from civil proceedings launched due to consequences that arise from the act.

[WiltonRanch]

Yes, but....

MLAs would be given a free vote on the motions, which will describe the alleged infraction and how it hurts Alberta. Once passed, the resolutions become non-binding recommendations to cabinet.

The legislation would allow cabinet to direct provincial entities, including municipalities, municipal police forces, post-secondary institutions, school districts and regional health authorities not to enforce federal laws. Cabinet could also direct a minister to issue an order or directive.

The bill is silent on what happens if any organization refuses to follow cabinet's directives and continues to follow federal law.

Any measures made by cabinet must be in line with the Constitution, nor can they undermine Indigenous rights. The government says it will respect court rulings that find its actions are unconstitutional.

Powers used by cabinet would end two years after a resolution is passed. Cabinet could decide to extend them for an additional two years.

The bill also limits the time frame an organization can ask for a judicial review to 30 days, instead of the usual six months.

The court must judge the government's actions using the standard of "patent unreasonableness" instead of the less stringent and more common thresholds of unreasonableness or correctness.

The bill also aims to protect the government and provincial entities from civil proceedings launched due to consequences that arise from the act.

Thanks for clarification. Smell test worries me. Needs some fixing so it doesn’t smell bad.

[tweety]

Thanks for clarification. Smell test worries me. Needs some fixing so it doesn’t smell bad.

It will be interesting indeed. I see the Calgary Chamber has released their statement. Big thumbs down.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Where should she have gone to?

She should have just skipped the pleasantries, and the facade of attempting to work within confederation, and started out with the inevitable separation.
This is destined to fail, probably designed to fail. I assume that is the intention, to turn more people against Ottawa, and show that there is no workable solution within the legal framework available.
This just wastes more vauable time. And I'm not convinced it is worth wasting the political capital.

[tweety]

She should have just skipped the pleasantries, and the facade of attempting to work within confederation, and started out with the inevitable separation.
This is destined to fail, probably designed to fail. I assume that is the intention, to turn more people against Ottawa, and show that there is no workable solution within the legal framework available.
This just wastes more vauable time. And I'm not convinced it is worth wasting the political capital.

Oh it will work for what is wanted - that is the problem.

2 big errors however.

1. Supreme Court already ruled separation is unconstitutional and breaks international law. There is no right for a Province to secede from Canada. And don't point to the Clarity Act like the uninformed do.

2. Canada is a Federation since 1867 when the 3 countries united, not a confederate association of sovereign states. You should have learned that in Junior High.

Do your homework.

[blackpowder]

Nobody ever said DS was a genius.
Kenney wasn't wrong with his critique of the state of democracy.
So how to reverse the polarization trend?
Trudeau and his kind have long been the instigators.
The only debates revolve around compliance never refusal.
The do as I say not as I do style of treating the regions has to stop.
But the West is the only bad guy?
Ottawa ignores the hillbillies at everyone's peril. Whether right or wrong.

[tweety]

Nobody ever said DS was a genius.
Kenney wasn't wrong with his critique of the state of democracy.
So how to reverse the polarization trend?
Trudeau and his kind have long been the instigators.
The only debates revolve around compliance never refusal.
The do as I say not as I do style of treating the regions has to stop.
But the West is the only bad guy?
Ottawa ignores the hillbillies at everyone's peril. Whether right or wrong.

Can you give an example or 2 of Ottawa not listening that doesn't involve oil?

[tweety]

Maybe so, but it has a nice little confederation bomb attached to it that may get your result at the end of the day.

...

There is no confederation bomb because there is no confederation.