Guest post

Prof. Andrew Potter on constitutional revisionism: It would seem that if you are as rich as and photogenic as Belinda Stronach, ignorance of your country�s constitution is not a serious obstacle to being taken seriously as a candidate for Prime Minister. In a speech last weekend at the St. James Club in Montreal that confirmed her status as this electoral season�s Stockwell Day, Stronach called on the federal government to leave the provinces alone and to stick to its own constitutional responsibilities. �I believe in federalism, but by this I mean federalism as it was intended by our Constitution,� said Ms. Stronach. ����������� She went on to argue that �Under our Constitution, the federal and provincial levels of government are equal. Neither one is subordinate to the other. Each level is sovereign within its own area of jurisdiction.� Ms. Stronach�s views on the Constitution are remarkably similar to those advanced by Mr. Day during the last Federal election. As a means of promoting the Alliance�s provincialist agenda, he repeatedly called for a return to an understanding of the Constitution as it was originally written. ����������� It is bizarre to see advocates of provincial rights adopting an �original intent� or textual fundamentalism approach to Constitutional interpretation, and it makes one wonder what country these people think they are living in. Whatever Jefferson, Madison and the others may have intended about the relationship between Washington and the States, it is clear that our Fathers of Confederation intended the provinces to be subordinate to the central government. ����������� Not only were all residual powers given to Ottawa (in deliberate contrast with the American federal model), but Ottawa was also given the power to set aside or disallow provincial legislation as it saw fit. Furthermore, the central government was given the right to appoint the provincial lieutenant governors, without whose approval no bill could become law.� As Sir John A. Macdonald said, �We have given the central government all the great subjects of legislation.� ����������� If there is a phrase that describes both the text of our Constitution and the intentions of those who wrote it, it is that Canada would be a country characterized by �ever closer union.� It was widely expected that as the constituent parts of the far-flung Dominion were gradually knitted together into a single political entity, the provinces would wither and die, or at best remain minor, municipal entities. The fact that for better or for worse this has manifestly not come to pass, and that the provinces are now stronger than ever, is beside the point. ����������� �There is a tendency to think that the country would be better off if the elements of Confederation were separated by watertight compartments. Good firewalls make for good federal/provincial relations, to use a metaphor Stephen Harper might like. Belinda Stronach�s preferred phrase is �disentanglement,� as in, �As Prime Minister, my government would sit down with the Council of the Federation to disentangle overlap and duplication between the federal and provincial levels of government.� In Montreal, Ms. Stronach suggested that disentanglement could be accomplished within her first twelve months of government. ����������� Is she kidding? Does Ms. Stronach really believe that she could resolve 137 years of federal/provincial �entanglement� by just sitting down with the Premiers for a chat? ����������� Well, actually she doesn�t. Toward the end of her speech, she pledged that the Federal government must provide adequate funding for health care. One deep breath later, she promised to support higher education by allowing parents and students to deduct tuition fees from their income tax. So much for disentanglement. ����������� �There is no question that Ottawa is an imperial sort of place, and there are certainly good arguments for keeping Ottawa out of certain areas of provincial jurisdiction (funding for cities, for example). At the same time, it is clear that Canada would be a better place if the provinces were to surrender certain powers to a single national authority (such as securities regulation). In between, there is a huge grey area of overlapping jurisdiction and shared responsibility. Some of it is endorsed by the constitution, some of it is not, but a great deal of it is necessary, as even Ms. Stronach tacitly acknowledges. ���������� Despite what Belinda Stronach seems to think, political inexperience and constitutional ignorance are not virtues. Like Stockwell Day before her, she�s asking to be dismissed as just another pretty face. Andrew Potter teaches philosophy at Trent University.