Justin Trudeau, a danger for federalism

Justin Trudeau’s stunning pre-budget tour, if he were a rock singer, could be titled “Barbarian invasions“.

Every day between now and the presentation of his budget on April 16, the Liberal leader intends to announce billions of dollars (on credit!) that he promises to pour into problems that in no way fall under his jurisdiction: food for children school, home, etc.

The floodgates are open like never before. It gets gross.

Photo Agence QMI, JOEL LEMAY

Quebec federalism

This is a violation of a fundamental Canadian constitutional principle: the sharing of powers. This same division (which level is responsible for what in the dominion) is not always very clear, having been established in 1867.

However, certain areas, such as health and education, constitute explicitly exclusive competences of the provinces.

In the ROC (rest of Canada), it seems that in general, we don’t care. Regardless of the constitutional texts, Ottawa is considered the “national” government responsible for finding solutions to the nation’s problems.

For a majority of Quebecers, the national government is in Quebec. Hence the attachment of all parties (except perhaps QS) to this federative principle according to which each level should act within its particular competences.

In 2015, Justin Trudeau promised nothing else, in a letter to the then PM, Philippe Couillard: “The challenges we face cannot be resolved solely from Ottawa. They require […] a federal vision that respects the jurisdictions of Quebec and all the provinces.”

  • Listen to the political meeting between Antoine Robitaille and Benoît Dutrizac via QUB :
Spending abuse

Nine years later, Justin Trudeau, hoping to stay in power, blithely violated his promise and abused the “spending power” that Ottawa considers “unlimited”.

Meanwhile, are its clearest skills adequately funded? Borders, armies, communications regulations, etc. Ask the question…

Trudeau Sr., as head of the federal state, also abused the federal spending power. However, he denounced it in 1957, before entering politics: “No government has – for that part of the common good which does not come under its control – a right of oversight over the administration of others,” wrote – he in rare support for Duplessis who attacked “federal grants to universities”.

Stephen Harper had promised in 2005 to limit this excessive power which, in his own words, had “given birth to a dominating federalism, […] paternalistic” which has become “a serious threat to the future of our federation”! He will fail.

Through his speech and his housing projects, Pierre Poilievre seems far from the federalist philosophy of his predecessor.

Referral

What can Quebec do in the face of this spiral of “defederalization” of Canada? (A term used by the specialist in “spending power”, jurist Marc-André Turcotte.)

Should he officially ask (Turcotte suggests this in a book) the following question to the Court of Appeal: “Is a federal spending power compatible with the federal nature of the Canadian constitutional order?”

Risky, certainly, given the fact that the federal government appoints judges. But it might be a nice risk.


source site-64