The Bloc Québécois motion to remind the Trudeau government that it is up to the provinces to decide on the use of the notwithstanding provision of the Constitution was defeated.
According to the results communicated in the House, 142 deputies voted in favor of the motion and 172 were against. The Conservative MPs joined those of the Bloc Québécois, but the opposition of the Liberals and New Democrats tipped the scales.
During a press conference, Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet accused the Liberals of trying to “restrict the sovereignty of the Quebec Parliament, of the National Assembly of Quebec”.
“The fundamental issue is the will expressed by Prime Minister Trudeau and, unsurprisingly, by the equally centralizing NDP, to ask judges, the majority of whom were appointed under his reign, to oversee, restrict or rewrite by judgment the Constitution that was adopted under Pierre Trudeau,” he said.
The Bloc members are concerned that Ottawa will intervene before the Supreme Court “to counter” Bill 96, which modernizes the Charter of the French language and the Act respecting the secularism of the State.
Used more and more often
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had raised an outcry in Quebec by announcing his desire to better regulate the use of the clause. He considers it “unacceptable” that the provinces have recourse to it in a preventive manner.
During debates on the motion last Thursday, Liberal MP Rachel Bendayan explained that Canada’s constitutional tradition is marked by a dialogue between the legislator and the court and that preventive recourse to this provision, which violates fundamental rights, ” limits this dialogue by limiting legal debate”.
Mme Bendayan noted that the practice of rarely resorting to the Constitution’s notwithstanding provision has long been the norm. In fact, she pointed out, the clause was never invoked from 2001 to 2017, but times have changed and it is now more common.
The Conservatives, for their part, affirmed that the Bloc Québécois demonstrates with this motion that it is “completely disconnected” from the reality of citizens. “It takes a full day, an opposition day, to talk about the Constitution, when there are so many other subjects that are more important to Quebecers,” said their political lieutenant for Quebec, Pierre Paul- Hus.
The New Democratic Party (NDP) recognizes on the contrary that the Bloc motion refers to a “fundamental debate”. Its deputy leader, Alexandre Boulerice, insisted on the idea that the use of the notwithstanding clause should not be “absolute”.
“We must ask ourselves whether the legislator can, at any time and without major justification, suspend the majority of rights and freedoms, which are nevertheless protected,” said the NDP lieutenant for Quebec.
He, too, said he sees the use of the notwithstanding clause, which was meant to be “exceptional, almost as a last resort,” is now being used “repetitively, perhaps even abusively, systematically.”