FROLITICKS

To better understand the split between provincial and federal powers, given by Canada’s written constitution, one has to understand a little bit of the history.  When Canada became an independent country from Great Britain, the federal government was given a good deal of governance responsibilities.  Canada was formed as a confederation comprised of ten provinces and several territories.  However, the provinces eventually garnered a fair amount of responsibility for certain matters which were not national in scope.  Federally, the government deals primarily with inter-provincial areas such as transportation, banking, and inter-provincial commerce, as well as such international areas dealing with foreign policy, trade, defence and immigration.  So far so good.  However, during World War II, the federal government took control of areas of taxation in order to make war related payments.  These revenue areas were not returned to the provinces after the war. For this reason, the provinces have complained about their heavy reliance on access to federal funding for areas of primary provincial responsibility such as health, education and housing.  In addition, as the years passed, new areas surfaced of great importance such as telecommunications and nuclear energy, something that the federal government determined was in their jurisdiction as part of its constitutional responsibility for the peace, order and good government of Canada.  Over the course of the 20th century, legal interpretations of peace, order and good government more clearly defined the limits of federal authority over the provinces.  Often disputes over who’s responsible for what and to what extent end up in litigation by provinces and the federal government.  Like the old constitution of 1867, the new one of 1982 will remain vague in many areas until time and circumstance permit its interpretation by the courts.

All in all, the provinces continue to have substantial jurisdiction for areas such as education, health and urban affairs.  One area of contention has been the federal introduction of “equalization payments” to the provinces to help ensure that provincial governments across Canada can provide adequate services.  It was expected that the richer provinces would help to subsidize certain areas in the so-called poorer provinces.  For example, Alberta has its oil and gas industry which brings in large revenues to its coffers.  The federal government gets its share of taxes from Alberta’s energy sector and passes most along to the Maritime and other provinces to help provide some of the services that Canadians have come to rely on.  Quebec has also benefited greatly from the equalization arrangement, while Ontario has not.

Now, the current Alberta government is complaining about federal policies and laws that they feel intrude upon their provincial responsibilities or which Albertans are not in agreement with, such as gun control measures and environmental taxes on oil and gas sectors to name a few.  Recently proposed legislation introduced in Alberta would allow its cabinet to direct “provincial entities” — Crown-controlled organizations, municipalities, school boards, post-secondary schools, municipal police forces, regional health authorities and any social agency receiving provincial money — to not use provincial resources to enforce federal rules deemed harmful to Alberta’s interests.  This is a very disturbing development, suggesting even greater polarization between a province and the federal government.  Fortunately, the Alberta government has not gone as far as — like Quebec in the past — to suggest a potential separation from Canada’s confederation.

However, Alberta’s stance appears to be somewhat similar to Quebec’s political moves in the sixties, seventies and eighties where provincial parties promoting Quebec’s independence from Canada had emerged.  Failing to obtain a majority in two referendums on independence, the Quebec movement slowly disappeared over the last decade.  Instead, Quebec has attempted to secure more provincial control over former federal jurisdiction, such in such areas as immigration and public pensions plans.  Indeed, Quebec recently passed several contentious laws dealing with French language rights and secularism in its public sector.  The courts have already begun to examine appeals to such legislation based on possible violations under human and rights laws.

What all this amounts to is the power to govern.  The federal government has to play a fine line between what powers can be shared and what policies best serve all Canadians equally.  There is little doubt that provincial premiers will continue to gang up on the Prime Minister, particularly when to do so is in their interests.  The PM on the other hand has the difficult and delicate task of maintaining a strong national presence in governance in support of the peace, order and good government of Canada.