Connect with us


Saskatchewan makes its legal case, arguing federal carbon tax is unconstitutional




Saskatchewan’s legal battle against the carbon tax is not about whether climate change is real, but whether the federal government is violating provincial jurisdiction with its price on pollution, one of the province’s lawyers said Wednesday in its constitutional challenge to Ottawa’s policy.

“The government of Saskatchewan is not made up of a bunch of climate change deniers,” lawyer Mitch McAdam said in his opening remarks to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal in Regina on Wednesday morning.

“The government recognizes that climate change is a serious issue that has to be addressed and that effective measures are required to deal with greenhouse gas emissions. None of that is in dispute.”

Instead, the case is about what powers the federal government has and doesn’t have, McAdam said at the start of two days of hearings.

Watch the court proceedings in full here

Saskatchewan is asking its highest court to answer this question: “The Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act was introduced into Parliament on March 28, 2018, as Part 5 of Bill C-74. If enacted, will this act be unconstitutional in whole or in part?”

Paul Jacobson, lawyer for the province, argued against the federal government’s position that the pricing act falls under the peace, order and good government clause in the 1867 Constitution, saying the use of that clause now and in the future is “sweeping, radical and intrusive.” 

He called this move disrespectful to the sovereignty of Canadian provinces, saying, “Ottawa is not a big brother over provinces.” 

The federal government argues climate change is a matter of national concern, and definitively falls under the peace, order and good government clause. 

Here’s everything you need to know about the carbon tax court case, explained in two minutes:  

Why is Saskatchewan facing off against the federal government in court? CBC’s Madeline Kotzer explains how this constitutional tête-à-tête will play out. 2:12

The province argues the carbon levy is an unfair, uneven, illegal tax and that it violates provincial jurisdiction.

The federal government argues it’s a regulatory charge, not a tax, and so it has jurisdiction because carbon emissions are a matter of “national concern.”

For its case, Ottawa says: “We have been expanding federal jurisdiction under the peace, order good government clause over and over again for half a century. For a century we barely used it but we’ve been using it more. And each time it happens, it feels kind of big,” said John Whyte, a constitutional lawyer and former deputy attorney general of Saskatchewan.

“[Canada] will have to have the court believe that measures to reduce carbon emissions into the atmosphere is a matter of concern to the nation.”

Whyte said that in his opinion, the federal government’s case is stronger than Saskatchewan’s.

“There is no knockdown winning argument for the province here.”

Both Canada and Saskatchewan get three hours to make their arguments: Saskatchewan on Wednesday morning and the federal government on Thursday morning.

There are 16 interveners in the reference case:

  • Seven on Wednesday in favour of Saskatchewan.
  • Nine on Thursday in favour of the federal government.
  • Three provinces — Ontario, New Brunswick and British Columbia — that will each get 30 minutes to address the court.
  • The 13 others interveners will receive 15 minutes each, including for an address and questions from the judges.

CBC Saskatchewan reporter Adam Hunter is in court to cover the legal challenge. Follow what’s happening through his tweets below. For those on mobile, click here.

Saskatchewan’s argument

The province of Saskatchewan is asking the court to rule the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act is unconstitutional and should be declared beyond federal authority or void and unenforceable.

The province argues the federal government cannot impose a policy that treats provinces unequally.

“This case is not about the risks posed to the country by climate change,” reads the province’s written argument.
“This case is not even about whether a carbon tax is a good or a bad way to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that fuel climate change. This case is fundamentally about the nature of our federation.

“The legislation is unconstitutional because it disregards fundamental principles of Canadian constitutional law, in particular, the principles of federalism.”

Lawyers representing the position of Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe’s government are facing off with lawyers representing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on the right to impose a carbon tax on provinces. Two days of hearings in a Regina court began Wednesday. (Matt Smith/The Canadian Press)

Don Morgan, Saskatchewan’s minister of justice, said the federal government cannot tax provinces differently based on how much they like or dislike a specific province’s plan to reduce carbon emissions.

“Our goal is not to have a carbon tax in our province, and this is our ability to challenge,” Morgan said.

“Politically it’s important for the message to the people of our province that we are sticking up for them, that this is something that’s fundamentally important to us as an oil-producing, energy-exporting province.”

Morgan said the province would not seek an injunction if its case is unsuccessful.

The government of Canada’s argument

“Canada seeks the court’s opinion that the whole of the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act is validly enacted under Parliament’s power to pass laws for the peace, order and good government of the nation as a whole respecting GHG emissions, being a matter of national concern,” reads the government of Canada’s argument.

Its submission asks the court, if it rules against the federal case, that it suspend its declaration until after the Supreme Court of Canada makes a ruling in the event of an appeal.

“Pollution is a national concern. Carbon pollution doesn’t know any borders,” federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna said.

“Unfortunately some provinces did not step up, unfortunately provinces led by Conservative politicians, who believe it should be free to pollute.”

Conservative leaders unite

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe and his ministers have repeatedly said they believe they have a strong case and will sway the court.

He has allies in Ontario Premier Doug Ford, New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs and Alberta Opposition Leader Jason Kenney, all of whom made their provinces interveners in Saskatchewan’s case.

In 2017, a University of Manitoba legal scholar was commissioned by that province’s government to give a legal opinion on the constitutionality of the federal carbon tax plan. Bryan Schwartz determined Ottawa had the right to impose a carbon tax on Manitoba and other provinces — but the provinces have a good legal argument to make for their own carbon pricing plans.

“If we just say no, we get [Prime Minister Justin] Trudeau. If we go to court, we lose,” Manitoba Premier Brian Pallister said in October 2017.

One year later, Pallister announced the province would leave the federal framework. He said the province would pursue the courts, but did not sign on as an intervener in the Saskatchewan case.

The court has given CBC permission to live stream proceedings. You can watch on our website beginning at 9:30 a.m. CST on Wednesday.

Schedule in order of appearance


  • Province of Saskatchewan – 3 hours.
  • Province of Ontario – 30 minutes.
  • Province of New Brunswick – 30 minutes.
  • SaskPower and SaskEnergy – 15 minutes.
  • The Canadian Taxpayers Federation – 15 minutes.
  • United Conservative Party (Alberta’s provincial Opposition party) – 15 minutes.
  • Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan – 15 minutes.
  • International Emissions Trading Association – 15 minutes.


  • Government of Canada – 3 hours.
  • Province of British Columbia – 30 minutes.
  • The Canadian Public Health Association – 15 minutes.
  • Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation – 15 minutes.
  • Canadian Environmental Law Association And Environmental Defence Canada – 15 minutes.
  • Assembly of First Nations – 15 minutes.
  • David Suzuki Foundation – 15 minutes.
  • Ecofiscal Commission of Canada – 15 minutes.
  • Intergenerational Climate Coalition – 15 minutes.
  • Climate Justice et. al – 15 minutes.
  • Province of Saskatchewan (reply).


Source link

قالب وردپرس


List of Tourist Attractions Open Now in Ottawa




With Ontario now in Step 3 of 2021 three-step plan for reopening, museums and other indoor attractions are allowed to reopen with capacity limited to not exceed 50 per cent capacity indoors and 75 per cent capacity outdoors.

Here is a list of Ottawa attractions you can visit starting July 16th.

Do remember to wear masks and buy tickets in advance.

Parliament Hill

Parliament’s Centre Block and Peace Tower are closed for renovation.

You can join for tours of the Senate of Canada Building (2 Rideau Street), House of Commons at West Block (111 Wellington Street) on Parliament Hill, and East Block at East Block (111 Wellington Street) on Parliament Hill.

When: Grounds open; guided tours of Parliament are suspended through the summer of 2021.
Where: 111 Wellington Street, Downtown Ottawa

Continue Reading


Ottawa performer leapfrogs from gymnastics to Broadway to TV




A new AppleTV+ series set in a magical town that’s stuck in a neverending 1940s musical includes a pair of Ottawa siblings in the cast. 

Warren Yang and his sister, Ericka Hunter, play two of the singing, dancing residents of the village portrayed in Schmigadoon!, a small-screen series that takes its cues from classic musicals like Brigadoon, Wizard of Oz and Sound of Music, and skewers them with the offbeat comedic mastery of Saturday Night Live. 

In fact, you’ll recognize many of the names from SNL, starting with executive producer Lorne Michaels, creator of the late-night, live-comedy sketch show. Schmigadoon! also stars SNL cast member Cecily Strong and comedian Keegan-Michael Key, who hosted SNL in May. They play a New York couple who get lost on a hike and stumble into a strange town where everyone sings and dances. 

For Yang, a relative newcomer to show-biz, the series marks his television debut. For Hunter, the younger of his two older sisters, it’s the latest in a career path that began with dance lessons as a child more than 30 years ago. She attended Canterbury High School, Ottawa’s arts-focused secondary school. 

“Her dream was always to perform,” said Yang, 34, in an interview. “But that was never the path I thought was an option for me.” 

While his sister studied dance, Yang did gymnastics. He was an elite gymnast throughout his youth, ultimately leaving Merivale High School at 16 to train in Montreal, finishing high school through correspondence courses. He was a member of the Canadian National Team and received a scholarship to study at Penn State, majoring in marketing. 

A few years after graduation, Yang was working at an advertising agency in Toronto when he got a call from a Manhattan number. To his astonishment, they asked if he would be interested in auditioning for a Broadway revival of Miss Saigon.

Continue Reading


COVID-19: uOttawa to require vaccination for students living in residence




Vaccination will be mandatory for students who want to live in residence at the University of Ottawa this year, with proof of vaccination and at least one dose required before move-in, or within two weeks of doing so if they can’t secure a shot before arriving.

Those who can’t receive a vaccine for “health-related reasons or other grounds protected under the Ontario Human Rights Code” will be able to submit a request for accommodation through the university’s housing portal, according to information on the university’s website.

Students with one dose living in residence will also have to receive their second dose “within the timeframe recommended by Ottawa Public Health.”

People who haven’t been granted an exemption and don’t get vaccinated or submit proof of having done so by the deadlines set out by the school will have their residence agreements terminated, uOttawa warns.

“Medical and health professionals are clear that vaccination is the most (effective) means of protecting people and those around them,” reads a statement provided to this newspaper by uOttawa’s director of strategic communications, Patrick Charette.

Article content

“It is precisely for this reason that the University of Ottawa is requiring all students living in residence for the 2021-2022 academic year to be fully vaccinated. The University recognizes that some students may require accommodations for a variety of reasons and will be treating exceptions appropriately.”

Faculty, staff and students are also strongly encouraged to get vaccinated, the statement notes.

“Ensuring a high vaccine coverage in all communities is critical to ensuring an ongoing decline in cases and ending the pandemic. This will be especially important with the return of students to post-secondary institutions in our region in the fall of 2021.”

Neither Carleton University nor Algonquin College is currently mandating vaccination for students living in residence, according to the websites for both schools. But uOttawa isn’t alone in its policy – Western University, Trent University, Durham College and Fanshawe College have all implemented similar requirements. Seneca College, in the GTA, is going even further, making vaccination mandatory for students and staff to come to campus, in-person, for the fall term.

Continue Reading