3 ms·

Authoritarian rule? Firstly mostly they’re arguing about provincial legislation to the federal government. Secondly vaccinations are already mandatory in most p

Authoritarian rule? Firstly mostly they’re arguing about provincial legislation to the federal government. Secondly vaccinations are already mandatory in most provinces to attend school and for most health care jobs. Stop with the hyperbole.

totony 5y ago
Unacceptable provincial legislations are federal matters. That has always been the case and is why the supreme court is federal. So it makes sense to protest in ottawa when overreach is suspected (esp since this seems like a human rights matter and is federal jurisdiction). Provinces in Canada have way less power than states in the US
- fooster 5y ago
  You might want to look at https://www.canada.ca/en/intergovernmental-affairs/services/federation/distribution-legislative-powers.html https://www.canada.ca/en/intergovernmental-affairs/services/... to see what is exclusively a provincial matter and a federal matter and then where the power is shared. Now you tell me what provincial legislation should have been interfered with at federal government with respect to mandates and lockdowns.
  - totony 5y ago
    Have you read that link? I'm not familiar with all the intricacies, but from a cursory look these seem relevant: >Certain areas of government action - some of which have become priorities over the years - are not specifically identified and assigned to one or both orders of governments in the Constitution Act, 1867. The courts have found that these areas come under various legislative powers, some federal, others provincial. Two such areas are the environment and health. Federal: >Regulation of Trade/Commerce >Quarantine This also doesn't seem to be set in stone as mentioned in "5. Court Interpretation of the Distribution of Legislative Powers." Neither does it seem complete, as e.g. it doesn't mention human rights as being either federal or provincial, while there is a lot of precedent of it being a federal matter. EDIT: Also AFAIK most mandates are provincial bylaws that stem from the emergency act (which is a federal act)

totony 5y ago

Unacceptable provincial legislations are federal matters. That has always been the case and is why the supreme court is federal. So it makes sense to protest in ottawa when overreach is suspected (esp since this seems like a human rights matter and is federal jurisdiction). Provinces in Canada have way less power than states in the US

fooster 5y ago
You might want to look at https://www.canada.ca/en/intergovernmental-affairs/services/federation/distribution-legislative-powers.html https://www.canada.ca/en/intergovernmental-affairs/services/... to see what is exclusively a provincial matter and a federal matter and then where the power is shared. Now you tell me what provincial legislation should have been interfered with at federal government with respect to mandates and lockdowns.
- totony 5y ago
  Have you read that link? I'm not familiar with all the intricacies, but from a cursory look these seem relevant: >Certain areas of government action - some of which have become priorities over the years - are not specifically identified and assigned to one or both orders of governments in the Constitution Act, 1867. The courts have found that these areas come under various legislative powers, some federal, others provincial. Two such areas are the environment and health. Federal: >Regulation of Trade/Commerce >Quarantine This also doesn't seem to be set in stone as mentioned in "5. Court Interpretation of the Distribution of Legislative Powers." Neither does it seem complete, as e.g. it doesn't mention human rights as being either federal or provincial, while there is a lot of precedent of it being a federal matter. EDIT: Also AFAIK most mandates are provincial bylaws that stem from the emergency act (which is a federal act)