Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

FELDSTED: Quebec recognized the incremental incursion of federal governments on provincial subjects and stood up for herself. We see the results of ensuing negotiations


One of the least understood portions of our constitution is the obligations of the federal government set out under Section 91:

91. It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces; and for greater Certainty, but not so as to restrict the Generality of the foregoing Terms of this Section, it is hereby declared that (notwithstanding anything in this Act) the exclusive Legislative Authority of the Parliament of Canada extends to all Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated ...

... and any matter coming within any of the Classes of Subjects enumerated of a local or private Nature ... assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces.

We need to pause here and consider three very important principles:
  • Under the initial clause of Section 91, it is clear that federal authority cannot override the classes of subjects assigned to the provinces;
  • Under the final clause of Section 91 it is equally clear that classes of subject assigned to provinces cannot be construed as authority to override enumerated federal classes of subject; and
  • The lists of classes assigned are not powers. They are classes of subjects assigned to the federal government as areas of responsibility in which to act on behalf of the people. It is a list of federal duties to the nation that cannot be legally transferred to the provinces.

We have long lived under a false premise, encouraged by successive federal governments, that the federal government is a higher authority than the provinces.

That is not so.

“Peace, order and good government” are the words used in section 91 of the British North America Act of 1867 (now Constitution Act, 1867) to define the Canadian Parliament’s lawmaking authority in relation to provincial authority. The phrase’s vague and broad definition of Parliament’s authority over provincial matters has caused tensions between federal and provincial governments over the scope of powers since Confederation. It has come to be considered the Canadian counterpart to the United States’ “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
~~ The Canadian Encyclopedia ~~



If you look at the list of subjects assigned to the federal government, they are either beyond the capability of a single province to administer, or are intended to prevent the chaos of having ten different sets of laws, for the conduct of ordinary affairs.

Federal subjects are different from but not superior to provincial subjects.

Quebec woke up to this some time ago, and recognized the incremental incursion of federal governments on provincial subjects, and stood up for herself. We see the results of ensuing negotiations.


Federal governments have used the first line of the Section 91 preamble to make laws on subjects not enumerated as provincial:

It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces;

Federal governments refer to this section as the Peace, Order and Good Government section, which gives it authority to expand the subjects assigned to it ... but then tries to avoid the responsibilities included.

For example, the federal government has no constitutional authority to spend funds on international aid. It cannot show Canadians that spending huge sums on foreign aid is in their best interests. It is ludicrous for a federal government to include large expenditures in foreign aid in a deficit budget.

It is in the best interests of Canadians to avoid deficit budgets and pay down the national debt.

The federal government is not in the compassion business and cannot make a case for the necessity of foreign aid when we have people living in poverty, unable to afford homes, suffering untreated mental ailments and insufficient medical personnel to meet the demands of an aging population.

Providing compassion to foreigners it refuses to extend to residents is not on.

The federal government is responsible for indigenous people, access to clean water, education, health care, housing, and municipal services.  They are failing thousands of people in hundreds of locations.

That is a constitutional responsibility. Foreign aid is not.

The federal government has no constitutional authority to participate in the United Nations, or to spend money on the United Nations, or any of its agencies. The UN has proven completely incapable of protecting any nation from internal rebellion, or outside attack, and has about 65 million refugees to prove it.

The Canadian government is not in the business of cleaning up after UN failures.

NATO and NORAD are different as they are organizations aimed at mutual defence of members and part of the federal obligation to protect Canada.

Stayed tuned as I will shortly be discussing, and taking a look at, the basic list of subjects assigned to provinces.


John Feldsted
Political Consultant & Strategist
Winnipeg, Manitoba

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Focus on the nine things I mentioned. That’s what will allow the Conservative Party to win the next election

IMAGE CREDIT:   Darryl Dyck, the Canadian Press. I thought I had already made up my mind who I would be ranking on my ballot, in the Conservative Party of BC leadership race; now I am not so sure.  That means that, at least for me, and perhaps many others, it’s a good thing voting hasn’t already taken place. There were initially only one or two of the candidates that I thought might be a little too right of centre for my liking, now it seems that list is growing. I consider myself more closely aligned with what used to be called a Progressive Conservative, regardless, I feel more than comfortable within the Conservative Party of BC.  Some, however, in messages to me on my political Facebook page, have been rather, shall we say, a bit mean-spirited in comments they’ve made about my ‘purity’ as a conservative. To tell you the truth, I really don’t care! Some leadership candidates, in comments made online, have also been raising the issue of who is a pure enough conservati...

WARD STAMER -- Those are REAL forestry numbers, not just made-up numbers

The following is a condensed version of remarks Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s made, regarding Forestry, in the BC Legislature, on Tuesday afternoon (02/24/2026)   Let’s talk a little bit, when we talk about Budget 2026, about the forest industry, which is near and dear to my heart. Forestry remains one of British Columbia’s foundational industries. It’s a pillar that built this province. Entire communities depend upon it. Interior towns, northern communities, Vancouver Island regions, the Kootenays, the Lower Mainland, with manufacturing facilities in Surrey and Maple Ridge, just to name a few — everywhere in BC is touched by forestry. One word that was not mentioned in Budget 2026 was forestry. That’s a shame, an incredible shame. It wasn’t an oversight – it was intentional. This government has driven forestry into the ground .... INTO THE GROUND! We can talk a little bit about some of the initiatives that this government has brought forth, to try to resurrect ...

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...

Labels

Show more