DOCSLIB.ORG

S.C.C. File No. 35923 in the SUPREME COURT of CANADA (ON APPEAL from the COURT of APPEAL for SASKATCHEWAN) a TTORNEY GENERAL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
S.C.C. File No. 35923 in the SUPREME COURT of CANADA (ON APPEAL from the COURT of APPEAL for SASKATCHEWAN) a TTORNEY GENERAL S.C.C. File No. 35923 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR SASKATCHEWAN) A TTORNEY GENERAL FOR SASKATCHEWAN APPELLANT (Respondent) - and- LEMARE LAKE LOGGING LTD. RESPONDENT (Appellant) - and- ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ALBERTA INTERVENERS FACTUM OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR SASKATCHEWAN (Filed Pursuant to s 42 of the Supreme Court Rules) SASKATCHEWAN MINISTRY OF GOWLING LAFLEUR HENDERSON JUSTICE LLP Constitutional Law Barristers and Solicitors 820 - 1874 Scarth Street 160 Elgin Street, Suite 2600 REGINA SK S4P 4B3 OTTAWA ON KIP lC3 Tel: (306) 787-6307 Tel: (613) 786-8695 Fax: (306) 787-9111 Fax: (613) 788-3509 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Thomson Irvine D. Lynne Watt Katherine Roy Counsel for the Attorney General for Ottawa Agents for Attorney General for Saskatchewan Saskatchewan - 2 - MACPHERSON LESLIE & TYERMAN DENTONS CANADA LLP 1500,410 - 22 nd Avenue East 99 Bank Street, Suite 1420 SASKATOON SK S7K 5T6 OTTAWA ON KIP 1H4 Tel: (306) 975-7136 Tel: (613) 783-9600 Fax: (306) 945-7145 Fax: (613) 783-9690 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Jeffrey M. Lee, Q.c. K. Scott McLean Kristen MacDonald Corey A. Villeneuve (Law Clerk) Counsel for amicus curiae Ottawa Agents for the amicus curiae MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY BURKE-ROBERTSON GENERAL OF ONTARIO 441 MacLaren Street Constitutional Law Branch Suite 200 4th Floor - 720 Bay Street OTTA WA ON K2P 2H3 TORONTO ON M7 A 2S9 Tel: (416) 326-0131 Tel: (613) 236-9665 Fax: (416) 326-4015 Fax: (613) 235-4430 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Michael Dunn Robert E. Houston, Q.c. Daniel Huffaker Counsel for the Attorney General of Ontario Ottawa Agents for the Attorney General of Ontario BRITISH COLUMBIA MINISTRY OF BURKE-ROBERTSON JUSTICE 441 MacLaren Street Legal Services Branch Suite 200 P.O. Box 9280 Stn. Provo Govt. OTTAWA ON K2P 2H3 VICTORIA BC V8W 917 Tel: (250) 356-5597 Tel: (613) 236-9665 Fax: (250) 356-9154 Fax: (613) 235-4430 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Richard Butler Robert E. Houston, Q.C. Counsel for the Attorney General of British Ottawa Agents for the Attorney General of Columbia Ontario - 3 - ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ALBERT A GOWLING LAFLEUR HENDERSON 4th Floor, 9833 - 109 Street LLP EDMONTON AB T5K 2E8 160 Elgin Street, Suite 2600 OTTAWA ON KIP lC3 Tel: (780) 422-9221 Tel.: (613) 786-8695 Fax: (780) 425-0307 Fax: (613) 788-3509 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Lillian Riczu D. Lynne Watt Counsel for the Attorney General of Alberta Ottawa Agents for Attorney General for Alberta TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. OVERVIEW OF POSITION AND STATEMENT OF FACT A. Overview of Position 1 B. Statement of Facts 5 II. ISSUES 9 III. ARGUMENT 10 A. The Legislative Framework 10 (1) Constitutional Basis for the SFSA and the BfA Provisions 10 (2) Outline of the Mediation and Revision Process under Part II of 12 the SFSA (3) Other Provisions of Part II Are Not in Issue in this Appeal 15 (4) Outline of the Receivership Provision Under Part XI of the BfA 16 (5) Court-Ordered Receiverships are Always Discretionary 20 (6) The Federal Farm Debt Mediation Act 22 B. The Paramountcy Issue 23 (1) Outline of the Paramountcy Doctrine 23 (2) First Branch: There is No Operational Conflict Between the 26 Mediation and Review Provisions and Section 243 (3) Second Branch: The Mediation and Review Provisions Do Not 29 Frustrate the Federal Purpose (a) Restrained Approach to Frustration of the Federal Purpose 29 (b) Section 243 is Not a Complete Code and Must Be 32 Interpreted Consistently with Provincial Law (c) Delays for Mediation and Review are Consistent with 34 the Purpose of Section 243 (d) Section 243 is Discretionary 36 (4) Summary 38 - 11 - C. The Constitutional Question is not Moot 39 IV. COSTS 44 V. ORDER SOUGHT 45 VI. TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 46 VII. STATUTORY PROVISIONS 48 TAB Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act A The Saskatchewan Fann Security Act B APPENDIX A: Summary of Provisions of Part II of the SFSA Which Were C Not Raised in the Courts Below PART I OVERVIEW OF POSITION AND STATEMENT OF FACTS A. Overview of Position 1. The Saskatchewan Farm Security Act ("SFSA,,)i is a significant piece of provincial legislation in Saskatchewan. It is designed to protect the farming sector in Saskatchewan, which historically has been a major part of the Saskatchewan economy and culture, and continues to be so. 2. Part II of the SFSA contains a mixture of provisions relating to the legal rights of farmers with respect to their land. Some of these provisions date back to the Great Depression, having been carried forward into the SFSA. Others have been enacted more recently, in response to economic developments in the farming sector. 3. The two key provisions of Part II in issue in this appeal are ss 9 and 11 of the SFSA. These two provisions are the entry point for a mandatory mediation and review process between a farmer and a mortgagee seeking to enforce its rights under a mortgage on farm land. The mortgagee cannot institute court proceedings to enforce its claim until after the review and mediation process has been completed, which can take at least 150 days. The purpose of this mediation and review process is to ensure that all prospects for a mediated settlement are fully explored. While this process is in operation, court proceedings cannot be instituted. If the mediation and review process does not lead to a settlement, the creditor can then begin the court proceedings to enforce its security. I The Saskatchewan Farm Security Act, SS 1988-89, c S-17.1. - 2 - 4. This appeal raises the issue whether the mediation and review process applies when a mortgagee applies under s 243(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act ("BIA,,)2 for the appointment of a receiver against the farm land of an insolvent farmer. The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal has held that the mediation and review process governed by ss 9 and 11 of the SFSA frustrates the purpose of s 243(1), triggering the doctrine of federal paramountcy. The Court of Appeal therefore concluded that " ... Part II of the SFSA is inoperative in circumstances where an application is made to appoint a receiver pursuant to s 243(1) of the BIA.,,3 The Court of Appeal rejected the alternative argument that there was an operational conflict between the provisions, holding that both laws could operate together.4 5. The Attorney General for Saskatchewan respectfully disagrees with the finding that the impugned provisions are inoperative, and submits that the SFSA process does not frustrate the purpose ofs 243(1) of the BIA. The Attorney General submits that the receivership provision is a discretionary provision. A secured creditor is not required to proceed under s 243( 1), and s 243 expressly recognizes that a creditor could instead apply for a receivership under applicable provincial law. The BIA receivership is simply one tool that may be available to a secured creditor. Its primary purpose is that an order for a receiver under s 243 takes effect nationally, so the creditor need only make one application for a receiver, rather than make separate applications in each province where the debtor may have assets. In other respects, a receiver under s 243 is much the same as a receiver appointed under provincial law. The Attorney General submits that Parliament did not intend to exclude other remedies under provincial law, but simply to provide one more option for creditors, particularly valuable for a national receivership order. 2 Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3, s 243(1), as enacted by SC 1992, c 27, s 89 and amended by SC 2005, c 47, s 115 and SC 2007, c 36, s 58. 3 Reasons for judgment of the Court of Appeal, para 67 (Appeal Record ("AR"), p 052). 4 Reasons for judgment of the Court of Appeal, para 42 (AR, P 042). - 3 - 6. The receivership provision under s 243 is discretionary in another way: the court has considerable discretion whether to grant the receivership, depending on whether it is "just and convenient" to do SO.5 The secured creditor does not have a right to a receivership, even if the debtor is insolvent and in arrears. The decision of the Court of Appeal in this very case demonstrates this point. Having found that the appellant in that appeal, Lemare Lake Logging Ltd. ("Lemare Lake") did not need to comply with the SFSA, the Court nevertheless ruled that Lemare Lake was not entitled to a receiver under s 243. The Court concluded that Lemare Lake should proceed" ... by way of the usual process - by way of foreclosure.,,6 That foreclosure process would then be subject to the review and mediation provisions of the SFSA. 7. That outcome demonstrates that the receivership provision designed by Parliament is a discretionary provision. Whether the court will grant a receivership is discretionary, and will be based on the court's assessment of what is "just and convenient" in all the circumstances of the particular case. 8. This Honourable Court has held that in cases raising a possible paramountcy issue, a federal law should be interpreted in a manner that avoids a conflict with the provincial law, if at all possible under the principles of statutory interpretation. That admonition plays a particular role in this case, where the federal and provincial laws both regulate different aspects of the same process.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Brief by Professor François Larocque Research Chair In
    BRIEF BY PROFESSOR FRANÇOIS LAROCQUE RESEARCH CHAIR IN LANGUAGE RIGHTS UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA PRESENTED TO THE SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AS PART OF ITS STUDY OF THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGES REFORM PROPOSAL UNVEILED ON FEBRUARY 19, 2021, BY THE MINISTER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND OFFICIAL LANGUAGES, ENGLISH AND FRENCH: TOWARDS A SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGES IN CANADA MAY 31, 2021 Professor François Larocque Faculty of Law, Common Law Section University of Ottawa 57 Louis Pasteur Ottawa, ON K1J 6N5 Telephone: 613-562-5800, ext. 3283 Email: [email protected] 1. Thank you very much to the honourable members of the Senate Standing Committee on Official Languages (the “Committee”) for inviting me to testify and submit a brief as part of the study of the official languages reform proposal entitled French and English: Towards a Substantive Equality of Official Languages in Canada (“the reform proposal”). A) The reform proposal includes ambitious and essential measures 2. First, I would like to congratulate the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages for her leadership and vision. It is, in my opinion, the most ambitious official languages reform proposal since the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982 (“CA1982”)1 and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”),2 which enshrined the main provisions of the Official Languages Act (“OLA”)3 of 1969 in the Canadian Constitution. The last reform of the OLA was in 1988 and it is past time to modernize it to adapt it to Canada’s linguistic realities and challenges in the 21st century. 3. The Charter and the OLA proclaim that “English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.”4 In reality, however, as reported by Statistics Canada,5 English is dominant everywhere, while French is declining, including in Quebec.
    [Show full text]
  • Jurisdictional Dilemmas in Resource Industries I
    1979) JURISDICTIONALDILEMMAS 91 JURISDICTIONALDILEMMAS IN RESOURCEINDUSTRIES WILLIAM M. ELLIOTT• This paper highlights constitutional dilemmas posed by the Canadian constitution in matters of resource regulation., marketing and taxation., with particular em­ phasis on Saskatchewan. The background to and impact of the CIGOL case is examined, including a discussion of the issues of direct tazation and the trade and commerce power. Ancillary matters such as recovery of payments under invalid laws and techniques of interim relief also receive scndiny. Similar problems in the potash and uranium industries are analyzed. I. INTRODUCTION The dilemmas posed by constitutional limitations on the powers of provincial governments and the federal government are not confined to oil and gas, but include all resources. Oil and gas are merely part of a larger question. Furthermore, the problems vary from region to region and province to province, and the approaches and solutions vary with the political philosophy of governments of the day. The struggle is not new and will not go away even in the event of constitutional change. Corporations, whether private or publicly owned, will always be faced with the discipline of the bottom line and governments with the real or fancied "need" of politicians and tax gatherers. The words "fair", "reasonable," "just' and "unconstitu­ tional" will continue to be heard. One should not expect any so-called solutions to be more than a te.mporary lull before another storm. In a huge country divided by regions, and governed by a federal system with divided constitutional powers, the possibilities of disagreement are endless. II. HISTORY Sections 91 and 92 of the British North America Act 1 give rise to most of the jurisdictional questions.
    [Show full text]
  • 1St Session 19Th Legislature
    JOURNALS of the LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY of the Province of Saskatchewan From the 22nd day of February. 1979 to the 3rd day of May. 1979 In the Twenty-eighth Year of the Reign of Our Sovereign Lady, Queen Elizabeth II BEING THE FIRST SESSION OF THE NINETEENTH LEGISLATURE OF THE PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN Session, 1979 REGINA: R. S. REID. QUEEN'S PRINTER 1979 VOLUME LXXXV CONTENTS Session, 1979 JOURNALS of the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan including QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Pages 1 to 197 JOURNALS of the Leg1slat1ve Assembly of Saskatchewan Pages 1 to 194 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Appendix Pages 195 to 197 MEETING OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY CAMERON IRWIN MclNTOSH. Lieutenant Governor, (L.S.) CANADA PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN ELIZABETHTHE SECOND. by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom. Canada and Her other Realms and Territories QUEEN. Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. TO OUR FAITHFUL the MEMBERS elected to serve in the Legislative Assembly of Our Province of Saskatchewan. and to every one of you. GREETING: A PROCLAMATION DR. R. GOSSE. WHEREAS. it is expedient for causes Deputy and considerations to convene the Attorney General Legislative Assembly of Our Prov- ince of Saskatchewan. WE DO WILL that you and each of you and all others in this behalf interested on THURSDAY. the TWENTY-SECOND day of FEBRUARY. 1979, at Our City of Regina. personally be and appear for the despatch of Business. there to take into consideration the state and welfare of Our said Province of Saskatchewan and thereby do as may seem necessary. HEREIN FAIL NOT. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF we have caused Our Letters to be made Patent and the Great Seal of Our said Province of Saskatchewan to be hereunto affixed.
    [Show full text]
  • Treaty Implementation: Fulfilling the Covenant
    TREATY IMPLEMENTATION: FULFILLING THE COVENANT Office of the Treaty Commissioner Saskatoon, Saskatchewan © Office of the Treaty Commissioner 2007. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior written permission of the Office of the Treaty Commissioner. ISBN 978 – 0 – 9782685 – 0 – 3 Printed in Canada Published by the Office of the Treaty Commissioner Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada Publication of this book has been made possible with the cooperation of the Saskatchewan Institute of Public Policy Treaty Implementation: Fulfilling the Covenant Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL . vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . xii SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . xix 1. INTRODUCTION . 1 The Exploratory Treaty Table . 3 Two Perspectives on the Treaties . 4 The Statement of Treaty Issues . 5 The “Made in Saskatchewan” Process . 7 The Governance Agreements in Principle . 8 About This Report . 9 2. THE INTENTIONS OF THE TREATY PARTIES . 15 Spirit and Intent of Treaties: The Elders’ Understanding . 15 a) Elders’ Understanding of Treaty Principles . 17 b) Wîtaskêwin – Living Together on the Land . 18 c) Elements of Treaty that Require Flexibility and Adaptability . 20 The Numbered Treaties: Canada’s Understandings . 21 a) The Policy of the Royal Proclamation of 1763 . 22 b) Legislative Policies and the Indian Act . 24 c) Treaties in the Modern Era . 26 Conclusion: Identifying Common Intentions as a Guide to the Future . 27 3. APPROACHES AT THE EXPLORATORY TREATY TABLE . 29 Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations Approach . 30 Canada’s Approach . 31 Common Understandings .
    [Show full text]
  • 209 AMENDING the BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT. Every
    209 AMENDING THE BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT. Every Canadian should be inspired by the vision of the Fathers of Confederation in their conception of one vast nation of the British Provinces in North America, stretching from sea to sea, and by the ability and courage they displayed in putting their patriotic vision into practical effect. But the B .N.A. Act makes no special provision for its amendment and the suggestion is sometimes made that this point was overlooked. I believe the Fathers of Confederation assumed that any amendments to the Act would, as the occasion arose, be made by the Imperial Parliament . I can find no reference in pre-Confederation speeches to the amendment of the proposed Act, except that in the debates of the Canadian Parliament of 1865 the Hon . D'Arcy McGee said :- "We go to the Imperial Government, the common arbiter of us all, in our true Federal metropolis-we go there to ask for our fundamental Charter. We hope, by having that Charter can that only be amended by the authority that made it, that we will lay the basis of permanency for our future government." -"Canada Confederation Debates", (1865) page 146. There is a very substantial part of the Canadian Constitution outside the B.N.A. Act, which, following British precedent, grows. and develops. The B .N.A. Act, however, can only be amended by statute and, defining as it does the legislative power of the Dominion and provinces respectively, the question as to how it should be amended has of late years become a matter of increasing importance .
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Reserves on the Prairies 243
    1985] INDIAN RESERVES ON THE PRAIRIES 243 INDIAN RESERVES ON THE PRAIRIES RICHARD H. BARTLETT~ Indian reserves comprise the only land left to the Indians of the Prairie Provinces. This paper endeavors to examine and explain the rights of ownership and administra­ tion held by the Indians and Governments in such lands. It endeavors to determine what the treaties between the Indians and the Crown promised and to what extent they have been fulfilled. Rights with respect to minerals and timber are examined in the course of the study. I. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF INDIANS RESERVES BY TREATY 1 Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan make up the Prairie Provinces of Canada. The southern reaches of the Provinces were the traditional lands of the plains' tribes: the Plains Cree, the Assiniboine, the Gros Ventre, the Blackfoot and the Sarcee. 2 To the north the forests were the territory of the Chipewyan, Beaver, Slave and Sekani tribes. 3 The traditional title of the Indians to their lands was recognized in the terms of the treaties that were entered into between the Crown in the right of the Dominion and the Indians. The treaties provided for the surrender of the Indian title in return for the establishment of reserves, guarantees as to hunting and fishing rights, annuities and certain social and economic undertakings. The treaties were entered into as the pressure of settlement and development demanded. Indian title in southern Manitoba and Saskat­ chewan was surrendered by Treaties #1 (1871), #2 (1871), #3 (1873) and #4 (1874). Central Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta was surrendered by Treaties #5 (1875) and #6 (1876).
    [Show full text]
  • The Companies Act
    1 COMPANIES c. C-23 The Companies Act being Chapter C-23 of The Revised Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1978 (effective February 26, 1979) as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1980-81, c.21; 1989-90, c.5 and c.54; 1992, c.A-24.1; 2000, c.L-5.1; 2004, c.L-16.1; 2009, c.27; 2010, c.B-12; 2012, c.F-13.5; 2013, c.O-4.2 and c.W-17.11, 2015, c.21; and 2018, c.42. NOTE: This consolidation is not official. Amendments have been incorporated for convenience of reference and the original statutes and regulations should be consulted for all purposes of interpretation and application of the law. In order to preserve the integrity of the original statutes and regulations, errors that may have appeared are reproduced in this consolidation. 2 c. C-23 COMPANIES 3 COMPANIES c. C-23 Table of Contents SHORT TITLE ANCILLARY POWERS 1 Short title 30 Ancillary powers ADMINISTRATION 31 Official seal for use outside province 2 Administration of Act 32 Power of attorney 33 Representation at meetings of other companies INTERPRETATION 3 Interpretation 34 Power to hold property as joint tenant 35 Restrictions on company where prospectus not issued PART I Incorporation of Companies 36 Restrictions on company where prospectus issued CONSTITUTION AND ORGANIZATION 37 Exceptions to s.35 and s.36 4 Prohibition of formation of unregistered associations 38 Certificate to commence business for gain 39 Variation of contracts before statutory meeting 5 Mode of forming incorporated company 40 Certain shares, etc., not to be dealt with before 6 Objects of a specially limited
    [Show full text]
  • Interprovincial Sovereign Immunity Revisited Janet Walker Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, [email protected]
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by York University, Osgoode Hall Law School Osgoode Hall Law Journal Article 5 Volume 35, Number 2 (Summer 1997) Interprovincial Sovereign Immunity Revisited Janet Walker Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj Article Citation Information Walker, Janet. "Interprovincial Sovereign Immunity Revisited." Osgoode Hall Law Journal 35.2 (1997) : 379-397. http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol35/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Osgoode Hall Law Journal by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Interprovincial Sovereign Immunity Revisited Abstract The onc ventional wisdom has been that the Canadian provincial Crowns are immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of other Canadian provinces just as they are immune from the jurisdiction of foreign courts. This reflects the old views that the provinces are like foreign countries for the purposes of the conflict of laws and that court jurisdiction over the Crown is purely a creature of statute. Recent recognition of the constitutional bases for court jurisdiction and the need to reassess conflict of laws rules in light of the principles of Canadian federalism invites us to revisit interprovincial sovereign immunity, especially as it could arise in multi-province class actions against the Crowns in right of the provinces. This article is available in Osgoode Hall Law Journal: http://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/ohlj/vol35/iss2/5 INTERPROVINCIAL SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY REVISITED© BY JANET WALKER* The conventional wisdom has been that the Canadian La philosophic traditionnelle est a l'effet que provincial Crowns are immune from the jurisdiction of l'immunit6 des Couronnes provinciales s'6tend aux the courts of other Canadian provinces just as they are tribunaux des autres provinces canadiennes.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Treasures Trésors
    A Glimpse Inside the Archives of the Senate of Canada of Senate the of Archives the Inside Glimpse A PARLIAMENTARY TREASURES PARLIAMENTARY PARLIAMENTARY TREASURES | TRÉSORS PARLEMENTAIRES TRÉSORS PARLEMENTAIRES Regard sur les Archives du Sénat du Canada PARLIAMENTARY TREASURES A Glimpse Inside the Archives of the Senate of Canada Cataloguing in Publication: Y9-19/2014 ISBN: 978-1-100-54780-0 © Senate of Canada 2014 All rights reserved. All copyrights in the illustrations are held by the Senate of Canada unless otherwise indicated. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, Senate of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1A 0A4. PARLIAMENTARY TREASURES A Glimpse Inside the Archives of the Senate of Canada TABLE OF CONTENTS Letters of Welcome 1 From the Speaker of the Senate 3 From the Clerk of the Senate and Clerk of the Parliaments Introduction History of Canada 14 The Birth of Confederation 18 The Birth of New Regions 21 The First Years 24 The World Wars and the Great Depression 28 The Modern World Transportation 37 Transport by Land: The Era of Railways 39 Transport by Water: From Canoes to Ships 41 Transport by Air: The Age of Aircraft Canadian Society 46 Official Languages 47 Acadians 47 Women 50 Aboriginal Peoples 51 Human Rights 52 Marriage and Divorce 53 Multiculturalism 56 The Arts 58
    [Show full text]
  • Patriation of the Canadian Constitution: Comparative Federalism in a New Context
    Washington Law Review Volume 60 Number 3 6-1-1985 Patriation of the Canadian Constitution: Comparative Federalism in a New Context William C. Hodge Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation William C. Hodge, Patriation of the Canadian Constitution: Comparative Federalism in a New Context, 60 Wash. L. Rev. 585 (1985). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol60/iss3/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at UW Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington Law Review by an authorized editor of UW Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PATRIATION OF THE CANADIAN CONSTITUTION: COMPARATIVE FEDERALISM IN A NEW CONTEXT William C. Hodge* INTRODUCTION What races will survive World War III? The Chinese and the Qu6bcois. The Chinese because there are so many of them, and the Qu6b6cois because if they've survived the last four hundred years, they'll survive anything. Qu6bec is that part of North America that is so distinct from the rest, and against such odds, that it takes pride in serving to define what a nation is- and can be. -JOEL GARREAU' The Canadian constitution, also known as the British North America Act, 1867,2 has been "patriated." Of that bundle of sticks that, fastened together, constitute sovereign autonomy, a significant few continued to rest with the British Parliament until 1982-a condition the Canadians found humiliating and the British embarrassing.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution and Government
    82 CONSTITUTION AND GOVERNMENT -Provinces and Territories of Canada, Dates of Admission to Confederation, Legislative Processes by which Admission was Effected, Present Area and Seat of Government Seat of Province, Date of Present Provincial Territory or Admission Legislative Process Area or District or Creation (sq. miles) Territorial Government July 1, 1867 I Act of Imperial Parliament—The British f 412,582 July 1, 1867 1 North America Act, 1867 (Br. Stat.l 594,860 July 1, 1867 | 1867, c. 3) and Imperial Order inl 21,425 July 1, 1867 j Council, May 22, 1867. \ 28,354 July 15, 1870 Manitoba Act, 1870 (SC 1870, c. 3) and Imperial Order in Council, June 23,1870. 251,000 Winnipeg British Columbia July 20, 1871 Imperial Order in Council, May 16,1871.. 366,255 Victoria Prince Edward Island July 1, 1873 Imperial Order in Council, June 26,1873.. 2,184 Charlotte- town Saskatchewan' Sept. 1, 1905 Saskatchewan Act, 1905 (SC 1905, c. 42).. 251,700 Regina Alberta4 Sept. 1, 1905 Alberta Act, 1905 (SC 1905, c. 3) 255,285 Mar. 31, 1949 The British North America Act, 1949 (Br. Stat. 1949, c. 22) 156,185 Northwest Territories5... July 15, 1870 Act of Imperial Parliament—Rupert's Land Act, 1868 (Br. Stat. 1868, c. 105) and Imperial Order in Council, June 23, 1870 1,304,903 Jan. 1, 1920 527,490 >Ottawa7 Jan. 1, 1920 228,180 Jan. 1, 1920 649,25$ J June 13, 1898 Yukon Territory Act, 1898 (SC 1898, c. 6) 207,076 Whitehorse 3,851,809 i The area of Ontario was extended by the Ontario Boundaries Extension Act, 1912 (SC 1612, c.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Chronology of Important Constitutional Events
    Historical Chronology of Important Constitutional Events A GUIDE TO THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE CANADIAN CONSTITUTION I 2 I 5 Magna Carta (This is the date generally associated with Magna Carta. However, after King John's death and the ensuing period of conflict among the power elite in England, the Charter was re-issued by Henry III in 1225, and later confirmed by Edward I in 1297.) 1628 Charles I accepts the Petition of Right 1663 Royal Government in New France 1670 Royal Charter incorporating the Hudson's Bay Company 1679 Habeas Corpus Act (An Act for the better securing of the Liberty of the Subject, and for the Prevent1on of Imprisonment beyond the Seas) 1689 English Bill of Rights 1701 Act of Settlement 1713 Treaty of Utrecht 1763 The Royal Proclamation 1774 The Quebec Act 1787 (Adoption of the Constitution of the United States of America, 11 years after the Declara- tion of Independence) 1791 The Constitutional Act of 1791 1839 Lord Durham's Report on the Affairs of British North America 1840 The Act of Union 1864 The Quebec Conference 1865 The Colonial Laws Validity Act 1866 The London Conference liv / Chronology 1867 The British North America Act 1870 Order In Council admitting Rupert's Land and the Northwest Territories to the union 1870 The Manitoba Act (Canada) 1871 Order in Council admitting the colony of British Columbia to the union 1873 Order in Council admitting the colony of Prince Edward Island to the union 1875 The Supreme and Exchequer Court Act (Canada) 1880 Order in Council annexing to Canada all British territories and adjacent islands in North America 1896 A.-G.
    [Show full text]