Document Information

Date: 1981-12-01
By: Alberta (Legislative Assembly)
Citation: Alberta, Legislative Assembly, Alberta Hansard, 19th Leg, 3rd Sess, 1981 at 1976-1977.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

1976

Constitution

MRS. CHICHAK: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the hon. Premier. I find it necessary to bring back the subject of the constitution for some clarification and recognition of position. My first question is to inquire of the hon. Premier as to his position with regard to the current proposed amendment to the constitution by the NDP in the House of Commons, to provide special compensation to Quebec only, with respect to a situation where Quebec would choose to opt out of a particular program.

MR. LOUGHEED: I may have misunderstood the amendment being discussed or debated now in the House of Commons. The position is that it affects the accord signed by the nine provinces, including Alberta. Last Friday, a communication was transmitted on behalf of the nine provinces to the Prime Minister, to the effect that there should not be any further substantive amendments made and that we should proceed with the accord as we have it, the resolution in its present form; and that if there are to be subsequent changes, they occur pursuant to Section 36.

I presume the hon. Member for Edmonton Norwood is referring to amendments being debated that would change the nature of the amending formula, to the effect that if a province opted out of a constitutional amendment, it would receive compensation. My understanding of the situation is that subsequent to our meeting on November 5, the federal government, through the Prime

1977

Minister, proposed that that be altered and that compensation be provided in the areas of education and culture only. There now has been an amendment by the Progressive Conservative opposition in Parliament that the accord be altered and that compensation be provided generally for all matters of opting out, which would put it in accordance with the agreement entered into by the Quebec government last April 16.

If the hon. member is referring to the amendment . . . And I must have the amendment wrong. I can’t believe that the NDP has proposed an amendment that would provide compensation only to the province of Quebec. I must have that wrong; I’m sure that couldn’t be the case.

MRS. CHICHAK: Mr. Speaker, I hope that is wrong as well. I hope that is not in fact what is being proposed.

My supplementary question is further on the constitution and proposed amendments. Could the hon. Premier indicate whether any further amendments are being contemplated to give further special conditions and recognition for the Metis, subsequent to the directive issued by the Premier and the earlier advised information provided to the House?

MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, my understanding of the situation as it exists today is that there would not be further changes to the section that has been brought in — renumbered as Section 35, I believe — to provide for a recognition of the existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada, defined as the Indian, Metis, and Inuit. My understanding of the current situation is that that’s the way it will stand as the resolution is taken to final vote in the House of Commons, then the federal Senate and, if approved, on to the United Kingdom Parliament. However, there is the Section 36(2) which I’ve mentioned before in the Legislature, which provides over the course of the next year for some identification of the rights referred to in the previous section.

MRS. CHICHAK: One additional supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Requests have been made in a number of other areas for further amendments. I wonder if the hon. Premier could simply advise whether, on behalf of this province, he would consider and agree to any other amendments in any other area.

MR. LOUGHEED: Mr. Speaker, the situation is that the nine provincial governments that signed the accord on November 5 have taken a position, as a result of a telephone conference last Friday, to the effect that there should be no further substantive amendments and that the matter should proceed as it is now, and as the resolution exists today before the federal House of Commons. If there is to be consideration of further changes, that will be undertaken through the process of what is Section 36.