Document Information

Date: 1964-10-14
By: Secretariat of the Conference
Citation: Federal-Provincial Conference, (Ottawa: 14-15 October 1964).
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE
OTTAWA, October 14-15, 1964

[Page 1]

[Page 2]

On September 18, 1964, Prime Minister Pearson wrote to the ten Provincial Premiers suggesting the dates of October 14 to 15 or 16 as the appropriate time to hold the Federal-Provincial Conference proposed at the previous Conference held in Charlottetown on September 2, 1964. The Prime Minister suggested that the agenda include discussions on the question of constitutional amendment in Canada, the terms of reference and organization of the Tax Structure Committee set up at the Federal-Provincial Conference held in Quebec City in March and April of that year, the question of jurisdiction over off-shore mineral rights, and any other topics that might be suggested by the provinces. All ten Provincial Premiers accepted the invitation and the Conference proceeded as suggested.

In preparation for this meeting of Prime Ministers and Premiers, the Conference of Attorneys General consisting of representatives from the eleven governments in Canada met on Tuesday morning, October 13, to discuss the question of constitutional amendment in Canada in order to prepare a final report to be presented to the plenary meeting the following day. The first meeting of the Tax Structure Committee was also held on that same morning to formulate recommendations on its terms of reference for presentation to the plenary meeting.

The Federal-Provincial Conference of Prime Ministers and Premiers commenced at 10:25 a.m., October 14, 1967. No opening statements were made but the Premier of British Columbia, Mr. W. A. C. Bennett, circulated a prepared brief which is reproduced in this booklet. The federal Minister of Finance, Mr. Walter Gordon, read a Report by the Tax Structure Committee. This report, containing the proposed terms of reference for the Committee, was unanimously adopted and reproduced in a joint press communiqué which is included in this booklet as Appendix A.

The Conference then discussed other matters, such as the Hall Commission on Health Services, the Labour Standards Code, social aid programmes, and a national and international electric grid. During the discussion on social aid, the Premier of Saskatchewan, Mr. W. R. Thatcher, presented a statement on certain problems associated with assistance programmes. This statement is reproduced in this booklet.

The federal Minister of Justice, Mr. Guy Favreau, read the Report of the Committee of Attorneys General to the Conference of Prime Ministers. This report also was unanimously accepted and the Conference issued a joint press communiqué outlining the background and content of this formula for constitutional amendment. The communiqué is reproduced as Appendix B and is accompanied by a copy of the draft act prepared for consideration by the federal and provincial governments. Also reproduced for comparison purposes is a copy of the draft act for constitutional amendment prepared by the Federal-Provincial Constitutional Conference of 1960-61.

[Page 3]

The next topic of discussion was the question of jurisdiction over off-shore mineral rights. The Premier of Nova Scotia, Mr. Robert Stanfield, presented on behalf of the four Atlantic Provinces a brief in which these provinces claimed proprietary rights over the submerged resources under the Gulf of St. Lawrence and other adjacent bodies of water. This brief is reproduced herein. The following morning, on October 15, the representatives discussed as a final topic the Canada Pension Plan. The Conference then adjourned at 10:45 a.m. A list of federal and provincial delegates attending the Conference is found in Appendix C.

[Page 4]

I. Amendment of the Constitution of Canada in Canada – Progress report from the Conference of Attorneys General

II. Terms of reference and organization of the Tax Structure Committee – Recommendations of the Committee

III. Off-shore mineral rights

IV. Other matters

[Page 5]

Mr. Prime Minister, Gentlemen:

British Columbia’s representatives to this family gathering of senior Canadian Governments join you in renewed loyalty to Her Majesty Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, whose most recent visit has just concluded. We are grateful that Her Majesty, who personifies the traditions and the heritage which made Confederation possible in 1867, consented to celebrate with us the 100th anniversary of the Charlottetown and Quebec Conferences, which laid the foundation for the great nation we serve today.

We meet here under optimistic and noteworthy circumstances. All sectors of the Canadian economy are participating in renewed growth, fuller employment, and greater utilization of our bountiful resources. This improvement in national economic climate is generating increased public revenues, and particularly to the federal sector, which enjoys: much the larger part of the major shared taxes.

British Columbia has great faith in the future of Canada and in its ability to provide greater prosperity and opportunity for all our people. British Columbians are also convinced of the ability of our Province to maintain rapid economic progress. Capital investment reached 31 percent of British Columbia product in 1965 and is expected to reach an estimated 54 percent in 1964, demonstrating the great capacity for growth of the Province. Rapid development of British Columbia appears assured for the next decade and will contribute to the general well-being of all Canada.

British Columbia will support steps recommended by the Attorneys General to ensure prompt, full repatriation of the Constitution of Canada.

British Columbia has participated in agenda discussions for the Tax Structure Committee to this Conference. My Province will co-operate fully in the federal-provincial study in depth by this Committee on the relation of future federal and provincial revenue needs to federal and provincial expenditure responsibilities.

[Page 6]

Mr. Prime Minister, when you announced the Tax Structure Committee on April 1, 1964, you stated: -*

“This would be no ordinary committee. It will also require devotion to the ideal of a strong federal government and strong provincial governments, working together for the realization of a prosperous and united confederation”.

These views parallel closely the stated objectives in the British Columbia brief to the November, 1963, Federal-Provincial Conference: **

“Our nation requires strong provincial and federal governments co-operating in a flexible partnership to discharge their duties within clear-cut fields of legislative authority and constitutional taxing powers. We must constantly guard against the dangers of administrative centralization. we must preserve provincial constitutional rights to balance local autonomies with a federal parliament in which each Province necessarily has a minority position”.

My Province expects this Conference and its Tax Structure Committee to give careful consideration to five factors vital to the achievement of these objectives. The factors are:

One, the availability to each Province of personal and corporation income tax and succession duty rates which properly reflect provincial constitutional rights and reasbnable provincial revenue needs. Such arrangements must eliminate the need for double taxation and permit essential provincial expenditures in accordance with urgent priorities on education, health and welfare, highways, and development programmes. They should at the same time, prevent excessive levies in other provincial tax fields.

Two, the recognition of public service costs in British Columbia, which are well above the national level, and the further recognition that compensation for these higher costs is fully as justified as is the fiscal need of other regions. It should readily be acknowledged that these higher

* – Federal statement on Tax Structure Committee, Quebec City, April 1, 1964, p. 3.

** – British Columbia brief: Federal-Provincial Conference Ottawa, November 25, 1963, p. 2.

[Page 7]

public service costs do exist because of topography and geography, rapid provincial population growth, higher wages, and the effect of national tariff policies.

Three, a new jointly financed national highway programme.

Four, national trade and tariff policies that recognize the needs of all economic regions of Canada.

Five, a coast-to-coast electric-power grid and a study of North American electrical-energy interconnection needs.

In contributing these factors for review, each of which is subsequently developed briefly, I am mindful of past suggestions by British Columbia to the Federal Government which assisted formulation of policies of benefit to all Canadians.

Tax Sharing

Constitutional service responsibilities and tax rights of provinces are clear. Provinces are required to finance all aspects of education, public health and welfare, highways, natural-resource development, and aid to municipalities.

Everyone agrees that reasonable provincial expenditures on public education are essential and must be met in this increasingly technological and competitive world. Also, provinces must encourage natural-resource development by providing basic road access so that mines, forests, and farms can be developed to provide employment in manufacture, in construction, and in service industries for the expanding labour force. Municipalities must have more provincial aid to supply services to the larger part of our population now within municipal boundaries. without doubt, the great burden falls on provincial treasuries to finance those essential growth expenditures which are the key to fuller employment and progress in every economic region of Canada, and which must receive priority in Canadian expenditures.

The constitutional rights of the provinces to use income and inheritance taxes are unquestioned and well established. After many years of reluctance to give equitable recognition to these provincial rights and needs, some tangible federal appreciation has been demonstrated recently.

It is the view of British Columbia that the projections and studies of the Tax Structure Committee will reveal a clear need to return a further share of these taxes to support essential provincial services. Committee studies should recognize that with removal of the “straight-jacket” on

[Page 8]

provincial educational and developmental expenditures, greater national income and enhanced federal revenues will accrue. Thus, more reasonable provincial levies will keep our national economy growing and generate more personal and public income for all Canadians.

Fiscal Need and Fiscal Cost

British Columbia recognizes that fiscal-need grants payable from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada are essential to provinces where personal income is below the national average. Our representatives will support and assist impartial studies of the Tax Structure Committee designed to appraise the expenditure needs and revenues of those provinces requiring aid.

Concurrently, British Columbia will expect that fiscal recognition in the form of additional standard rates be instituted to reflect the higher-cost nature of the British Columbia economy and the higher-cost nature of provincial expenditures arising from our geographic location and the adverse effect of national tariff policies.

British Columbia is more dependent on foreign markets for its goods than other regions of Canada and suffers most from tariff policies designed to protect domestic industries of the central provinces. The resulting high-cost character of the British Columbia economy offsets the benefits of provincial income above the national average.

Higher built-in provincial costs reflect sharply in provincial service expenditures. Thus, the per-student expenditure for elementary and secondary education in British Columbia is 27 per cent above the national average, and includes salaries of teachers 16.5 per cent above the average across Canada. Compounding the pressure on provincial educational expenditure is an average annual growth rate of 5.8 per cent in students – 16 per cent above the national average. When the higher cost of educating each additional student is adjusted for the more rapid growth in our school population, the cumulative effective is 47 per cent greater in British Columbia than the average of all provinces.

The pressure of these higher provincial educational costs will be compounded by further rapid growth which appears assured for the next decade. Over the last 12 months, for example, our provincial population grew faster in numbers than that of all three Prairie provinces combined, and three times that of all four Atlantic provinces.

Higher provincial personal income is also offset by the much greater cost per mile of building a basic road and transportation network in a land area greater than Ontario. Trans-Canada Highway expenditures are 88 per cent higher in

[Page 9]

British Columbia than the national average; roads-to-resources costs in British Columbia are 62 per cent above the national average. The cost of government services in British Columbia is also increased because many goods for public use must be purchased from the protected and distant industries of central Canada.

British Columbia quotes these high built-in costs of provincial services because they are real, because they bring into realistic perspective the alleged high purchasing power of our provincial income, and because they actually reduce our ability to provide essential educational and developmental services in a period of rapid growth. British Columbia expects the Committee, in its study of provincial finances, to consider fully and to recommend tangible recognition of further provincial revenue needs as compensation for higher costs of our services.

National Highways

British Columbia fully supports recognition by both provincial and federal administrations of those fields of services clearly specified in our constitution as the job of the respective governments. We likewise support strict adherence to those clearly defined fields. However, in the partnership implicit in Canadian federalism there are fields of joint responsibility which require joint action and outlays. I refer, in particular, to the national highways which are vital arteries for transport between all provinces. They are essential, not only as instruments of national unity, but also to augment interprovincial commerce and to strengthen our foreign balance of payments from tourism.

Clause (a) of subsection (10) of section 92 of our Constitution provides joint responsibility for building these highways. Therefore, with the first Trans-Canada Highway virtually complete, a new national highway programme should be implemented linking provinces which desire to participate.

Trade and Tariff Policies

British Columbia has previously emphasized the five-to-one favourable balance of commodity trade that the central provinces enjoy with the Province and the additional price, in excess of $100 million a year, paid by British Columbians through compulsory purchase of many goods from protected eastern industries. I would observe that these higher domestic prices are reflected in the costs of our industries which must sell their products almost exclusively in competitive world markets. Our dependence on foreign markets is clearly indicated by the fact that British Columbia exported 23.6 per cent of its gross product to world markets in 1965 while the rest of Canada only exported 14.9 per cent.

[Page 10]

British Columbia’s favourable balance of exports with world markets, offset by a large excess of domestic imports from eastern Canada, is vitally important to stability in Canada’s balance of international payments. It is therefore appropriate for the Government of Canada to seek reductions in the tariffs of other nations that will enlarge foreign markets for Canadian goods. At the same time, reductions in Canadian tariffs, quotas and dump duties should be implemented to ensure efficiency in national industry producing for the domestic market, and to reduce the burden of national tariff policies on residents and industry outside the central provinces. Some protection for certain agricultural products may be a necessity, but in an increasingly dependent and competitive world, duties which impede expansion of international trade, or increase the national cost of living, are outdated.

National and International Electric Grid

In March, 1962, a Federal-Provincial Conference was held in Ottawa respecting a Canadian electric-power grid. British Columbia supports this national project and believes that positive steps in this direction are now desirable. Opportunities exist to increase the efficient use of presently developed electric power in all provinces and to supply abundant low-cost energy for residential and industrial use across the nation. These facts strongly support concrete action to achieve a nation-wide electric grid. Mr. Prime Minister, I urge a positive programme to this end.

Increased integration of all energy supplies for continent-wide marketing is an inevitable and logical economic step. Natural-gas pipelines today link continental supply with continental markets. A similar continental development in the transmission of electric power appears desirable. with the rapid technical development of long-distance high-voltage transmission-lines, the day of construction of large generating plants close to generating sources is now here. Accordingly, Mr. Chairman, British Columbia urges that feasibility studies be initiated by the federal government on possible integration of American and Canadian electric-pcwer transmission-lines for greater North American efficiency and economy in over-all energy supply and demand.

Conclusion

British Columbians are firm believers in a great destiny for all Canada, united from shore to shore.

We have our difficulties, we have our growing pains, and we have our differences. But all these are small in comparison with the blessings and the achievements which our forebears and recent generations have wrought in this fair land.

[Page 11]

We in British Columbia are disciples of rapid development. We believe the Government of Canada must support effective programmes of growth in all parts of the country to increase employment and income. Since Canada also receives the greater share of increased taxes resulting from national growth, we believe it is likewise in the interest of the Government of Canada to co-operate wholeheartedly in major developmental projects.

As Premier of British Columbia, I would be shirking my duty if I failed to insist on the full rights of the people I represent within the Canadian federation. Therefore, I have been straightforward in outlining the difficulties under which Canadians in British Columbia are labouring, and which merit the understanding and assistance of other Canadians as we search for a solution to our problems. For our part, Mr. Prime Minister, British Columbians will act jointly with you in a co-operative spirit to seek solutions to the problems of other regions and thus achieve the essential goal of a stronger and more united Canada.

[Page 12]

Mr. Chairman, my fellow premiers and prime ministers, one of the most difficult problems facing all governments to-day is the employable recipient of assistance under the Unemployment Assistance Agreements.

While the object of our policies should be, I feel, to fit these people into the mainstream of society, the current agreements far from rewarding these efforts financially penalize us when we undertake some of them.

There are, I think, two groups of people to be considered. First, those physically able to work, but so completely lacking in job skills, they may never hold a job on a regular basis.

Some of these people are complete social misfits who would never be offered a job by a municipality or private employer no matter how urgent the demand.

For them I think the only solution is a programme of training and job conditioning which will enable them to take their place in the labour force.

This programme will be expensive, both in terms of supervision and, subsidization, but i suggest it is the logical next step in our national welfare programme; a step which federal, provincial and municipal governments must take together if it is to be most effective.

The second group are those who are both physically and socially able to work, but for whom no work is available. While other programmes are available to re-train these people, or assist them in moving to areas where work is available, these do not meet all the requirements.

For this group, I feel, a variation in our present system is required.

The province and its municipalities cannot often afford to subsidize work for these people when federal assistance disappears as soon as they begin work. Neither can we expect the federal govern ment to continue to pay welfare payments to employed people.

[Page 13]

What I would suggest we consider is a system that assists the provinces and yet provides some limit to federal involvement. One possibility is a federally-created fund.

Payments out of it would support local projects in areas where consistently high levels of social aid payments have been experienced.

The federal government would agree to maintain the average level of payments for a year, regardless of caseload, and the difference between caseload costs and the payments received would go to replenish the fund.

The total amount in the fund would be guaranteed by the provincial government, and this would both protect the federal government and ensure that assisted projects mainly employed social aid recipients.

These may not be the best solutions, I doubt if they are the only ones, but I hope they can provide the basis for a discussion of this serious problem.

[Page 14]

1. The Conference of Prime Ministers at Charlottetown on September 2nd, directed that the Attorneys General should meet “to complete a procedure for amending the Constitution in Canada, based on the draft legislation proposed at the Constitutional Conference of 1961”. Pursuant to this direction, the Attorneys General met in Ottawa on October 5th-6th and October 13th-14th, and they have now reached agreement on a procedure in accordance with the terms of reference given to them.

2. Draft Act – The Committee of Attorneys General recommends that the formula arrived at as the result of the Conference of 1960-61, be accepted with the modifications formally agreed to during this Conference and with the inclusion, as an integral part of it, of the substance of the present Section 91 (1), subject to clarifications to be indicated below, and the substance of Section 92 (1) as it now stands.

The modifications recommended in the 1961 formula include provisions to make it clear that the exclusion of future United Kingdom legislature from application to Canada applies only to legislation that would extend to Canada “as part of the law thereof” and does not interfere with normal extra-territorial effect. A further modification is necessary to include reference to the British North America Act 1964 and another amendment is consequential upon the revision of Section 91 (1).

A further modification is recommended to clarify the situation with regard to subject matters excepted from the exclusive legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada under the revised provision that was previously Section 91 (1).

It is also recommended that the provision in the proposed new Section 94A on the subject of delegation be revised with respect to a delegation of provincial powers which may be of, concern to less than four provinces. It is recommended that before there be a declaration by the Parliament of Canada that a matter is of concern to less than four provinces there should be consultation with all provinces.

[Page 15]

3. Section 91 (1) – The Committee of-Attorneys General recommends that the substance of Section 91 (1) for incorporation in the amending formula be revised to make its application more specific. It is also recommended that there should be certain additional exceptions from the exclusive power of Parliament provided for by it.

The application of the Section would be made to the power of amending “the Constitution of Canada in relation to the executive Government of Canada and the Senate and House of Commons”.

To the exceptions as set forth in Section 91 (1) as it now stands would be added the following:

a) “the functions of the ueen and the Governor General in relation to the Parliament and Government of Canada”.

b) “the number of members by which any province is entitled to be represented in the Senate”.

c) “the residence qualifications of Senators and the requirements of the Constitution of Canada for the summoning of persons to the Senate by the Governor General in the Queen’s name”.

d) “the principles of proportionate representation of the provinces in the House of Commons prescribed by the Constitution of Canada”.

4. The Committee recommends that the French text of the amending formula should be included in a schedule to the bill to be submitted eventually to the British Parliament and thus given full legal effect in the same way as the English text.

5. The Conference of Attorneys General recommends that the government of Canada and the governments of the provinces convene periodically to study, in the light of experience, the working of the Canadian Constitution and amendment or revision proposals which may be submitted to any of the governments.

That the report made by the Chairman at the end of the Conference this morning, together with the consolidated formula submitted by the federal delegation bearing date October 8, 1964, as amended in accordance with the report of the drafting committee dated October 13, 1964, and adopted this morning – be submitted to the Conference of Prime Ministersand Premiers as the report of this Conference of Attorneys General.

[Page 16]

The broad question of submarine mineral rights, of course, involves questions of International Law respecting the extent of such rights in coastal areas, the manner in which and the base from which limits are to be measured, what constitutes territorial and inland waters, and similar questions. It also, in a federation like Canada, involves questions of boundaries between federated states and international boundaries between adjoining states. with these questions, except that of interprovincial boundaries to which I shall refer later, we are not at the moment concerned. The questions with which we are concerned are (a) that of the proprietary rights in submarine minerals as between Canada and the Provinces, whatever the extent and nature of those rights may be, and, (b) boundary lines between Provinces. These are the only questions which at this time it would be appropriate to discuss.

The position of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland is that the proprietary right in minerals contained in submarine lands belongs to the Provinces where those submarine lands are contiguous to a Province. Indeed, it is a matter of some surprise to us that any question should be raised as to the ownership of such mineral rights.

It should be noted that we are not here dealing with fisheries or legislative provisions respecting navigation or shipping, or any other matter which may with equal clarity be said to be within the legislative jurisdiction of Canada. We are at the moment concerned with the specific question of proprietary rights in minerals and provincial boundaries.

It is a matter of great concern to us that any question should be raised with respect to minerals inasmuch as the position certainly of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, has been to assume that these rights belonged to the Provinces. That assumption was based, of course, prim ily on the provisions of Section 109 of the British North America Act which, as you are aware, states:

[Page 17]

“All Lands, Mines, Minerals, and Royalties belonging to the several Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick at the Union, and all Sums then due or payable for such Lands, Mines, Minerals, or Royalties, shall belong to the several Provinces of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick in which the same are situate or arise, subject to any Trusts existing in respect thereof, and to any Interest other than that of the Province in the same”.

and in the case of Newfoundland, on the provisions of Section 37 of Terms of Union, which states:

“All lands, mines, minerals, and royalties belonging to Newfoundland at the date of Union, and all sums then due or payable for such lands, mines, minerals or royalties, shall belong to the Province or Newfoundland, subject to any trusts existing in respect thereof, and to any interest other than that of the Province in the same”.

It is a fact that the boundaries of the several Atlantic Provinces extended beyond the land mass of the Provinces at the time of Confederation. Indeed, for many years coal mining has been carried on in Nova Scotia in mines which extended seaward miles beyond high water mark. Similarly, in Newfoundland, iron ore mining has been carried on in submarine areas.

While there is a sound legal argument for Provincial ownership of the proprietary rights in submarine minerals, this should not be the only or even the most important factor in resolving any question that may exist or in supporting the suggestion that the Government of Canada should take all necessary steps to make it clear that proprietary rights in minerals contained in submarine lands are the property of the Province where those submarine lands are contiguous to a province. In addition to the legal argument, it should be pointed out that the orderly exploration and exploitation of submarine minerals is essential to the economic development of the Provinces. This, of course, is more apparent in the case or the Atlantic Provinces and Eastern Quebec. Such exploration and development cannot be carried on in a proper fashion as long as there remains any question in the minds of those who would be prepared to carry out exploration and development as to the proper source of authority for their operations. Also on historical and equitable grounds it should be made abundantly clear that these rights are those of the Provinces.

Naturally, the Provinces most affected are the Provinces bordering on or surrounded by the sea and, perhaps most of all, the Atlantic Provinces. It is submitted that the mineral rights, including those in submarine areas, were undoubtedly vested in those Provinces at the time they entered into Confederation and, to a degree at least, were then being exploited. The Atlantic Provinces certainly exercised jurisdiction over contiguous marine and submarine areas before they respectively entered into Confederation with the other Provinces of Canada. It is also true, in the case of the Atlantic Provinces, that their land mass is

[Page 18]

necessarily limited and that any expansion of development must now extend to the submarine areas. Unlike other areas of Canada, it has not been and is not now possible to extend the land areas of the Atlantic Provinces. Even if, therefore, there were a real question as to ownership of proprietary rights in submarine minerals, it is sunmitted that it would be only just and equitable to vest those rights in the Atlantic Provinces. I do not wish at the moment to pursue the history of the treatment of natural resources and northern lands as these matters relate to other Provinces of Canada, but I do suggest that past actions in this regard by the Government of Canada afford ample precedent for a transfer to the Atlantic Provinces of proprietary mineral rights, if such rights are vested in any degree in Canada.

Reference has been made in this submission to Provincial boundaries but I do not think that that general question need be discussed at length or decided at this Conference. Section 5 of the British North America Act, 1871, provides the procedure for changing boundaries and in effect it is primarily a matter for agreement between the Provinces concerned. I can say, however, that the Atlantic Provinces have discussed this question among themselves and have agreed upon tentative boundaries of the marine ar s adjoining those Provinces. These boundaries have been set out by metes and bounds and have been graphically delineated on a map. Hereto attached is a copy of the map and t e description of the boundaries by motes and bounds. Speaking on behalf of the Province of Nova Scotia and as authorized by the Premiers of the Provinces of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, I request the Federal authorities to give effect to the boundaries thus agreed upon by legislation, pursuant to Section 3 of the British North America Act, 1871. It may be that before actual legislation is prepared the description by motes and bounds should be reviewed and revised and the attached map, if necessary, varied accordingly, but, for all practical purposes, the attached description of the boundaries and map represent the agreement of the Atlantic Provinces.

We are asking you, Mr. Prime Minister, to assure all of the Provinces that the position of the Provinces in respect of their ownership of submarine mineral rights will be acknowledged and respected by Canada and that, if necessary, proper legislative measures will be enacted to assure such rights to the Provinces. We are asking you to put in motion the steps necessary to define the marine boundaries between the several Atlantic Provinces as set out on the map and in the description accompanying this submission, subject to review in detail.

We ask the Government of Canada to continue to assert the status of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, including the Strait of Belle Isle and Chaleur Bay, Cabot Strait, Northumberland Strait, and the Bay of Fundy, as inland waters or territorial waters.

[Page 19]

In conclusion, the Provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland assert that the Provinces are entitled to the ownership and control of submarine minerals underlying territorial waters, including, subject to International Law, areas in the Banks off Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, on legal and equitable grounds.

This submission is presented on behalf of the four Atlantic Provinces pursuant to agreement reached at the Atlantic Premiers Conference held in Halifax on the 30th of September last.

[Page 20]

General

The basis on which the following boundaries to mineral rights are suggested may be outlined as follows:

1. Mineral deposits under shelf waters between Provinces pertain to one or another Province.

2. Islands lying between Provinces and belonging to one or another Province are considered as if they were peninsulas.

3. Mineral right boundaries are so drawn as to join median points between prominent landmarks selected so far as possible along parallel shores.

4. In cases where three provinces meet but boundaries for one pair would overlap on the third, a N-S or other prime directional line is used to connect the closest point definable from the considerations in paragraph 3 above to the conflicting boundary.

I – Boundary of Nova Scotia

The boundary with New Brunswick in Northumberland Strait runs from the mouth of Tidnish River due N to centre line of Baie Verte; thence easterly to the midpoint between Coldspring Head and Cape Tormentine; thence north easterly to the midpoint between Brocklesby Head and Coldspring Head, which constitutes the mutual corner of N.S., N.B. and P.E.I.

From this mutual point the boundary with Prince Edward Island runs easterly to the midpoint between Cape Cliff and Rice Point; thence easterly to the midpoint between Cape John and Prim Point; thence easterly to the midpoint between Caribou Island and Wood Island; thence N of E to a point midway between the northerly point of Pictou Island and the southerly point of Cape Bear Peninsula; thence easterly to the midpoint between Murray Head and Livingstone Cove; thence north-east to the midpoint between East Point (P.E.I.) and Sight Point; thence northeasterly in

[Page 21]

the direction of the midpoint between White Capes and Entry Island (P.Q.) but terminating at an east-west line through the midpoint between Cable Head and South Cape, which line defines in part the boundary between P.E.I. and Quebec.

From the above point the boundary with Quebec runs northeasterly to the midpoint between the southeast corner of Amherst Island and White Capes; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between Cape St. Lawrence and East Point: (Magdalen Islands); thence northeasterly to the midpoint between St. Paul Island and East Point; thence northeasterly to the Newfoundland-Quebec boundary at the midpoint between Cape Anguille and East Point.

From this mutual corner the boundary with Newfoundland runs southeasterly to the midpoint between St. Paul Island (Nova Scotia) and Cape Ray (Newfoundland); thence to a point midway between Flint Island (Nova Scotia) and Grand Bruit (Newfoundland); thence southeasterly to International waters.

On the Bay of Fundy side, the boundary with New Brunswick commences at the mouth of the Missaguash River and follows the centre line of the Cumberland Basin to a point directly opposite Joggins; thence to the midpoint between Cape Enrage and a Promontory west of the Shulie River; thence to the midpoint between Cape Capstan and Point Wolfe; thence to a point midway between Martin Head and Ile Haute; thence south of west to a point midway between the west promontory of Parker Cove and Cape Spencer; thence southwest to a point midway between Gulliver Point and Point LePreau; thence to a point midway between White Head Island and Brier Island; thence westerly through a point midway between Whipple Point and Southwest Head; then generally southwest to International waters.

II – Boundary of Prince Edward Island

Starting at a point midway between Brocklesby Head and Coldspring Head where New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island have a mutual corner; thence easterly to the midpoint between Cape Cliff and Rice Point; thence easterly to the midpoint between Cape John and Prim Point; thence easterly to the midpoint between Caribou Island and Wood Island; thence north of east to a point midway between the northerly point of Pictou Island and the southerly point of Cape Bear Peninsula; thence easterly to the midpoint between Livingstone Cove and Murray Head; thence northeasterly

[Page 22]

to the midpoint between Sight Point and East Point; thence northeasterly in the direction of the midpoint between White Capes and Entry Island as far as an east-west line through the midpoint between Cable Head and South Cape (Magdalen Islands) at which point, P.E.I., Quebec and N.S. have a mutual corner.

From this mutual point the line runs west through the midpoint between South Cape and Cable Head; thence northwesterly to a point midway between South Cape and North Point; thence northwesterly to the midpoint between Miscou Island (N.B.) and Deadman Island (Magdalen Islands); at which point P.E.I., N.B. and P.Q. have a mutual corner.

From this mutual corner, the boundary with New Brunswick runs south of west to a point midway between North Point and the midpoint of the easterly shore of Shippigan Island; thence west of south to the midpoint between North Point and Point Escuminac; thence southwesterly to the midpoint between Cape Gage and Point Sapin; thence southerly to the midpoint between Cape Luminere (N.B.) and the P.E.I. Shore due east of that Cape; thence southerly to the midpoint between West Point and Buctouche Spit; thence southeasterly to the midpoint between Cape Egmont and Cape Bald; thence south of east to the midpoint between Seacow Head and Cape Bruin; thence south of east to the midpoint between Cape Traverse and Cape Jourimain; thence southeast to the point of beginning at the Nova Scotia Boundary.

III – Boundary of Quebec in the Gulf of St. Lawrence

Starting at the mouth of the Matapedia River opposite Dalhousie, easterly to the midpoint between Heron Island and Carleton Point; thence easterly to the midpoint between Little Belledune Point and a point south-east of New Richmond; thence south of east to the midpoint between Green Point and Bonaventure Point; thence southeasterly to the midpoint between Bonaventure Point and the entrance to Bathurst Harbour; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between Paspebiac Point and Maisonnette Point; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between Birch Point and C. d’Espoir; thence due east a distance equal to the distance between Birch Point and C. d’Espoir; and Deadman Island (Magdalen Islands), at which point is a corner common to N.B., P.E.I. and P.Q.

[Page 23]

From this mutual corner point east of south to a point midway between South Cape (Magdalen Islands) and North Point (P.E.I.); thence south-east to a point midway between South Cape and Cable Head; thence due east to the line joining the midpoint of East Point and Sight Point with the midpoint of White Cape and Entry Island, at which point is the mutual corner of P.Q., P.E.I. and Nova Scotia.

From this common corner northerly to the midpoint between Amherst Island and White Cape; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between East Point (Magdalen Islands) and Cape St. Lawrence; thence north of east to the midpoint between St. Paul Island and East Point; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between Cape Anguille (Newfoundland) and East Point (Magdalen Islands) which constitutes the mutual corner of Newfoundland, N.S. and P.Q.

From this mutual corner north to the midpoint between Heath Point (Anticosti Island) and Cape St. George; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between St. Mary Island and Cape St. Gregory; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between Mecatina Island and Table Point; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between Port-St.-Servan and Pt. Riche; then northeasterly to the midpoint between Isle au Bois and Ferolle Point at the southern extension of the northsouth line on land between Labrador and Quebec.

IV – Boundary of New Brunswick in the Gulf of St. Lawrence

Starting at the mouth of the Matapedia River opposite Dalhousie, easterly to the midpoint between Heron Island and Carleton Point; thence easterly to the midpoint between Little Belledune Point and a point southeast of New Richmond; thence south of east to the midpoint between Green Point and Bonaventure Point; thence southeasterly to the midpoint between Bonaventure Point and the entrance to Bathurst Harbour; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between Paspebiac Point and Maisonnette Point; thence northeasterly to the midpoint between Birch Point and C. d’Espoir; thence due east a distance equal to the distance between Birch Point and C. d’Espoir; thence east of south to the midpoint between Miscou Island (N.B.) and Deadman Island (Magdalen Islands), at which point is a corner common to N.B., P.E.I. and P.Q.

[Page 24]

From this mutual corner south of west to the midpoint between North Point (P.E.I.) and the midpoint of the easterly shore of Shippigan Island; thence west of south to the midpoint between Point Escuminac and North Point; thence southwesterly to the midpoint between Point Sapin and Cape Gage; thence southerly to the midpoint between Cape Luminere and the P.E.I. shore due east of that Cape; thence southerly to the midpoint between Buctouche Spit and West Point; thence southeasterly to the midpoint between Cape Bald and Cape Egmont; thence south of east to the midpoint between Cape Bruin and Seacow Head; thence south of east to the midpoint between Cape Jourimain and Cape Traverse to the midpoint between Coldspring Head and Brocklesby Head being the mutual corner of P.E.I., N.S. and N.B.

From this mutual corner south of west to the midpoint between Cape Tormentine and Coldspring Head; thence westerly to the midpoint between Tidnish Point and the Point immediately east of Port Elgin; thence due south to the mouth of the Tidnish River.

V – New Brunswick – Bay of Fundy

On the Bay of Fundy Side, the boundary with New Brunswick commences at the mouth of the Missaguash River and follows the centre line of Cumberland Basin to a point directly opposite Joggins; thence to the midpoint between Cape Enrage and a promontory west of the Shulie River; thence to the midpoint between Cape Capstan and Point Wolfe; thence to the midpoint between Squally Point and Point Wolfe; thence to a point midway between Martin Head and Ile Haute; thence south of west a point midway between the west promontory of Parker Cover and Cape Spencer; thence south-west to a point midway between Gulliver Point and Point LePreau; thence to a point midway between White Head Island and Brier Island; thence westerly through a point midway between Whipple Point and Southwest Head; thence generally south-west to International waters.

VI – Boundary of Newfoundland

Starting at a point midway between Ile au Bois and Feralle Point on the southern extension of the north-south line on land between Quebec and Labrador, southwesterly to the midpoint between Port.-St.-Servan and Point Riche; thence south-westerly to the midpoint between Mecatina Island and Table Point; thence southwesterly to the midpoint between St. Mary Island and Cape St. Gregory; thence southwesterly to the midpoint between Heath Point and Cape St. George; thence souther to the midpoint between East Point (Magdalen Islands) an Cape Anguille, which is the mutual corner of Quebec, Nfld. and N.S.

[Page 25]

From the above common point, southeasterly to the midpoint between St. Paul Island and Cape Ray; thence southeasterly to the midpoint between Flint Island and Grand Bruit; thence S.E. to International waters.

[Page 26]

The Prime Minister and Premiers have this morning adopted the following recommendations of the Tax Structure Committee on the terms of reference of the Committee:

I. – The Committee is directed by the Federal-Provincial Conference to study and to report upon the following matters, its report to be submitted to the Conference early in 1966:

1. Trends to be expected during 1967-72 in public expenditures by the federal government, the provinces and the municipalities, taking into account the broad priorities likely to be accorded by governments to expenditures on major programmes that will compete for available funds;

2. The problems involved in financing these expenditures and their relationship to the economic circumstances to be expected, the probable levels of costs of public services and facilities, and the prospective levels of government debt;

3. The general policy to be followed in respect of shared-cost programmes during the period 1967-72;

4. The tax fields that should be used exclusively by the federal government and by the provinces and municipalities, and the fields in which joint occupancy is desirable;

5. The arrangements to be made in respect of jointly-occupied tax fields;

6. The relation of equalization grants to the fiscal requirements and fiscal capacities of the provinces, and the best equalization arrangements for the period 1967-72;

7. Future intergovernmental liaison on fiscal and economic matters;

[Page 27]

8. Other related matters.

II – The Committee agreed upon the nature of the studies that should be undertaken to facilitate its work. These will be put in hand as quickly as possible.

III – The Committee agreed that the Continuing Committee of officials on Fiscal and Economic Matters, originally established by the Federal-Provincial Conference of 1956, should be assigned responsibility for general direction of the studies to be undertaken and the working out of the assumptions and methods to be used in those studies requiring a common basis of approach. Mr. A. W. Johnson was selected to co-ordinate and expedite this work, as well as to be Secretary of the Tax Structure Committee itself.

[Page 28]

The Conference of the federal and provincial governments, meeting in Ottawa on October 14th, unanimously agreed on a formula to repatriate the Constitution of Canada. This formula, when it has become law, will mean that any future amendment of the Constitution will be made in Canada instead of by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. As a result, our Constitution will have become, for the first time in the history of Canada, truly and wholly Canadian.

This milestone in the evolution of Canada’s government is the culmination of the series of discussions between the federal and provincial governments which began in 1950 and were carried on in 1960-61.

The formula for constitutional amendment provides that, as a general rule, proposals for changes in the Constitution will become law if they are passed by Parliament with the concurrence of at least two-thirds of the provinces having at least 50% of the population of Canada. In matters which are of concern to only a limited number of provinces the two-thirds rule is replaced by the concurrence only of those provinces affected. Some fundamental provisions of the Constitution, such as those relating to the division of legislative powers between federal and provincial authorities and the use of both English and French languages, could be changed only by the federal Parliament and all the provinces acting together.

The existing provisions of the Constitution, regarding amendments in matters of purely federal or purely provincial concern, will be removed from the British North America Act itself and will instead be included in the proposed new legislation. This legislation embodying the new formula clarifies the description of the matters concerning which the federal Parliament has exclusive jurisdiction to make constitutional amendments.

To provide for greater flexibility in the Constitution, legislative powers may be delegated between the federal and provincial authorities under conditions specified in the formula.

The constitutional formula was recommended unanimously by the Attorneys General of Canada and the provinces and accepted unanimously by the Conference.

[Page 29]

It is proposed that the French text of the amending formula should be included in a schedule to the Bill to be submitted to the Parliament of the United Kingdom, thus making the texts in both languages official.

The Federal-Provincial Conference agreed that the government of Canada and the governments of the provinces would from time to time study, in the light of experience, the working of the Canadian Constitution and any revision proposals which may be submitted by any of the governments.

[Page 30]

WHREAS the Senate and House of Commons of Canada in Parliament assembled have submitted Addresses to Her Majesty praying that Her Majesty may graciously be pleased to cause a measure to be laid before the Parliament of the United Kingdom for the enactment of the provisions hereinafter set forth:

Be it therefore enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

1. Subject to this Part, the Parliament of Canada may make laws repealing, amending or re-enacting any provision of the Constitution of Canada.

2. No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of this Act or section 51A of the British North America Act, 1867, or affecting any provision of the constitution, of Canada relating to

(a) the powers of the legislature of a province to make laws;
(b) the right or privileges granted or secured by the Constitution of Canada to the legislature or the government of a province;
(c) the assets or property of a province;
(d) the use of the English or French language shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislatures of all the provinces.

3. (1) No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada that refers to one or more, but not all, ofthe provinces,shal1 come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislature of every province to which the provision refers.

(2) Section 2 of this Act does not extend to any provision of the Constitution of Canada referred to in subsection (1) of this section.

[Page 31]

4. (1) No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada relating to education in any province other than Newfoundland shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislatures of all the provinces other than Newfoundland.

(2) No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada relating to education in the province of Newfoundland shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislature of the province of Newfoundland.

(3) Sections 2 and 3 of this Act do not extend to any provision of the Constitution of Canada referred to in subsection (1) or (2) of this section.

5. No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada not coming within section 2, 5 or 4 of this Act shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the provinces representing at least fifty per cent of the population of Canada according to the latest general census.

6. Notwithstanding anything in the Constitution of Canada, the Parliament of Canada may exclusively make laws from time to time amending the Constitution of Canada in relation to the executive Government of Canada, and the Senate and House of Commons, except as regards

(a) the functions of the Queen and the Governor General in relation to the Parliament or Government of Canada;
(b) the requirements of the Constitution of Canada respecting a yearly session of Parliament;
(c) the maximum period fixed by the Constitution of Canada for the duration of the House of Commons, except that the Parliament of Canada may, in time of real or apprehended war, invasion or insurrection, continue a House of Commons beyond such maximum period,if such continuation is not opposed by the votes of more than one-third of the members of such House;
(d) the number of members by which a province is entitled to be represented in the Senate;
(e) the residence qualifications of Senators and the requirements of the Constitution of Canada for the summoning of persons to the Senate by the Governor General in the Queen’s name;
(f) the right of a province to a number of members in the House of Commons not less than the number of Senators representing such province;
(g) the principles of proportionate representation of the provinces in the House of Commons prescribed by the Constitution of Canada; and
(h) the use of the English or French language.

7. Notwithstanding anything in the Constitution of Canada, in each province the legislature may exclusively make laws in relation to the amendment from time to time of the Constitution of the Province, except as regards the office of Lieutenant-Governor.

[Page 32]

8. Any law to repeal, amend or re-enact any provision of the Constitution of Canada that is not authorized to be made either by the Parliament of Canada under the authority of section 6 of this Act or by the legislature of a province under the authority of section 7 of this Act is subject to the provisions of sections 1 to 5 of this Act.

9. Nothing in this Part diminishes any power of the Parliament of Canada or of the legislature of a province, existing at the coming into force of this Act, to make laws in relation to any matter.

10. No Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed after the coming into force of this Act shall extend or be deemed to extend to Canada or to any province or territory of Canada as part of the law thereof.

11. Without limiting the meaning of the expression “Constitution of Canada”, in this Part that expression includes the following enactments and any order, rule or regulation thereunder, namely,

(a) the British North America Acts, 1867 to 1964;
(b) the Manitoba Act, 1870;
(c) the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875;
(d) the Canadian Speaker (Appointment of Deputy) Act, 1895;
(e) the Alberta Act;
(f) the Saskatchewan Act;
(g) the Statute of Westminster,1951, in so far as it is part of the law of Canada; and
(h) this Act.

12. Class 1 of section 91 of the British North America Act, 1867, as enacted by the British North America (No. 2) Act, 1949, and class 1 of section 92 of the British North America Act, 1867, are repealed.

13. The British North America Act, 1867, is amended by renumbering section 94A thereof as 94B and by adding thereto, immediately after section 94 thereof, the following heading and section:

[Page 33]

“94A. (1) Notwithstanding anything in this or in any other Act, the Parliament of Canada may make laws in relation to any matters coming within the classes of subjects enumerated in classes (6), (10), (13) and (16) of section 92 of this Act, but no statute enacted under the authority of this subsection shall have effect in any province unless the legislature of that province has consented to the operation of such a statute in that province.

(2) The Parliament of Canada shall not have authority to enact a statute under subsection (1) of this section unless

(a) prior to the enactment thereof the legislatures of at least four of the provinces have consented to the operation of such a statute as provided in that subsection, or
(b) it is declared by the Parliament of Canada that the Government of Canada has consulted with the governments of all the provinces, and that the enactment of the statute is of concern to fewer than four of the provinces and the provinces so declared by the Parliament of Canada to be concerned have under the authority of their legislatures consented to the enactment of such a statute.

(3) Notwithstanding anything in this or in any other Act, the legislature of a province may make laws in the province in relation to any matter coming within the legislative jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada.

(4) No statute enacted by a province under the authority

of subsection (3) of this section shall have effect unless

(a) prior to the enactment thereof the Parliament of Canada has consented to the enactment of such a statute by the legislature of that province, and
(b) a similar statute has under the authority of subsection (3) of this section been enacted by the legislatures of at least three other provinces.

(5) The Parliament of Canada or the legislature of a province may make laws for the imposition of punishment by fine, penalty or imprisonment for enforcing any law made by it under the authority of this section.

(6) A consent given under this section may at any time be revoked, and

(a) if a consent given under subsection (1) or (2) of this section is revoked, any law made by the Parliament of Canada to which such consent relates that is operative inthe province in which the consent is revoked shall thereupon cease to have effect in that province, but the revocation of the consent does not affect the operation of that law in any other province, and

[Page 34]

(b) if a consent given under subsection (4) of this section is revoked, any law made by the legislature of a province to which the consent relates shall thereupon cease to have effect.

(7) The Parliament of Canada may repeal any law made by it under the authority of this section,in so far as it is part of the law of one or more provinces, but if any repeal to all of the provinces in which that law is operative, the repeal does not affect the operation of that law in any province to which the rep does not relate.

(8) The legislature of a province may repeal any law made by it under the authority of this section, but the repeal under the authority of this subsection of any law does not affect the operation in any other province of any law enacted by that province under the authority of this section.”

14. The French version of this Act set forth in the Schedule to this Act shall form part of this Act.

15. This Act may be cited as the Constitution of Canada Amendment Act.

16. This Act shall come into force on the —— day of ————.

[Page 35]

WHEREAS the Senate and House of Commons of Canada in Parliament assembled have submitted Addresses to Her Majesty praying that Her Majesty may graciously be pleased to cause a measure to be laid before the Parliament of the United Kingdom for the enactment of the provisions hereinafter set forth:

Be it therefore enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

1. Subject to this Part, the Parliament of Canada may make laws repealing, amending or re-enacting any provision of the Constitution of Canada.

2. No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of this Act or section 51A of the British North America Act, 1867, or affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada relating to

(a) the powers of the legislature of a province to make laws,
(b) the rights or privileges granted or secured by the Constitution of Canada to the legislature or the government of a province,
(c) the assets or property of a province,
(d) the use of the English or French language, shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislatures of all the provinces.

3. (1) No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada that refers to one or more, but not all, of the provinces, shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislature of every province to which the provision refers.

(2) Section 2 of this Act does not extend to any provision of the Constitution of Canada referred to in subsection (1) of this section.

4. (1) No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada relating to education in any province other than Newfoundland shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislatures of all the provinces other than Newfoundland.

[Page 36]

(2) No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada relating to education in the province of Newfoundland shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislature of the province of Newfoundland

(3) Sections 2 and 3 of this Act do not extend to any provision of the Constitution of Canada referred to in subsection (1) or (2) of this section.

5. No law made under the authority of this Part affecting any provision of the Constitution of Canada not coming within section 2, 3 or 4 of this Act shall come into force unless it is concurred in by the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the provinces representing at least fifty per cent of the population of Canada according to the latest general census.

6. Nothing in this Part diminishes any power of the Parliament of Canada or the legislature of a province, existing immediately before this Act came into force, to make laws in relation to any matter.

7. No Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom passed after the coming into force of this Act shall extend or be deemed to extend to Canada or to any province or territory thereof.

8. Without limiting the meaning of the expression “Constitution of Canada”, in this Part that expression includes the following enactments and any order, rule or regulation thereunder, namely,

(a) the British North America Acts, 1867, to 1960;
(b) the Manitoba Act, 1870;
(c) the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875;
(d) the Canadian Speaker (Appointment of Deputy) Act,
(e) the Alberta Act;
(f) the Saskatchewan Act;
(g) the Statute of Westminster, 1931, in so far as it is part of the law of Canada; and
(h) this Act.

9. The British North America Act, 1867, is amended by renumbering section 94A thereof as 94B and by adding thereto, immediately after section 94 thereof, the following heading and section:

[Page 37]

“94A. (1) Notwithstanding anything in this or in any other Act the Parliament of Canada may make laws in relation to any matters coming within the classes of subjects enumerated in heads (6), (10), (13) and (16) of section 92 of this Act, but no statute enacted under the authority of this subsection shall have effect in any province unless the legislature of that province has consented to the operation of such a statute in that province.

(2) The Parliament of Canada shall not have authority to enact a statute under subsection (1) of this section unless

(a) prior to the enactment thereof the legislatures of at least four of the provinces have consented to the operation of such a statute as provided in that subsection,or
(b) it is declared by the Parliament of Canada that the enactment of the statute is of concern to less than four of theprovinces and the provinces so declared by the Parliament of Canada to be concerned have under the authority of their legislatures consented to the enactment of such a statute.

(3) Notwithstanding anything in this or in any other Act the legislature of a province may make laws in the province in relation to any matter that is otherwise within the legislative jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada.

(4) No statute enacted by a province under the authority of subsection (3) of this section shall have effect unless

(a) prior to the enactment thereof the Parliament of Canada has consented to the enactment of such a statute by the legislature of that province, and
(b) a similar statute has under the authority of subsection (3) of this section been enacted by the legislatures of at least three other provinces.

(5) The Parliament of Canada or the legislature of a province may make laws for the imposition of punishment by fine, penalty or imprisonment for enforcing any law made by it under the authority of this section.

(6) A consent given under this section may at any time be revoked, and

(a) if a consent given under subsection (1) or (2) of this section is revoked, any law made by the Parliament of Canada to which such consent relates that is operative in the province in which the consent is revoked shall thereupon cease to have effect in that

[Page 38]

province, but the revocation of the consent does not affect the operation of that law in any other province, and
(b) if a consent given under subsection (4) of this section is revoked, any law made by the legislature of a province to which the consent relates shall thereupon cease to have effect.

(7) The Parliament of Canada may repeal any law made by it under the authority of this section,in so far as it is part of the law of one or more provinces, but if any repeal under the authority of this subsection does not relate to all of the provinces in which that law is operative, the repeal does not affect the operation of that law in any province to which the repeal does not relate.

(8) The legislature of a province may repeal any law made by it under the authority of this section, but the repeal under the authority of this subsection of any law does not affect the operation in any other province of any law enacted by that province under the authority of this section.”

10. This Act may be cited as the Constitution of Canada Amend- ment Act.

11. This Act shall come into force on the …….. day of …… 1962.

[Page 39]

Federal Government:

Rt. Hon. L. B. Pearson – Prime Minister of Canada Head of Delegation

* Hon. W. L. Gordon – Minister of Finance Chairman, Tax Structure Committee

* Hon. G. Favreau – Minister of Justice Chairman, Conference of Attorneys General Member, Tax Structure Committee

Partial Attendance:

Hon. A. Laing – Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources

Hon. J. LaMarsh – Minister of National Health and Welfare

Hon. J. J. Connolly – Minister without Portfolio Member, Conference of Attorneys General

* Hon. E. J. Benson – Minister of National Revenue Member, Tax Structure Committee

Advisers:

* Mr. R. G. Robertson – Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet

* Mr. J. E. G. Hardy – Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet

* Mr. R. B. Bryce – Deputy Minister of Finance

* – To attend meetings of Tax Structure Committee

[Page 40]

* Mr. A. W. Johnson – Assistant Deputy Minister of Finance

Mr. E. A. Driedger – Deputy Minister of Justice

Mr. D. S. Maxwell – Associate Deputy Minister of Justice

Mr. R. Bédard – Associate Deputy Minister of Justice

* Mr. T. Kent – Policy Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office

Mr. E. A. Cote – Deputy Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources

Mr. J. A. MacDonald – Assistant Deputy Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources

Dr. J. W. Willard – Deputy Minister of Welfare

* Mr. D. H. Sheppard – Assistant Deputy Minister of National Revenue

* Mr. C. W. Mavor – Provincial and International Relations Section, Department of National Revenue.

Provincial Governments:

ONTARIO

* Hon. John P. Robarts, Q.C., Prime Minister of Ontario

* Hon. James N. Allan, Provincial Treasurer

Hon. A. A. Wishart, Q.C., Attorney General

Hon. George C. Wardrope, Minister of Mines

* Mr. W. M. McIntyre, Secretary of the Cabinet

Mr. W. B. Common, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General

* Mr. H. E. Brown, Deputy Provincial Treasurer

Mr. D. P. Douglas, Deputy Minister of Mines

* Mr. G. E. Gathercole, Co-Chairman, The Ontario Pension Committee

* Dr. J. K. Reynolds, Chief Executive Officer, Department of the Prime Minister

[Page 41]

Mr. L.E. Coward, Chairman, The Pension Commission of Ontario

Mr. E.A. Stacey, Director, Pension Funds Branch, Treasury Department

* Mr. R.A. Farrell, Executive Officer, Department of the Prime Minister

Mr. A.R. Dick, Q.C., Associate Deputy Attorney General

Mr. C.R. Magone, Q.C., Special Adviser on Constitutional Matters

Professor Alexander Brandy, Special Adviser on Constitutional Matters

* Mr. D.J. McClellan, Comptroller of Revenue, Department of Treasury

* Mr. W.J. Smithson, Director, Research and Statistics Branch, Department of Treasury

* Mr. D.W. Stevenson, Director, Economics Branch, Department of Economics and Development

* Mr. W. Kinmond, Press Relations Officer, Department of the Prime Minister

Mr. Frank Gerity, Adviser

QUEBEC

* Hon. Jean Lesage, Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Hon. Paul Gérin-Lajoie, Minister of Education

* Hon. Eric Kierans, Minister of Revenue

* Mr. Claude Morin, Deputy Minister of Federal-Provincial Affairs

Mr. Louis-Philippe Pigeon, Legal Adviser

* Mr. Marcel Bélanger, Economic Adviser

* Mr. Pierre Leboeuf, Assistant Deputy Minister of Revenue

Mr. Claude Castonguay, Actuary

Mr. P.E. Auger, Deputy Minister of National Resources

Mr. Denis Paré, Press Secretary

[Page 42]

NOVA SCOTIA

Hon. R. L. Stanfield, Premier and Minister of Education

* Hon. G. I. Smith, Minister of Finance and Economics

Hon. Richard A. Donahoe, Attorney General and Minister of Public Health

Mr. J. A. Y. MacDonald, Deputy Attorney General

Mr. I. G. MacLeod, Administrative Assistant to the Premier

Mr. John R. Bigelow, Adviser

NEW BRUNSWICK

Hon. Louis J. Robichaud, Q.C., Premier and Attorney General

*Hon. L. G. DesBrisay, Minister of Finance and Industry

*Mr. Donald Tansley, Deputy Minister of Finance and Industry

*Mr. F. R. Drummie, Economic Adviser

Mr. H. W. Hickman, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General

Mr. John Williamson, Adviser

MANITOBA

*Hon. Duff Roblin, Premier and Provincial Treasurer

*Hon. Stewart E. McLean, Q.C., Attorney General

*Hon. Sterling R. Lyon, Q.C., Minister of Mines and National Resources

*Hon. George Hutton, Minister of Agriculture and Conservation

*Mr. R. M. Burns, Deputy Provincial Treasurer

*Mr. L. S. M. Partridge, Treasury Department

*Mr. Derek Bedson, Clerk of the Executive Council

[Page 43]

BRITISH COLUMBIA

*Minister of Education : Hon. W. A. C. Bennett, Premier and Minister of Finance

*Hon. R.W. Bonner, Q.C., Attorney General

Hon. Donald L. Brothers, Minister of Mines and Petroleum Resources

*Mr. G.S. Bryson, Deputy Minister of Finance

*Mr. W.F. Veitch, Assistant Deputy Minister of Finance

*Mr. W.C. Budd, Executive Assistant to the Premier

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND

*Hon. Walter R. Shaw, Premier and President of the Executive Council

*Hon. Alban Farmer, Provincial Treasurer, Attorney General and Advocate General

*Mr. D.G. Dennis, Assistant Deputy Provincial Treasurer

SASKATCHEWAN

*Hon. Ross Thatcher, Premier and Provincial Treasurer

*Hon. D.V. Heald, Attorney General

ALBERTA

*Hon. E.C. Manning, Premier and Attorney General

*Hon. A.C. Aalborg, Provincial Treasurer

*Mr. C.K. Huckvale, Provincial Auditor

*Mr. J. Frawley, Special Counsel in Ottawa

NEWFOUNDLAND

Hon J.R. Smallwood, Premier and Minister of Economic Development

[Page 44]

Hon. L. R. Curtis, Attorney General

* Hon. F. W. Rowe, Minister of Highways

* Mr. W. N. Marshall, Comptroller and Deputy Minister of Finance

Mr. E. Roberts, Assistant Press Liaison Officer

Conference Secretariat

Mr. J. E. G. Hardy, Secretary of Prime Ministers Conference and Conference of Attorn General
Mr. A. W. Johnson, Secretary of the Tax Structure Committee
Mr. E. C. Aquilina, Executive Secretary
Mr. J. Garner, Assistant Secretary
Mr. A. D. Hunt, Assistant Secretary
Mr. D. H. Clark, Assistant Secretary
Mr. A. Laframboise, Assistant Secretary
Mr. F. Sorokan, Assistant Secretary
Mr. L. Lafrance, Administrative Secretary
Mr. P. Groulx, Administrative Officer.

Conference Press Liaison

Mr. Richard O’Hagan, Press Officer
Mr. André J. Letendre, Associate Press Officer
Mr. James B. Regan, Special Services Officer.