Document Information
Date: 1981-11-19
By: Ontario (Legislative Assembly)
Citation: Ontario, Legislative Assembly, Official Reports of the Debates (Hansard), 32nd Leg, 1st Sess, 1981.
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF). [external site–Ontario Legislative Assembly]
CONSTITUTIONAL RESOLUTION
Mr. Cassidy: Mr. Speaker, I have a new question for the Premier with respect to the Constitution Act which is now before the Parliament of Canada. Last week the Premier assured the House that Ontario was not among the provinces that suggested native rights should be removed from the charter. Yet we now learn that while the Premier was saying this, the Attorney General (Mr. McMurtry) had been actively arguing for amendments that would have watered down the commitment to native rights to the point of removing them. Could the Premier clarify Ontario’s position with respect to including aboriginal rights in the charter?
Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I have not had an opportunity on my return to read the entire text of the Attorney General’s letter. However it was made abundantly clear, both in this House and in Ottawa — and I have made it abundantly clear since — that Ontario does support and continues to support the inclusion of native aboriginal rights within the constitution.
I think if the leader of the third party reads carefully what was said by the Attorney General, who has supported this from day one, he will see he raised some concerns of a legal or technical nature which have been raised on other matters of the charter by other Attorneys General with respect to certain aspects of the definition and how it might be phrased. But in terms of our position, it is what it was a year ago September. In spite of opposition from many sectors, it has remained consistent for some 13 months and that position has not altered today.
Mr. Cassidy: A supplementary: I am glad to have the clarification of the Premier, although frankly it is difficult to see the consonance when one reads the Attorney General’s letter. However, the question now and for the next few days is, what further steps is the Premier prepared to take on behalf of Ontario in order to gain sufficient support among the other Premiers so section 34 can be restored to the act now before Parliament, or so some other protection for aboriginal rights can be worked into the constitution? If it is not done with the act as it goes over to the British Parliament there is a very real danger aboriginal rights will never be adequately protected in the constitution of Canada.
Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I do not share the point of view being expressed by the Leader of the New Democratic Party. I really do not.
I would prefer that it be included, but I was part of a discussion where I genuinely believed the position taken by other Premiers and by the Prime Minister was that it is their intent to have a meeting shortly — I cannot say in the next six weeks or two months — but very shortly with respect to the defining or refining or agreeing upon a wording to include aboriginal rights.
I would not want to be Premier in a province of this country who says if a conference is called for sometime next year he no longer wants to participate. I just do not think that would happen. I am one who believes the others who were present when they said this would be the first order of business. It was included in the communique and in the accord.
If the honourable member is asking, “Has our position altered?” I hope I have answered that; it has not. I understand the government of Canada has been canvassing this issue along with the issue of equality of women’s rights. In case there is any misunderstanding, when the women call my office I am delighted to get the calls and I give them the phone number of one or two other Premiers. I even might be inclined to give them the phone number of the Premier of Saskatchewan on that issue. I want the leader of the third party to know it is not all as simple as he thinks it is.
I also want him, and I hope the women of this province, to understand that Ontario has been committed and is still committed to equal rights in the constitution. The government of Canada, I understand, has been having discussions on both of those issues. We stand prepared to have them included.
Mr. Sweeney: A supplementary to the Premier: The Premier may notice the little ribbon on my lapel circulated by the Kitchener-Waterloo Status of Women group to encourage what he just spoke about — the inclusion of women’s rights in the constitution. During the negotiations, was he given any indication by his fellow Premiers of what conditions would be required to include women’s rights in the constitution? Can the Premier give us any indication as to when or how women’s rights may be included in that constitution?
3 p.m.
Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I do not recall dealing specifically with the whole section on equality rights. There was a discussion of the general application. We argue it should not be the part that has the notwithstanding provision. I am trying to simplify it as much as I can. The agreement that was finally concluded had that as part of the notwithstanding section. I made it clear we had no intention of introducing any notwithstanding legislation here. I have talked to a number of the women myself. There is an awareness this province supports its inclusion.
I do not go by telexes, but I do have some information Nova Scotia has perhaps rethought its position and may be in the process of agreeing to that being included. In that case it might leave just one province that has not so far accepted.
This is something I did not dwell on at the time I reported to the House. However, while we helped develop the compromise — and I think it was right and proper — I would be one of those who would predict the politics of the situation are such that we will not see a lot of notwithstanding legislation introduced in some of our sister provinces in spite of the ability to do so. I think that is a political reality.
Mr. Wildman: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question to the issue raised by my leader with the Premier. I accept the Premier’s statement that it is not a simple issue, that it is complex. However, the Attorney General of Ontario suggests to the federal minister that if the aboriginal and treaty rights clause is not changed, Indian bands could take over whole communities in the Ottawa Valley or perhaps even Parliament Hill and bring about grave disruption in Canadian life. Does the Premier really believe this was in the spirit required to bring about the acceptance of native rights by other provinces in this country?
Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, the Attorney General might like an opportunity to be more definitive himself. The Attorneys General spent months on the wording of the then proposed charter. What is in the present federal —
Mr. Foulds: Shoot from the lip again.
Mr. Cassidy: You were undermined behind your back.
Hon. Mr. Davis: With great respect, unlike the member for Ottawa Centre, I have never been undermined by people on this side of the House. I say that with some pride. The odd minister may have disagreed with me on occasion but they would never undermine their leader. If the leader of the third party had that degree of commitment, he would have been better off.
Mr. Speaker: Order. Would the Premier please address the question. Never mind the interjections.
[…]
CONSTITUTIONAL RESOLUTION
Ms. Bryden: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier. A few minutes ago, I believe the Premier said he did not recall any discussion among the other signatories to the accord of the sections in the charter relating to women’s rights, a fact that underlines that the accord was made by 10 men who appear to be unaware of the present widespread discrimination against women in many areas of our society, such as equal pay and family law.
Now that the women of the country have let the Premier and the other chauvinist signatories know, by thousands of letters, phone calls, telegrams and protest meetings, that they oppose the inclusion in the revised version of the charter of an override clause on the two sections guaranteeing women’s rights, will he do more than hand out the phone numbers of one or two Premiers and, instead, lead a movement to persuade all the signatories to reopen the question of including equality for women and aboriginal rights in the original form in the charter of rights?
Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I just want to disabuse the honourable member of one thing. I think the member for Kitchener-Wilmot (Mr. Sweeney) asked me if there was discussion as to what the “notwithstanding” approach would be of some of the provinces as it related to equality rights, women’s rights. There was no discussion, because I do not think any Premier had made any determination on just what “notwithstanding” approach he might take.
I assure the member that this province made it very clear that we were supportive, we are supportive and we will continue to be supportive. As I say, I do not go by telexes, but I understand Nova Scotia now has said it is supportive. In that the member is far closer to the government of Saskatchewan than I will ever be, I think she might use her best offices to see what the distinguished Premier of that province might do.
I want to make it clear that our position has been clear and is clear, and I am able to say this to any person, male or female, in Ontario.
Ms. Copps: Mr. Speaker, the Premier also stated earlier that he wanted this House to know that this government would not be responsible for any implementation of the “notwithstanding” clause with respect to future negotiations vis-à-vis women’s rights. How can this Premier and this government expect us to believe they will not continue to use women as a political football when, as little as two weeks ago, I introduced in a committee a measure that would have enshrined the principle of equal pay for equal work in this province and his government combined in toto to defeat that resolution?
Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I will not prolong this discussion. My understanding is that this already is the law of Ontario.
Mr. Cassidy: Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the Premier that representations from this party have gone to some of our friends out in western Canada, and I now have some hopes of success in that regard.
My question to the Premier is this: Is he prepared, on behalf of this province, to see a reopening of the discussions among the Premiers in order that the two questions at issue, women’s rights and aboriginal rights, could be reconsidered by the Premiers and so that a new and more positive result on both of those matters could be reflected in the accord and in the act before Parliament?
3:30 p.m.
Hon. Mr. Davis: Mr. Speaker, I think they are really two matters. I do not think it is a question of reopening, because I think we made a lot of progress — contrary, probably, to the expectations of a lot of people. That agreement is there, it is holding up and the resolution before the House reflects it. I do not think it needs reopening. People know my position, and they know the position of the other Premiers.
On the question of women’s rights, there appears to be some acceptance of what we have been saying for a year. Whether this will emerge with respect to aboriginal or native rights, I quite honestly cannot tell the honourable member.