Document Information

Date: 1980-11-14
By: Howard Leeson, Saskatchewan
Citation: Telex from Howard Leeson to Michael Kirby (14 November 1980)
Other formats: Click here to view the original document (PDF).

Encl.

Nov 14 18 10 ‘80

^{[c.: M. Str[illegible]}         

^{M. Fred [illegible]}

^{Mrs. Reed]}

PMO PCO OTT

INTGOV AFF REG

NOVEMBER 14, 1980

Mr. MICHAEL KIRBY

SECRETARY TO THE CABINET FOR FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS,

OTTAWA, ONTARIO

F.P.R.O. B.R.F.P.

Michael Kirby

NOV 17 1980

DEAR MICHAEL

I RECEIVED WITH INTEREST YOUR PROPOSED DRAFTS OF SECTION 42 (LINKAGE) AND SECTIONS 40 AND 46 (REFERENDUM RULES COMMITTEE) I NOTE THE EXTENT TO WHICH THESE DRAFTS REFLECT CHANGES URGED BY SASKATCHEWAN, AND I AM ENCOURAGED BY THIS INDICATION OF FLEXIBILITY ON THE PART OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

DETAILED COMMENTS ON YOUR DRAFTS FOLLOW.

SECTION 42 (LINKAGE)

A COUPLE OF TECHNICAL POINTS. FIRST, IN OUR VIEW, SECTION 2(A) IS NOT WELL DRAFTED, AN AMENDMENT CANNOT BE ‘AUTHORIZED’ UNDER 41(1)(A), AUTHORIZATION REQUIRES BOTH FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL APPROVALS. WE HAVE A STRONG PREFERENCE FOR OUR ORIGINAL FORMULATION OF THIS SECTION ALSO, WE NOTE THAT YOUR PROPOSED DRAFT DOES NOT REALLY CONTAIN A ‘SUNSET’ PROVISION, WHILE IT PROVIDES THAT THE REFERENDUM PROCLAMATION MUST BE AUTHORIZED WITHIN TWO YEARS, IT SETS NO TIME LIMIT FOR THE ACTUAL HOLDING OF THE REFERENDUM.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, AS YOU YOURSELF POINT OUT, THE FEDERAL DRAFT DOES NOT REQUIRE PARLIAMENT TO TAKE A SEPARATE DECISION TO APPROVE THE HOLDING OF A REFERENDUM NOR DOES IT PROVIDE EVEN A LIMITED FORM OF RECIPROCITY (UNDER WHICH, IN APPROPRIATE CIRCUMSTANCES, A REFERENDUM MIGHT BE HELD TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT SUPPORTED BY THE PROVINCES BUT OPPOSED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT) YOU WILL APPRECIATE THAT SASKATCHEWAN CONTINUES TO ATTACH IMPORTANCE TO BOTH THESE POINTS.

SECTION 40 (REFERENDUM RULES COMMITTEE. PART IV)

[Page 2]

WE HAVE NO SERIOUS PROBLEMS WITH THIS DPAFT, THOUGH WE WOULD LIXE TO SEE THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER GUARANTEED (‘APPOINTED BY RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS’).

SECTION 46 <REFERENDUM RULES COMMITTEE, PART V)

SEE COMMENT ABOVE, CONCERNING INDEPENDENCE OF C.E.O.

ALSO, WE NOTE THAT THE FEDERAL DRAFT ESTABLISHES THE REFERENDUM RULES COMMITTEE, UNDER SECTION 46, AS A PERMANENT, ONGOING BODY. IN OUR VIEW, THERE IS NO NEED TO CREATE A PERMANENT NEW BUREAUCRACY TO DEAL WITH SITUATIONS THAT WOULD ARISE, WE WOULD HOPE, ONLY ON A VERY INFREQUENT BASIS. WE CONTINUE TO PREFER THE CREATION OF AN AD HOC BODY FOR EACH REFERENDUM, AS PROPOSED IN OUR ORIGINAL DRAFT IN OUR VIEW, REFERENDUMS SHOULD NOT COME TO BE REGARDED AS PART OF THE NORMAL ROUTINE OF GOVERNING.

AS YOU KNOW, WE CONTINUE TO AWAIT WITH INTEREST INDICATIONS THAT THE RESOLUTION WILL BE MODIFIED IN OTHER AREAS AS WELL.

ON A RELATED MATTER, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE IMPORTANCE WE ATTACH TO REACHING AN UNDERSTANDING, WITH AS MUCH PRECISION AS POSSIBLE, ON LEGISLATIVE OR ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS RESPECTING INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN RESOD;RCES I BELIEVE YOU APPRECIATE THAT IT WILL NOT BS POSSIBLE FOR SASKATCHEWAN TO ENDORSE THE RESOLUTION WHATEVER CHANGES ARE MADE IN OTHER RESPECTS – UNTIL THIS MATTER IS RESOLVED TO OUR MUTUAL SATISFACTION I LOOK FORWARD TO RECEIVING YOUR PRECISE PROPOSAL AT A VERY EARLY DATE.

HOWARD LEESON

DEPUTY MIN IS TER

SASKATCHEWAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

PMO PCO OTT

INTGOV AFF REG

M