Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s government says it is planning to introduce legislation that would allow it to ignore international agreements signed by Ottawa.
The future legislation is noted in a mandate letter Smith issued this week to the government’s intergovernmental relations ministry, which the premier heads.
The letter says it’s about protecting “Alberta’s authority.” In a statement, Smith’s office added that it’s also an issue of due process.
Sam Blackett, Smith’s press secretary, said the federal government isn’t required to consult the provinces when it signs international accords, even if those agreement include commitments that fall under provincial jurisdiction, such as health care.
“Alberta seeks to clarify that international agreements entered into by the federal government with subject matter that falls within provincial jurisdiction are only binding and enforceable in Alberta if passed into law under provincial legislation,” he said.
Blackett didn’t provide examples of agreements that Smith’s government was concerned about, but he said the World Health Organization Pandemic Agreement ratified earlier this year would be an example of something Alberta has authority over given its potential impact on health care.
A mandate letter from Alberta Premier Danielle Smith directs the province’s jobs minister to increase provincial control over immigration. As Travis McEwan reports, it’s unclear how that may be accomplished.
The pandemic agreement, simply put, will see signatories work together to “prevent, prepare for and respond to pandemics.”
Blackett said Alberta’s legislation would be similar to a long-standing legislative framework in place in Quebec.
University of Alberta constitutional law professor Eric Adams said Friday it’s not clear what Alberta is seeking through legislation, given the Constitution already grants provinces some control over implementing agreements that involve areas of provincial jurisdiction.
“For a long time, the law has been stable in this area and divides authority along some fairly clear lines,” he said, adding that the federal government can implement terms of international agreements on topics it has jurisdiction over while provinces can choose to legislate those agreements if they impact their jurisdiction.
“I’m not sure what provincial legislation would add to those existing constitutional rules and I guess we’ll have to wait and see.”
Adams said Canada’s division of powers means implementing the terms of international accords is already a bit “awkward.”
“Just because the federal government has signed onto a treaty doesn’t necessarily mean they can back the promise of those subjects as a legislative matter because some of those issues might be in provincial jurisdiction.”
He said this means the federal government can either get pre-emptive support from the provinces before Canada signs international treaties or seek that support through negotiations afterwards.
“The other option is to see which provinces take up the subject and just accept the reality that some provinces might not.”
Adams said another complication at play is that there are some subjects where there are overlapping jurisdictional powers between Ottawa and the provinces, citing health care and the environment as examples.
That “messy reality” doesn’t mean Ottawa can just mandate provinces to live up to international commitments the federal government makes though, he said.
“Canada can enter into those treaties, but it’s always got to fall to the regular division of powers about whether or not those promises are implemented.”
Blackett didn’t say when the government plans to table the legislation.
The legislature will resume sitting next month.
