Federal carbon tax plan is constitutional, Ontario’s top court says
Federal carbon tax plan is constitutional, Ontario’s top court says Federal carbon tax plan is constitutional, Ontario’s top court saysToday’S decision by the Ontario Court of Appeal is a win for the environment. It’S a win for taking action on climate change and it’s a win for candidate both today and for future Generations. Harold’S Chop cords of the federal government’s carbon pricing plan is constitutional Ontario monster. Legal challenge of the law saying a federally impose carbon tax is an intrusion on provincial jurisdiction of the Ontario Court of people. Disagree saying today the Federal Government Can legislate in relation to matters of national concern know earlier this year. Saskatchewan also lost his legal challenge of the climate plan, to say they will take their cases Supreme Court. So what did today’s ruling tell us about how that could play out joining me and studionow is Errol. Mendes was professor of constitutional and international law at the University of Ottawa. Professor Mendes, thank you for coming in today reaction generally to the decision from the Ontario Court. When you combine it with the decision of the Saskatchewan court of appeal, it’s a very strong ruling for the federal government and its carbon tax, because to some extent the majority ruling support in the Saskatchewan court of appeal. And, moreover, the majority ruling in in Ontario actually dismissed in some respects the concerns of the minority descent in the Saskatchewan court. So when those go up to the sprinkler Canada, it’s going to be a very strong set of rulings for the federal duck decision. So there was only one judge who was fully in the scent and frankly, I’m not sure how substantive that descend is because Jason Kenny, for example, NASDAQ David interpreting it as a as a rejection of the federal government’s use of sweeping Powers. But let’s take that because one of the parts of the descendants ruling, which I found frankly quite surprising, was that he claimed that the federal government’s position that this was such a natural concern for reduction of greenhouse gases, that it could be applied to things such as Home heating or improvements it Energy Efficiency. What we lawyer call that type of reasoning: a reductio ad absurdum. It’S not likely that the federal government is going to regulate home eating all so sad in the dissenting opinion analysis. What do you make of that? What is called a constitutional Theory he’s an originalist which likes to view the terms of the Constitution and very specific narratives and, frankly, I think that’s not in a card with frankly, what are Supreme Court and indeed, what we receive from the privy Council before The Supreme Court took over is the view of our constitution as a living tree, which goes beyond just technical boundaries. Off of of reasoning in this very important decision. Okay is looking at this same matter, challenging this same issue in court Alberta challenging, but we seemed so far. As you say, both in Ontario and Saskatchewan. The courts have been clear that the federal government did not overstep in and its jurisdiction 4/8 court of appeal, and that tells me that a lot of this is political maneuvering, because even if these rules are going against these government, they want to be seen to their Constituents, the ones who agree with them, that they should be no carbon text, that they’re due something in addition to these ruling, is being decided, decided against them. So, unfortunately, you’re missing a lot of this example. The same type of political positioning with the court between Alberta and British Columbia, thumbs off resources and, frankly again, BC has now been confirmed that its ability to stop the Trans Mountain pipeline is not going to go much further. So there’s a lot of maneuvering in terms of politics, but intensive law, it’s starting to become very clear. H1. We know that they are going to take their case to the Supreme Court. They expected we’ve heard in December at losing today. What do you think? The Supreme Court is likely to do very strong majority rulings that there’s very little chance that the decisions of the court of appeals of two major provinces will be off turn by the court. What I think is concerning at least to me, was if that is the the understanding of all the experts and keep in mind. Even Manitoba at one stage had a legal opinion who says: don’t even go much further, because it’s not going to be decided in your favor and that concerns me because one of the costs involved in terms of moving all these filled up to sprinkle to Canada and Not just legal cause, I’m talking about what condom is called opportunity cost at the same time has been pushing these appeals through this. Some major issues Happening Here in Ontario example at you may have heard that there’s been a massive cut in legal aid in Ontario, so we’re pushing money into appealing things which perhaps everyone knows is not going to be. Where is we have now? A large part of the Ontario population which may not have access to justice so that that to me talk talks about this opportunity. Cost involved in extending these appeals to the Supreme Court political agenda. Exactly exactly are so much for coming and helping us understand this better. Professor from the University of Ottawa Federal government’s approach to pricing, carbon pollution is good news for every Canadian who believe the climate action is urgent and a smart solutions to make the planets safer and our economy stronger to there is the federal minister of the climate change. Catherine McKenna is: she took the Facebook today to react to the favorable Court decision on her government’s carbon tax, the Ontario Court of Appeal last month, Saskatchewan xappeal Court also upheld the federal government’s carbon pricing law. So how will this latest ruling play into the heated political debate over the legitimacy of a federal carbon tax that leads the power panel in Marty and Marie all still with me and Marie I’ll? Let you pick up, as I said, for Saskatchewan now Ontario here we have the second Court decision to go against the provinces in as many months is that are constitutional. Professor was saying a few minutes ago. It is clear the federal government has jurisdiction to the political debate over carbon taxes. It’S not very surprising, given that the arguments on both sides were the same Province. This time Ontario saying thought I was overstepping by regulating attacks to attack climate change in ghd, because it’s a national concern I did find this ruling was even more categorical than the Saskatchewan in siding with the federal government. The courts say the Ontario Court of Appeal, saying Bristol, that kind of proves that it’s a national concern. They agreed with it and Ontario never brought up any provincial infringed upon by this Federal Regulation. Hence this still allow ample room for provincial jurisdiction. The questions that you have two cases of precedent staying the same thing whether this should maybe just be left of the Supreme Court. At this point, Alberta still wants to go ahead with their own, Conscious Sedation or their own argument court of appeal, but New Brunswick is already saying. Maybe we should focus on Saskatchewan going to the Supreme Court and Ontario now and make our arguments there instead of another case appeal. Ultimately, the Supreme Court will decide if, if he’s, really correct or not, and if the federal government is allowed to go ahead or not, but it’s definitely a huge win for Justin Trudeau in the Liberals going into an election, it doesn’t take away the political argument of Whether you should impose a tax or price on carbon and in whether it should be imposed on consumers, even though they get cash back are y’all. Come back to you on that in just a second but Emery also raised Alberta and as I look at Primm York, any statement after this Jen this decision today from Ontario, because Alberta did not intervene in the Ontario case and he’s also hardened by the split decision Of this court he’s going to go ahead with Alberta’s Court challenge this. So what are you expecting from him? For so many reasons, they campaigned on fighting with carbon tax in court. It is absolutely expected to him at the end of his base that they will launch another spear into this particular dragon in the hopes that they managed to cash it in the eye. Why don’t you know the first time I was when I was writing and researching about the the carbon tax challenge I was like. Oh, this is all just part in politics. This is all just so you know politicians trying to appeal to their bases with a hopeless, hopeless and high carbon tax case that would will park. And when I started talking to some people, who are experts in the end, isn’t in this field – and there are people who were parties in Arkansas would shut down the Federal backstop Pro program. And I was kind of amazed by that. But what we’ve seen in these ruins is that they’re, actually pretty split ruling and the only people, the only R134, when you cry and also 34322 in the in the concert in the Saskatchewan case in the schedule, is going to be heard by the Supreme Court. Jurisdictional issues at the provinces are bringing up so we’re dealing with him in a very serious way, so it would, I put odds on the Supreme Court ruling against the carbon tax know. I wouldn’t put High odds on it. I think there’s a pretty good chance that Supreme Court will fall in line with with with the provincial courts have ruled, but I also wouldn’t totally rule it out either. I don’t think that it is entirely as lost a cause as people who just want to talk. This up the populist politics would like it to be, and it’s a constitutional argument. They have more of a administrative argument and sew-in in the federal court that will be interesting to see could maybe change the we just heard from Catherine McKenna there on her Facebook statement. But as I look at a written statement, it’s also interesting – and let me just quote from it – is unfortunate – that conservative politicians, including Doug Ford and Jason Kenney, supported by Andrew Scheer, so coming to the federal level, support sheer continue to waste taxpayers dollars. Fighting climate action in court, rather than taking real action to fight climate change, this fall Canadians will get their chance to reject the approach of conservative politicians. How do you expect this issue will play out during the day? I expect to hear a lot more. What Catherine McKenna said for a very very simple reason is that she wants to Hitch this rightfully. I think the fact that Andrew Scheer supports this effort in general and, as you know, come out at in support of of Doug Ford in I mention Doug Ford. Not only because it is you know, electoral votes that is Ontario, but it’s governed by Doug Ford, who is supremely unpopular right now that unpopularity, I don’t think it’s as important as other people have been saying for Doug, I’m self. It is massively important for the conservative government so you’re going to see a lot of this sort of triangulation of them trying to hook this it into not necessarily, you know, cortical Enterprise been concentrating Ontario for that. For that very reason, the other interesting thing that’s going to be coming up in September is the fact that, according to the TMX pipeline is going to be going in the ground in September they will. The carbon tax is killing jobs in Justin. Trudeau doesn’t want anything to do with oil. Well, that’s the that’s the counter-argument. This is lining up extremely extremely well for Justin Trudeau, basically occupied my month before my life for about two-and-a-half months, every probably everybody on this panel. I would argue that we have not been saying a peep about this in a long time and that we’re hearing nothing about the fact that Justin Trudeau is winning on many different fronts right now. Okay, the last note on which to conclude that today, thank you. So much for all of that is always our power panel looks very much appreciate your inside jenkerson Marty, Patrick, win, capello’s host of Power & politics to see more of our show by subscribing to the CBC News Channel or click the link for another video. Thanks for watching The Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled the federal government’s carbon tax plan is constitutionally sound.
To read more: http://cbc.ca/1.5192914
»»» Subscribe to CBC News to watch more videos: http://bit.ly/1RreYWS
Connect with CBC News Online:
For breaking news, video, audio and in-depth coverage: http://bit.ly/1Z0m6iX
Find CBC News on Facebook: http://bit.ly/1WjG36m
Follow CBC News on Twitter: http://bit.ly/1sA5P9H
For breaking news on Twitter: http://bit.ly/1WjDyks
Follow CBC News on Instagram: http://bit.ly/1Z0iE7O
Download the CBC News app for iOS: http://apple.co/25mpsUz
Download the CBC News app for Android: http://bit.ly/1XxuozZ
For more than 75 years, CBC News has been the source Canadians turn to, to keep them informed about their communities, their country and their world. Through regional and national programming on multiple platforms, including CBC Television, CBC News Network, CBC Radio, CBCNews.ca, mobile and on-demand, CBC News and its internationally recognized team of award-winning journalists deliver the breaking stories, the issues, the analyses and the personalities that matter to Canadians.