Newfoundland’s third premier, Brian Peckford, said any attempt by Ottawa to usurp prairie provincial resource rights is doomed to fail.. David Lametti Justice Minister David Lametti .On April 5, Justice Minister David Lametti promised chiefs at the Assembly of First Nations that he would examine whether Ottawa could revoke the 1930 Natural Resources Transfer Act (NRTA) that gave Prairie provinces jurisdiction over their natural resources. .In an interview with the Western Standard, Peckford called the idea “outlandish.”.“I just don't understand where the minister is coming from and talking about this. This is settled law,” Peckford said. “He must have been just trying to please the sentiments of the First Nations.”.Peckford, who ruled as Newfoundland’s third premier from 1979 to 1989, said the act only formalized what other provinces received under the British North America Act in the first place..“Under the 1867 Act, all the provinces had jurisdiction over natural resources, Peckford said..“[Doing otherwise] was counterfactual to what was already in the Constitution, it seems to me.”.Peckford, who now lives on Vancouver Island, said a federal legislative attempt to eliminate the NRTA would fail. .“They can pull it off, but it won't make that much of a difference. I keep reminding everybody when the different cases come up about the Constitution. Everybody forgets because the federal government wants everybody to forget because they lost.”.The former premier is referring to the reference question posed by Pierre Elliott Trudeau to the Supreme Court of Canada, whether Ottawa could make a new constitution without provincial consent. The SCC said precedent suggested they could not. Peckford says nine decades of the NRTA, plus the 1867 and 1982 constitutions means a federal bill to retake resource rights would also “be just thrown out.”.“Any new thing that the federal government might do through the attorney general, or any new thing indigenous people might be doing about challenging what rights the provinces have is all sort of academic,” Peckford said..“Through convention, which is very powerful, just as powerful as if it was written, there is constitutional precedent for the provinces continuing to enjoy those rights under that act. Revoking it right now won't change anything because the provinces will challenge them and win in court.”.As for indigenous claims, the last living premier present for the negotiations to form the Constitution said Section 35 affirms aboriginal rights but does not define them..“Native rights are being litigated over time. And we don't know to what extent that will go because each case is going to be treated differently on its own merit. What the Supreme Court of Canada said so far on Section 35, [is that] 35 just gives the opportunity for the aboriginal people to make arguments on what their rights are.”.Peckford agrees with Prairie premiers Lametti’s musing about taking away their rights undermines national unity. The former premier believes if Ottawa tried to overturn the NRTA, the backlash would be worse than the elder Trudeau received in the 1980s for the National Energy Program..“The provinces would take them to court and it would be hung up in court for a while, but the Atlantic Accord sure puts a damper to all that,” he said..Peckford and former prime minister Brian Mulroney, both Progressive Conservatives, made the Atlantic Accord in 1985. Although offshore drilling is federal jurisdiction, Mulroney conceded revenues from this resource to the province..“One of the most famous things ever happened in Canada as relates to resource development was when I negotiated the Atlantic Accord, which the Supreme Court has just ruled belonged to the feds, but they agreed that all of the royalties should come to the provinces, who should also have a say in the management.”.Despite recent surprises from the SCC, Peckford said it’s the Liberal government that would be in for a shock if it ever tried to strip Prairie provinces of their resource rights..“I would surprise the other way. It would be a surprise to the federal government, but it shouldn't be a surprise to anybody else.”
Newfoundland’s third premier, Brian Peckford, said any attempt by Ottawa to usurp prairie provincial resource rights is doomed to fail.. David Lametti Justice Minister David Lametti .On April 5, Justice Minister David Lametti promised chiefs at the Assembly of First Nations that he would examine whether Ottawa could revoke the 1930 Natural Resources Transfer Act (NRTA) that gave Prairie provinces jurisdiction over their natural resources. .In an interview with the Western Standard, Peckford called the idea “outlandish.”.“I just don't understand where the minister is coming from and talking about this. This is settled law,” Peckford said. “He must have been just trying to please the sentiments of the First Nations.”.Peckford, who ruled as Newfoundland’s third premier from 1979 to 1989, said the act only formalized what other provinces received under the British North America Act in the first place..“Under the 1867 Act, all the provinces had jurisdiction over natural resources, Peckford said..“[Doing otherwise] was counterfactual to what was already in the Constitution, it seems to me.”.Peckford, who now lives on Vancouver Island, said a federal legislative attempt to eliminate the NRTA would fail. .“They can pull it off, but it won't make that much of a difference. I keep reminding everybody when the different cases come up about the Constitution. Everybody forgets because the federal government wants everybody to forget because they lost.”.The former premier is referring to the reference question posed by Pierre Elliott Trudeau to the Supreme Court of Canada, whether Ottawa could make a new constitution without provincial consent. The SCC said precedent suggested they could not. Peckford says nine decades of the NRTA, plus the 1867 and 1982 constitutions means a federal bill to retake resource rights would also “be just thrown out.”.“Any new thing that the federal government might do through the attorney general, or any new thing indigenous people might be doing about challenging what rights the provinces have is all sort of academic,” Peckford said..“Through convention, which is very powerful, just as powerful as if it was written, there is constitutional precedent for the provinces continuing to enjoy those rights under that act. Revoking it right now won't change anything because the provinces will challenge them and win in court.”.As for indigenous claims, the last living premier present for the negotiations to form the Constitution said Section 35 affirms aboriginal rights but does not define them..“Native rights are being litigated over time. And we don't know to what extent that will go because each case is going to be treated differently on its own merit. What the Supreme Court of Canada said so far on Section 35, [is that] 35 just gives the opportunity for the aboriginal people to make arguments on what their rights are.”.Peckford agrees with Prairie premiers Lametti’s musing about taking away their rights undermines national unity. The former premier believes if Ottawa tried to overturn the NRTA, the backlash would be worse than the elder Trudeau received in the 1980s for the National Energy Program..“The provinces would take them to court and it would be hung up in court for a while, but the Atlantic Accord sure puts a damper to all that,” he said..Peckford and former prime minister Brian Mulroney, both Progressive Conservatives, made the Atlantic Accord in 1985. Although offshore drilling is federal jurisdiction, Mulroney conceded revenues from this resource to the province..“One of the most famous things ever happened in Canada as relates to resource development was when I negotiated the Atlantic Accord, which the Supreme Court has just ruled belonged to the feds, but they agreed that all of the royalties should come to the provinces, who should also have a say in the management.”.Despite recent surprises from the SCC, Peckford said it’s the Liberal government that would be in for a shock if it ever tried to strip Prairie provinces of their resource rights..“I would surprise the other way. It would be a surprise to the federal government, but it shouldn't be a surprise to anybody else.”
