Virtue Signaller in Chief

And so we are treated to the latest display of the PM's public virtue in his belated declaration that, he, JT, arbiter of all that is just and good and defender of our religious freedom (unless you secretly oppose abortion) will fight Bill 21. Now, I do not know what he intends to do to fight that thing. I agree that it is a bad thing. But more than a few reasonable people of good will (not including me) worry that, to go after it might reignite separatist feelings in Quebec (although as I recall his bungling of the pipeline file may have done that in Alberta and he doesn't seem to worry).

But, more importantly, and this is where the virtue signalling comes in, I do not know how you are supposed to fight it unless you get Quebec to kill it voluntarily unless you go nuclear constitutionally. Once the Bill was passed, the Federal Govt. could then use its Disallowance power from the Constitution to strike it down. But, it didn't and hasn't. It has until June 17, 2020 ( the anniversary of its passage) to do so according to Forsey on Disallowance in the Constitution. If it doesn't do that by then, there is no other way to repeal it. Court decision based on the Charter almost certainly will be overriden by Quebec invoking the Notwithstanding Clause. You can't otherwise legislate on it because it is an exclusive provincial competence, civil rights, under s. 92. You can't POGG it like you did with the carbon pricing scheme because it is obviously not, technically at least, a matter of national importance in that it only applies to Quebeckers or their guests within Quebec. You could make it inapplicable on federal property, federally regulated workplaces, reserves and military installations (including, ironically, the LG's office). Although I don't think the PM is even proposing what I like to call the "Dief Bill of Rights" approach.

SO the question for Justin is this -, if you are opposed to this and sweet reason does not convince Quebec to ditch 21 before June 17, will you send instructions to the Lt. Gov. to disallow it? (And, don't try to hide behind the desuetude, "it's not conventional" argument. Just because it has not been used since since 1943, it has been used over a hundred times in every province except PEI and NFLD and it was never repealed.) Or is this just a case of you posing again as a great immaculator of our rights when you have absolutely no intention of doing anything except to strike a pose? It certainly reminds one of when you apologize for wrongs you and I did not commit for a photo op. Or are you just trying to embarrass your opponents into looking like their condoning racism to get seats in PQ so you can wash all that shameful makeup off? Why haven't you even threatened to disallow yet?

Questions that I would pose to our cynicalist PM tomorrow night in French.

Meanwhile, in a CBC story about the matter, "Trudeau's challenge to Singh on Quebec's Bill 21 has Risks", Disallowance is not mentioned at all, let alone as an option for the Federal Govt. to "intervene" as JT keeps saying he will leave open as an option. This is widely interpreted to mean that he might, if it gets to the SCC, instruct federal lawyers to seek intervenor status in the case. Here there is dishonesty and ignorance on two levels not only from the PM but the Press. One, as mentioned above, even if the SCC strikes this down as  unconstitutional on Charter grounds (as I do not see how there can be any other ground based on 92), Quebec will almost certainly use 33 to override to uphold a law that allegedly 70% of the province want. Thus, the writer and the PM are both being disingenuous in imfeplying that any court intervention can ultimately kill this. 

Secondly, either by ignorance or mendacity or both or maybe fear of the Constitutional fallout, the writer (and likely most of the Press) and the PM are not at least openly considering Disallowance, the only effective, sure route for repealing. Another example of our uninformed, superficial and heavily censored debate. Would that the PM could be made of the stuff that his father was made of when he used POGG several times to do major national things that he knew to be nasty but that were perfectly constitutional, when he believed it was in the national interest. But...he's not. And the clock is ticking. What if the SCC doesn't get around to deciding the case until late June? Will he use the Reservation power to put Bill 21 on hold until the court sorts it out? In the meantime, Justin Trudeau, the rest of our political "leadership" and the Press seem to stumble along, blissfully unaware, uncaring or afraid of how to defend our rights. If only Trudeau's virtue signalling was our only problem.