Preamble: The Myth: Canada is a Confederation of Provinces.
The Reality: Canada is actually a Federation of Provinces.
So what is the difference and why should it matter?
Differences are profound, all-encompassing and the establishment of an overly strong centralized Federal Government in Canada, despite significant, often irreconcilable regional disparities within Canada, has created essentially two classes of Provinces, impacting all citizens of those Provinces.
The ‘Tier One’ Provinces, defined as those Provinces with the voting ability to demand Constitutional, Legal, Economic and Social benefits accruing to them at the potential (often real) expense of the ‘Tier Two’ Provinces, have used their significant plurality of voters, Members of Parliament, Appointed Members of the Senate, Appointed Members of the Supreme Court, among others, to ensure that legislation adopted, economic and social decisions and initiatives, among others, are beneficial to their own Constituents, without due consideration to the effect upon, and consequences of, those self-same decisions as they affect the Constituents of the ‘Tier Two’ Provinces.
In short, the current model of Canadian Federalism benefits the original Constituencies of Upper Canada (Ontario) and Lower Canada (Quebec) even the Eastern Maritime provinces to a lesser extent in an inequitable, and unfair, manner, as it relates to the remainder of Canadian Provinces who were not party to the original BNA Act signed into law by a British Monarchy in 1867.
So how does this related to whether Canada is a de facto Federation instead of a Confederation, as most Canadians have been taught (and probably still believe)?
By definition, a ‘Confederation’ is a “a loose relationship between small local (ie Provincial) governments, which cooperate to common goals, while maintaining total autonomy. Having the freedom to operate independently allows a great deal of freedom for each region, though it may also lead to conflicts between the regions, and even between those regions and the central government”.
Another definition speaks to the ‘sovereignty’ of the member states or entities with a Confederation – and it is that specific LACK of sovereignty or total autonomy that gives lie to the notion that Canada is a Confederation of Provinces.
In historic terms, it can be safely argues that Canada changed from a Confederation to a Federation no later than 1875 when the Supreme Court of Canada was established, commensurate with powers that overruled Provincial jurisdiction in most critical points of law, including Canadian Constitutional Law.
It is also clear from history that the original intent of many of the questionably named ‘Fathers of Confederation’ was to steer the newly formed Canada in the direction of a Federation as soon as possible. Historians rightly describe Sir John A. MacDonald and many of his Anglo-Saxon cohorts as Federalists while many of the Francophone initial ‘Fathers’ were probably ‘Confederalists’ as they sought to maintain some true level of sovereignty for Lower Canada.
The quick transition from a true Confederation of Provinces into a Canadian Federation against the expressed wishes of many Lower Canada Members of Parliament was probably the first indication that the Province of Quebec (the former Lower Canada) would henceforth continue to pursue its own identity, culture and vision for its future, regardless of the modified terms of political association with the remainder of Canada. The impact of that initial divergence in philosophy and intent of the Fathers of Confederation remain with us throughout the subsequent history of Canada.
The immediate consequence, relevant to our analysis and conclusion, is that the Province of Quebec quickly and forcefully demanded a preferred status as a ’Tier One’ Province, henceforth. Quebec has maintained that privilege position ever since and has historically defied all attempts to bring it into a subservient relationship with Canada’s Federal Government.
Examples of that preferred ‘Tier One’ Provincial status?
Quebec did NOT consent to the Constitution Act, 1982 and claimed veto power.
Quebec consented to the terms of the Meech Lake Accord in 1987 on the strict understanding it would have ‘Distinct Society’ special rights within Canada. (For those who are not students of history, the final ratification of the Meech Lake Accord FAILED June 22, 1990 on the last possible day as Elijah Harper, a Manitoba MLA observed that First Nations input had NOT been sought on any of the proposed agreements between Provinces).
Quebec did NOT consent to the Charlottetown Accord in 1992, a revisited attempt to make Constitutional changes including the input of First Nations participants.
For the record, no serious attempts to amend Canada’s fragile Constitution have been made since that date.
What have we learned from this?
Canada’s ONLY claim to ‘Confederation’ status lies in the inability to amend Canada’s existing Constitution, however flawed, without the virtual consent of all Provinces. For reference, the failure of Meech Lake Accord resulted from: ‘Pursuant to Section 39(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982, on June 23, 1990, the amendments lapsed. They had received the assent of the federal government and eight provinces totalling 96% of the population.’
Canada’s Constituent, as it is written into law, is seriously flawed and subject to far too many discretionary interpretations and rulings by a Supreme Court that is itself appointed by political interests and a ‘seat allocation formula’ that protects the interests primarily of Ontario and (not surprisingly) Quebec.
Reality Check: Tier One Provinces, namely Ontario and Quebec, will almost certainly maintain their preferred status, Constitutionally.
So how do the Tier Two Provinces, including BC, find a way to improve our political, economic and societal standing within a Canadian Federation that is overtly, undeniably and demonstrably skewed in favour of two Eastern, heavily populated Provinces that have historically been able to bend Canada’s Parliament, including the House and the Senate, as well as the Supreme Court of Canada, to their political will and advantage, hence creating the Tier One Provincial status?
Tier Two Provinces, defined henceforth as ALL Canadian Provinces, with the specific exclusion of Ontario and Quebec, MUST find a way of improving their relationship with the Tier One Provinces WITHIN the constraints of the Canadian Constitution as currently defined and interpreted subject to the last ratified (with the exception of Quebec) constitutional amendments brought into law defined as the Constitution Act, 1982.
The Balance of Power, the goal of creating a more equitable, fair distribution of Political Will, Economic Opportunity & Sustainability, Interprovincial Trade and associated Benefits among vastly divergent Canadian Provinces, divergent in terms of Geography, Natural Resources, Population, Economic Opportunity and Cultural/Societal Milieu, is ONLY going to be achievable if Canadian Provinces re-examine their options and opportunities within the Canadian political as it exists.
Three outcomes (if we choose to accept the Status Quo) are possible:
1. Maintain Status Quo – increasingly unacceptable to most Westerners, including BC citizens.
2. Similar to Quebec, pursue a Referendum intended to ultimately disassociate from the Canadian Federation and achieve full autonomous, independent status as a Sovereign Entity or State.
3. Redefine or re-establish a genuine form of Confederation by utilizing some, if not all, of the Constitutional Authorities and Rights ALREADY
enshrined within Canadian Law with the ultimate goal in mind that such a reclaiming of Provincial Rights, Responsibilities and Authorities will empower Tier Two Provinces with greater control and autonomy over vital, critical mandates that affect Constituents both Provincially and Federally including, but not limited to:
a. Collect Provincial Individual Income Taxes in addition to existing Corporate and Business Taxes.
b. Repatriate a Pension Plan for all Constituents from the Canada Pension Plan to a Provincial equivalent.
c. Establish a Provincial Law Enforcement Agency to replace any RCMP contracts currently in place.
d. Re-examine Provincial Consent concerning the current Equalization Formula used to facilitate Federal transfers to Provinces.
e. Create or augment a Provincial Authority re: Environment Issues.
f. Create or augment a Provincial Authority re: Firearms Control.
g. Re-Assert and Re-Claim Provincial Jurisdiction over Health Care, including challenging the legal ability the Federal Government to enforce Health Care mandates and Health Care Transfer funding.
h. Re-Assert and Re-Claim Provincial Jurisdiction over Administration of Justice, both Civil and Criminal including challenging the ability of Federal Government to unilaterally appoint Superior Court Justices within individual Provinces.
I. Use section 88 of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Quebec Secession Referendum to force Senate reform back onto the national agenda.
The establishment of a BC Provincial Political Party committed Constitutionally to re-asserting these Constitutionally enshrined Provincial Rights and Authorities is required if there is any chance of creating a re-defined version of Confederation within Canada that does not perpetuate the current status of Tier One and Tier Two Provinces, BC included in the latter.
At the very least, it can be shown that there are significant economic benefits to de-centralizing both political decision-making and funding as evidenced by the unsustainable debt and deficit financing agenda of the prevailing Canadian Liberal Minority Government bolstered by the New Democratic Party.
De-centralization of political and economic power from an increasingly corrupted Federal Government is achievable – even under the constraints of Canada’s existing Constitution.
What BC is missing is the political driving force, including BC Constituent education, necessary to re-assert and reclaim Provincial Authorities and Rights already enshrined in Canada’s Constitution.
A second, equally important consideration, is the matter of elected members of legislative bodies, federal, provincial and municipal, honouring their sworn duty and responsibility to be the de facto, unequivocal representatives of the selfsame voters and constituents who elected those individuals to office.
A major, unacceptable and undemocratic flaw of the political status quo is that candidates for political office find themselves accountable, even subordinated, to the political party to which those candidates have pledged allegiance in preference to the very voter base that has elected those candidates to their office of fiduciary trust, responsibility and accountability.
The demands of the vast majority of existing political parties ensures that the self-interest of those political parties, including policy and platform decisions, is made at the executive level of the political party, rather than at the grassroots, constituent level.
Virtually all current mainstream parties also allow their leader to exercise a level of control and authority that diminishes the democratic rights of the individual party member and candidate.
The establishment of party ‘whips’ is evidence that most conventional political parties are committed to the concept of party solidarity and compliance to ‘top down’ policies and initiatives, rather than accepting that their primary purpose and responsibility is to ensure that the expressed best interests, vision and goals of the constituents are responsibly, transparently and accountably prioritized.
Historically, distance and technological constraints prevented the process of Direct Democracy from being achievable in large geographic governing jurisdictions No such constraints should prevent a new, constituent accountable and constituent responsible, political party from forming and becoming viable as a political force within the province of BC.
Video conferencing, Internet communications including email and secure portal websites, and other technological tools are available now to ensure that a commitment to Direct Democracy is not only possible, but achievable, from the very formation of the New BC Party movement.
Policy considerations and platform initiatives can all be widely and comprehensively distributed to New BC Party members for virtually immediate consideration, feedback, discussion, debate and ultimately, ratification, amendment or rejection.
The New BC Party would commit to putting such a technology based form of Direct Democracy in place, from the date the New BC Party is registered in accordance with BC provincial statutes.
BC’s Peculiar History & Projected Future
Until the arrival of England’s Captain James Cook in 1778, British Columbia was a mountain isolated and coastal isolated geographic region with an indigenous population estimated at less than 50,000 residents, by most accounts.
The Spaniards had already explored the BC coast in 1774 but made no permanent settlements at that time.
BC remained in dispute between the European countries until the Treaty of Nootka was signed in 1790 (revised in 1794), giving both countries trading rights. Of course, no one asked the indigenous population what they thought of this treaty but, in fairness, the native population was itself very fragmented and isolated into local areas with no common governing structure uniting all of the indigenous groups, tribes and communities. As a result, the indigenous population was virtually ignored, creating a legal challenge that continues to exist until this very day.
Surprisingly, even the prevailing unelected leaders of the two major colonies that existed prior to Confederation status for BC were not major players in the negotiations that led to BC joining Canada’s Eastern provinces in 1871. The leadership of both the Vancouver Island colony and the British Columbia colony that grew from the Fraser Gold Rush in 1858 were merged into a single governing body in 1866 but it took an outside initiative known as the Confederation League formed by the unlikely dreamer Amor de Cosmos (born Bill Smith) in 1868 to define the terms and initiative that led to British Columbia joining the Dominion of Canada in 1871.
Major factors were US expansion from the south, the purchase of Alaska by the US in 1867 and the obvious attraction of a national railway connecting BC to the remainder of what is now Canada.
Once again, the indigenous population was not consulted and were left out of the negotiations.
BC is somewhat unique in a variety of aspects, including its geographic characteristics. As Canada’s only Pacific coastal province, the maritime commerce capability is a major factor in BC’s economic as well as social, development.
Inland, a number of mountain ranges dissect the province from north to south, creating both unique transportation challenges as well as limiting the land base on which typical human activities can be economically pursued, most importantly agriculture.
Less than 4% of BC’s total land base is considered suitable for agricultural activities, including orchards and non-traditional crops.
Conversely, it is estimated that approximately 60% of BC’s land mass is forest, both coniferous and deciduous, with the vast majority being coniferous, alpine growth.
What does this mean in real terms?
BC is blessed with the most temperate climate in Canada, is rich with natural resources relating to logging, mining and related industries, but is unable to sustain its large population in excess of 5 Million residents without an active, viable trading and commerce component.
Again, BC’s unique position as Canada’s Western Gateway becomes a major advantage in facilitating the movement of trade goods both East into the remainder of Canada and West, from other Canadian Provinces into the Asian markets, even European markets via the Panama Canal.
It is noted that the Constitution assigns the right to manage both interprovincial trade and transportation corridors to the federal government but there are still provincial opportunities to affect the movement of goods within Canada available to BC as has been evidenced by the significant delays in the expansion of pipelines through BC, as a recent example.
Another undeniable fact in BC is that the vast majority of the population is concentrated in relatively small geographic areas along the coastal waterways. The mild climate and the proximity to the Pacific Ocean has attracted most of the 5 Million plus population of BC. This high density population base has significantly different requirements from those BC Constituents residing in rural or smaller urban environments. Currently, over 75% of BC residents live in communities defined as large or medium urban. Only 13% of residents are actually considered rural.
The past few decades have shown a discernible, demonstrable difference in voting patterns and behaviour between urban and rural voters. In BC, urban voters dramatically and overwhelmingly outnumber rural voters. As a result, the rural BC population is often being asked to support policies and legislation that is clearly drafted and targeted for the benefit of BC’s substantial urban population.
Perhaps just as important in the overall analysis of BC demographically and politically, is the undeniable fact that BC remains the only province in Canada that has not established treaty rights with the vast majority of the indigenous population, estimated today at less than 300,000 individuals representing about 6% of BC’s total population.
By comparison, the Asian population including Chinese, Indian, Filipino, Japanese, Korean and related groups is well in excess of One and a Half Million (1,500,000) individuals. Projections indicate a possible total Asian population in excess of Three Million (3,000,000) individuals by 2031 (source: Wikipedia) representing fully half, 50%, of the total BC population.
The expectations of governance as a result of the diversity of the BC population base cannot be considered simple and straightforward. Not unlike most jurisdictions, political parties in BC must pay close attention to the needs and expectations of well defined ethnic and cultural groups in many regional locales within BC.
A significant consideration for the New BC Party is that the Asian population is generally regarded as industrious, far more entrepreneurial, capitalistic and conservative in nature as opposed to socialistic or ‘Left leaning’. These communities would appear to be strong supporters of the New BC Party as the financial, cultural and social wellbeing of these communities would be well served by a political party that maintains a strong sovereign, BC focused vision and agenda.
In Principle and in Practice
Unlike existing status quo political parties, the New BC Party would establish Leadership and a BC All Regions Council with elected positions on a fully Regional basis, acknowledging the vast diversity of BC and its component elements; socially, economically, culturally, demographically and politically.
The New BC Party will be created on a ‘Return to Constituency’ promise that requires all New BC Party Candidates, even if and when elected to BC’s Provincial Legislature, to ensure that the Political Will of the selfsame Constituents and Voters who elected that Candidate, (now MLA), will be maintained and respected, utilizing the augmented technological tools now available to us.
The New BC Party will be a return to Participatory Democracy. This reimagined Democratic Model necessarily requires more engagement, involvement, knowledge and commitment from General Members as well as those elected to specific offices within the New BC Party.
The New BC Party recognizes and asserts that many of the fundamental principles of democracy have been perverted, subverted and demonstrably diminished under the established models practiced by the vast majority of existing, status quo political entities.
Status Quo Party members are invariably solicited for funding but rarely for input on the increasingly complicated nuances of government that have resultantly taken BC to an unacceptable level of unaccountable, authoritarian and bloated government, both at the legislature and in the BC Civil Service.
The New BC Party is being formed with the specific intent to flatten the hierarchy of power and control and to return Participatory Democracy to all BC Constituents.
High Tech, High Touch. We have the technology to reach out to ALL New BC Party Members on key legislative issues and the New BC Party has a Constitutional Commitment to bringing forward important Legislative Proposals to General Members and Constituents on a timely basis for discussion, debate, proposed amendments and ultimately, an ‘up or down’ vote which will be conveyed to the LIC (Legislative Impact Committee) and the Communications Committee for dissemination to the Leadership Team, Mainstream Media, Independent Journalists, the New BC Party website, Social Media posts and any other means available to confirm the New BC Party’s assessment, evaluation and response to the General Public and Constituents.
As an example, before any proposed legislation is debated in BC’s Legislature for final reading, each New BC Party MLA would be required to post proposed legislation of immediate or specific interest to the local Constituency on his/her Constituency website while the Regional Constituency and BC Provincial New BC Party websites would similarly responsibly post all legislative matters of a more Regional, or Provincial, level of importance on the respective websites maintained by those Regional or Provincial levels of the New BC Party.
An important consideration will be the ‘universality’ or ‘specific impact’ of proposed legislation based on the degree to which proposed legislation will have a direct, demonstrable and meaningful impact on the Constituents of each local Riding, Region and the Province of BC, in its entirety.
A Legislative Impact Committee would be elected (with an Elected Representative from each established Region within the New BC Party). That Legislative Impact Committee, hereinafter referred to as LIC, would be tasked with assigning a weighted vote value to each pertinent Proposed Legislative draft once it reaches the floor of the BC Legislature.
A weighted vote would ensure that the Constituencies and Regions most affected by potential Legislation would have a greater say in the New BC Party’s position on the proposed Legislation compared to a Constituency or Region that has far less potential impact or direct interest in the legislation.
Examples given:
1. Public Health is a universal right and therefore a universal unweighted vote for New BC Party members, as all are equally impacted, with equal fiduciary responsibility.
2. BC Ferry and waterway considerations are Regional in nature.Therefore, New BC Party Regions directly impacted by proposed Legislation on related BC Ferry and waterway considerations would have a weighted vote advantage on Saltwater Transportation, Regulation and Enforcement proposed Legislation that is Constitutionally under the purview of the Provinces as opposed to the Federal Government.
3. BC Hydro and Natural Resource extraction and development would be both Universal and Regional (even local Constituency applicable) dependent on the intent of the proposed Legislation. The construction or expansion of a hydro dam such as Site C in the Peace River Region has multifaceted consequences; both to all taxpayers and BC residents from an availability and pricing perspective as well as on a local, environmental or economic benefit basis to the Region in which the Site C dam is geographically located and from which much of the labour, material and ancillary resources would be drawn. The New BC Party LIC (Legislative Impact Committee) would be tasked with a more complicated means of assigning weighted voting on the ‘local/regional’ cost/benefit analysis components while allowing an equal vote on aspects of the proposed legislation that has universal impact, ie taxpayer contributed cost and anticipated return on investment to all BC energy clients and consumers.
This style of direct democracy, incorporating both micro and macro considerations, is recognized as requiring far more individual input and level of knowledge than is currently available to BC Constituents and ultimately, voters.
It is also recognized that this return to a more pure form of Direct Democracy requires that New BC Party members, including the BC New Party (elected from within) Leadership Team (perhaps Administrative Team is a better term), remain conversant with, and committed to, both public and internal legislative discussion and debate on proposed legislative additions, amendments or deletions.
It is anticipated that the New BC Party would immediately form a ‘Shadow Cabinet’ of members, either at the general member or leadership level, to monitor specific areas of legislative responsibility mirroring the various Ministries and Portfolios contained within the BC Government structure.
This New BC Party Shadow Cabinet would be formed by officers elected to that specific position by the General Members of the New BC Party. The Shadow Cabinet would then be responsible for forming Ministry/Portfolio Committees with required Regional members from all New BC Party Regions elected from within their respective Regions. Preferentially, the Shadow Cabinet will be populated by New BC Party MLA’s and/or Candidates who have been duly elected by their local Riding Constituency, by local Riding Constituency Members with a level of pertinent expertise or by General Members who have both time and interest in discharging requisite duties in accordance with the mandate established.
This New BC Party Shadow Cabinet would be responsible for disseminating information to the Regional leadership, the Riding leadership and the Provincial leadership as necessary concerning proposed legislative initiatives in sufficient time that the information be distributed to the New BC Party General Members for a ‘policy consideration’ response based on the recommendations of the LIC (Legislative Impact Committee).
The Legislative Impact Committee would thereafter be responsible for ensuring that the Communications Committee of the New BC Party is given timely access to the proposed legislation and the internal voting results of the New BC Party.
The Communications Committee would then be responsible for outlining and distributing the New BC Party position on the proposed Legislation on a timely basis to ensure that all impacted Ridings, Regions and the overall Provincial Constituents are made aware so that a meaningful public discussion can commence.
The Communications Committee of the New BC Party would be elected by General Members on a Regional Basis to ensure that all Regions are represented.
A close examination of this White Paper will properly lead the Reader to the conclusion that the role of ‘Leader’ of the New BC Party will be significantly different from the established norm.
The Leader of the New BC Party will be elected from General Members, by General Members; with the specific mandate to be the ‘Face and Voice’ of the New BC Party and to convey the intent and resolve of New BC Party members as determined through the herein referenced Participatory Democracy mechanism as described above.
The Important, Defining Difference? The Leader will ‘Convey’ and ‘Articulate” Policy, Vision and Legislative intentions as determined through ongoing Participatory Democracy rather than unilaterally establishing those selfsame Policy, Vision and Legislative intentions. The Leader will be the recognizable, articulate spokesperson for the New BC Party and its Members.
Why a New BC Party instead of supporting Independent Candidates directly?
As many of the concepts discussed herein would work equally well with Independent MLA’s coming together to achieve Local Riding Constituent goals through discussion, debate, prioritization and/or compromise, there are both legislative and economic constraints that make it almost impossible for Independent Candidates to achieve success – either at the voting booth, in terms of media coverage and exposure, and in terms of raising the funding necessary to be on a level playing field with Candidates from Registered Political Parties.
A second major impediment to Independent Candidate success is the legislative framework that is overseen by Elections BC.
As an example, a registered political party’s name cannot contain the word ‘Independent’ or ‘Non’Affiliated’ or similar wording that infers the Candidate is campaigning with the benefits of Registered Political Party association but without the stringent constraints that are also associated with Registered Political Party endorsement.
The belief of the author of this White Paper and subsequently, the belief of the New BC Party considers that the best, most capable and electable ‘potential’ Independent BC Political Provincial Candidates will recognize the merit and benefit of running as a Candidate for the New BC Party, including a Direct, Accountable and Transparent Responsibility ‘FIRSTLY’ to the Constituents and Voters within his/her local Riding as well as the unique ability to benefit from the ‘High Tech, High Touch’ Constitutional requirement to practice Participatory Democracy foundational principle of the New BC Party as outlined above.
For discussion purposes, the author has proposed Seven (7) Constitutional Regions within the New BC Party as detailed below:
1. Victoria & Surrounding Region
2. Greater Vancouver Island
3. South Lower Mainland
4. Greater Vancouver & Surrounding Region
5. Coastal Mainland BC (North of Greater Vancouver & Surrounding Region)
6. Northern BC
7. BC Interior
These proposed Constitutional Regions will be geographically and demographically defined later on in this White Paper. Boundaries will be established based on rough population equivalencies coupled with specific Regional characteristics & requirements.
The author considers that the combination of the need to re-assert Constitutional Provincial Rights, Responsibilities and the need to provide a direct, Participatory Democracy option to BC Constituents and Voters will ensure the viability and successful creation of the New BC Party.
We welcome your thoughts, criticisms and suggestions by return email.
A related proposed Constitution is being drafted that incorporates the normal ‘keep well’ clauses as well as specific clauses required to facilitate the proposed founding principles.
The next portion of this White Paper will explore the dynamics and requirements necessary to move past a theoretical discussion into a viable, electable Provincial Party registered in the Province of BC.