-Primary & subordinate legislation
-Delegation to cabinets, reg. Agencies, municipalities
-Delegation to another sovereign legislative body:  interdelegation
-Avoid overbroad delegation

-Manitoba initiative and referendum Act, 1916
-Alberta initiative and referendum act, 1913 (tested in 1916)
-Senate reference:  1979

-Depression:  all gov’ts wanted old-age pensions
-Rowell-Sirois Report:  interedelegate (1939)
-Nova Scotia first prov to pass necessary interdelegation legislation.  Referred to SCC.

Nova Scotia Interdelegation Case (1951)

-7 judges wrote separate opinions.  Decisions of Rinfret and Taschereau presented
-Rinfret:  right not to be subjected to laws unless passed by appropriate legislature (specificity rule)
-Lord Atkin in Labour Conventions:  “shop of state…watertight compartments.”
-Taschereau:  if interdelegation possible, everything might get interdelegated.

PEI Potato Marketing Bd v Willis (1952)

-Fed Ag Products Marketing Act (1949)
-Feds could delegate power to reg interprov marketing to a prov bd
-OC in 1950 delegated interprov power to reg PEI pot’s to PEI PMB
-PEI ref’d Q of validity to PEI Sup Ct in banco.  Conclusion:  ultra vires, following NS InterDel.
-In SCC:  NS InterDel disginguished. 9 js, 6 dec’s.
-Rinfret:  Act clearly in fed juris (T&C: int, Ag)
-NS Case just applies to del to legislatures.
-Feds can choose own board or agency (precedents)
-Praises fed-prov cooperation
-PEI Potato Marketing Bd cont’d
-Rand:  would be valid if Feds created a separate interprov marketing bd, and appointed same people to it as on PEI Bd.
-“Twin phantoms of ths nature must, for practical purposes, give way to realistic necessities.”

-Last JCPC decision:  Winner (1954) declared that only feds can license vehicles for interprovincial purposes.  Feds delegated interprov transport regs to prov. transport boards.
-Couglin (1968):  Fed transport del upheld.
-No need for const amen’t re interdelegation

Treaty-Making Cases

-Treaty-signing power, and treaty-implementation power, are two different powers.  The feds had them both until 1926, under S. 132 of the BNA Act.  In 1926, -Canada became equal to Great Britain in handling foreign affairs (Balfour Declaration, later confirmed by Statute of Westminster, 1931), and so S. 132 became obsolete.

-Aeronautics Case (1932) Canada was implementing a British Empire Treaty, but federal gov't has the power to implement a treaty on aeronautics under several heads of S. 91, such as defence, post office.

-Radio Case (1932) Section 132 is now obsolete.  Therefore, the treaty-making and treaty-implementation powers are new, and fall under POGG.

Labour Conventions Case (1937)
-Lord Atkin - wrote decision
-Distinguished Aeronautics and Radio cases.  He said that the Radio case decided that power to regulate radio transmissions is new, and therefore falls under POGG.  (Is that what you think was decided?)  The treaty-signing power falls to the feds under POGG, but the treaty-implementation power depends on the subject-matter of the treaty.  Matters that fall under S. 92 can only be implemented by the provinces.


Types of treaties:
-Head of states
-Exchange of notes

Thursday:  Stevenson article, “Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations"