This is the truth about the notwithstanding clause in the Charter, aka s33...

You are being told a lot of lies about the notwithstanding clause, this is the truth.

You might be hearing a lot about the notwithstanding clause these days and wondering what is going on. The fact is, the Carney government is trying to change the constitution via a Supreme Court case on Bill 21 - a heinous bill in my opinion - but not an excuse to scrap or weaken the notwithstanding clause.

We’ve been here before with this debate before and I’m still of the same position, leave the clause alone.

It was in 2018 that Ontario Premier Doug Ford was looking to use the notwithstanding clause to shrink the size of Toronto city council. He should never have had to do this, but a lower court ruled that Ford’s actions were unconstitutional.

Which is really weird because the constitution is clear, municipalities are creations of the province. A provincial government can merge municipal governments, they can even abolish them if they wish.

Eventually, a higher court overturned the very politically driven decision against Ford, but for a time, he seemed to need the notwithstanding clause, otherwise known as section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

I’ll never understand why some claim the notwithstanding clause is against the Charter when it is part of the Charter.

Anyway, back then I was hosting a radio show on 580 CFRA in Ottawa and reached out to Norman Spector. If you don’t know the man he was a career bureaucrat who was plucked from the civil service to serve as a top advisor to B.C. Premier Bill Bennett and later as Chief of Staff to Prime Minister Brian Mulroney.

Spector was also given appointments by Liberal PMs including Jean Chretien, so don’t label him politically.

Anyway, he was there for the talks about the Charter, the constitution and the notwithstanding clause and has better insight than many of the media commentators. I was messaging back and forth with Norm about the current controversy over the Carney government trying to neuter the notwithstanding clause, more on that in coming days, but there was no need to redo this interview, it still stands.