Talk:Reform Act (Canada)

Was 2022-02-03 the first?

Wasn't there another vote riht after the 2021 election, where the caucus confirmed O'Toole as leader? Wasn't that under this act too?24.114.84.53 (talk) 01:57, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Confusion about Parliament of Canada Acts

Issue has come up whether the Reform Act amended the Constitution of Canada, by amending the Parliament of Canada Act. The confusion is because there are two statutes named "Parliament of Canada Act".

• The first statute, enacted in 1875 by the British Parliament, is the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875. That statute amended the Constitution Act, 1867 by enacting the current version of s. 18 of the CA 1867. It is part of the Constitution of Canada, as Item 7 of the Schedule to the Constitution Act, 1982. Since it amended the CA 1867, it can only be amended through the constitutional amendment process set out in Part V of the Constitution Act, 1982. It was not amended by the Reform Act.
• The second Parliament of Canada Act is an ordinary statute passed by the Parliament of Canada. It is in the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, c. P-1. It was amended by the Reform Act, s. 4. If you click on the link in s. 4, it takes you to the Parliament of Canada Act, c. P-1, not the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875.

Unless someone can provide a cite showing that the Parliament of Canada Act, c. P-1 is part of the Constitution, I think the references to the Reform Act amending the Constitution neecd to be deleted. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

They are the same legislation, just patriated. See List of Canadian constitutional documents. Most of the constitutional legislation were Acts of the Westminster Parliament (ie UK Parliament). When they became domestic Canadian law (as was the point of the 1982 constitution) these pieces of legislation were converted to domestic Canadian Legislation (not UK legislation anymore), that is why the citations changed. They are still constitutional documents. That is why the articles says "reprinted in...". You can also see the CanLII version of the constitution and schedule, which links to the modern Parliament of Canada Act.[1] Hope that helps explain the complex process that was patriation.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Comparison of the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875 and the Parliament of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c. P-1

There are several problems with your analysis.

First, there are the names of the two Acts. The Act with constitutional status is the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875. The Act which was amended by the Reform Act is the Parliament of Canada Act. The year in the title of a Canadian statute is an important qualifier, used to distinguish different Acts with similar names. The lack of a year in the short title of the Parliament of Canada Act,, RSC 1985, c. P-1 indicates that it is a different Act than the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875.

Second, there is the location and citation for the two Acts. The Parliament of Canada Act is found in the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, c. P-1. The Parliament of Canada Act, 1875, originally (UK), 38-39 Vict, c 38, is reprinted in the Revised Statutes of Canada 1985, App II, No. 13. Two different Acts, two different locations in the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985.

Third, there is the legislative history of the two Acts. The Parliament of Canada Act, 1875 was enacted by the British Parliament in 1875. The Parliament of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c. P-1, was originally enacted by the Parliament of Canada in 1868, as An Act to define the privileges, immunities and powers of the Senate and House of Commons, and to give summary protection to persons employed in the publication of Parliamentary Papers, SC 1868 (Vict. 31), c. 23. It was continued as the Senate and House of Commons Act, Revised Statutes of Canada, 1886, c. 11. It was then continued in each edition of the Revised Statutes of Canada: Senate and House of Commons Act, RSC 1906, c. 10; Senate and House of Commons Act, RSC 1927, c. 147; Senate and House of Commons Act, RSC 1952, c. 249; and Senate and House of Commons Act, RSC 1970, c. S-8. It was continued in the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, under a new name, the Parliament of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c. P-1, but the same content. The transition to the new name and chapter number was shown in the Concordance to the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, at p. 226–227, showing that RSC 1970, S-8 had been continued as RSC 1985, c. P-1.

Fourth, there is the content of the two Acts, which are completely different. The Parliament of Canada Act, 1875, consists of only three sections. Section 1 amends the Constitution Act, 1867 (originally the British North America Act, 1867) by adding a new s. 18, which gives the Parliament of Canada the power to define the parliamentary privilege of the House of Commons and the Senate. Section 2 of the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875 retroactively validates actions taken by the Parliament of Canada under the original version of s. 18. Section 3 provides that the Act can be cited as the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875.

None of that is found in the Parliament of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c. P-1. Section 4 of the Parliament of Canada Act defines the scope of parliamentary privilege for the Senate and House of Commons. In that section, Parliament is using the power which the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875 gave to it by enacting the current version of s. 18 of the Constitution Act, 1867. The 1875 Act gave Parliament legislative power in the Constitution; the RSC Parliament of Canada Act exercises that legislative power. There is nothing in the Parliament of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c. P-1 which purports to amend the Constitution Act, 1867, nor to retroactively validate past actions of the federal Parliament. The rest of the Parliament of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c. P-1 contains material about the organization and operation of the Commons and Senate. None of that material is found in the short three sections of the Parliament of Canada Act, 1875.

In short, the two Acts are completely different. The Parliament of Canada Act, 1875 is part of the Constitution of Canada, and gave Parliament certain legislative powers with respect to parliamentary privilege. The Parliament of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c. P-1, is an exercise of that legislative power by the Parliament. It is an ordinary federal statute, dating back to 1868 and carried forward ever since. It is not part of the Constitution of Canada.

Finally, I would suggest you not be so patronising when you purport to "teach" other Wikipedia editors. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for this, I think you are largely right. I wasn't trying to be patronizing, but also didn't research or consider your past contributions and expertise in this area. I may also have been busy with other matters last week, and not given your original comment the consideration I should have.

I don't follow your logic on the legislative history, mainly because I am not sure where you have pulled this from. That said, I think you are correct that the 1875 Act and 1985 Act are different pieces of legislation. I wasn't the editor who initially added the reference to this being an amendment to the "Constitution of Canada", so I am not completely sure of their reasoning. Your analysis seems to make clear that the two acts are different pieces of legislation. That seems to resolve the issue about whether the 1985 Act is mentioned in the Constitution Act 1982's schedule, as part of the "Constitution of Canada", or whether it is an amendment of such a piece of legislation per section 52(2)(c) of the Constitution Act 1982 (which would also make it part of the "Constitution of Canada"). It seem based on your analysis, that neither of those would apply.

So it would then seem that the only other way the 1985 Act could be part of the Constitution of Canada, is if it were an "unnamed part" relying on the use of "includes" in section 52(2), as the definition is not exclusive (ie it can include other things besides the Constitutions 1867, 1982, and legislation in the schedule). If that is the case, the 1985 Act case could have a character like the Supreme Court Act, which sometimes is called an "ordinary federal statute" despite having a constitutional character, due to its mention in the amending formula (and arguably also because of written and unwritten principles of federalism, the rule of law, separation of powers, federalism etc). I have no idea whether the reference to the constitution was made originally due to the confusion over the two acts (I was clearly confused about it), or for some other more expansive reasoning like this. Admittedly, the "unnamed part" of the constitution theory would likely not support the black and white statement that it *is* part of the Constitution of Canada (principles of responsible government etc. aside).

Anyway, I will add the "citation needed" tags back in. Might be better to simply remove the reference to the Constitution of Canada from the lede and procedures section. If there are sources that make an argument that the Parliament of Canada Act (1985) have some constitutional character for similar reasons to that of the Supreme Court Act, that can be added later, with appropriate context. A correction may also be needed at CanLII, as their printing of the 1982 Constitution schedule links to the Parliament of Canada Act, 1985, but that isn't our responsibility is it?--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 00:12, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure You were right earlier on, The Parliament of Canada Act and The Parliament of Canada Act, 1867 by all accounts seem to be the same legislation, and there doesn't appear to be any evidence to the contrary. As you pointed out before, clicking on the 'Parliament of Canada Act, 1875' item in Canlii (under the schedule of the 1982 Constitution act) redirects to the Parliament of Canada Act proper. What I think happened is that Parliament frequently re-enacts and re-organizes legislation under the same title. And it appears to have done this a lot in 1985, since a lot of legislation, for example the Criminal Code and the Supreme Court Act, appears to be enacted in 1985 when you look at it laws-lois.justice.gc.ca, despite being obviously much older than that. CASalt (talk) 03:31, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

I've added Canlii as a reference CASalt (talk) 03:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

As a final note, I would like to point to WP:NOR. When a reputable source like CanLii considers the Acts the same, it's not open to Wikipedians to challenge that assertion through their own interpretation of the law or it's history, absent a reliable independent source confirming their theory. So even assuming CanLii is wrong here and we have a wikipedian who has just discovered some arcane legal/procedural knowledge. It would be wrong for us to let that influence this article unless a reliable source confirms it. CASalt (talk) 03:56, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Parliament of Canada Act, RSC 1985, c. P-1, Not Part of the Constitution

Looks as though this fight has gone back and forth, I've removed it, again. The two acts, the parliament of canada act, 1875, and the current parliament of Canada Act. Are not the same act, full stop. The Parliament of Canada Act wasin't even *called* that until the 1980s, before that it was the "Senate and House of Commons Act". It looks at though Canlii no longer links as well.

Also, Further to a comment made in the last discussion

"What I think happened is that Parliament frequently re-enacts and re-organizes legislation under the same title. And it appears to have done this a lot in 1985, since a lot of legislation, for example the Criminal Code and the Supreme Court Act, appears to be enacted in 1985 when you look at it laws-lois.justice.gc.ca, despite being obviously much older than that."

That's because the most recent statutory revision was in in 1985, [2] Why their reporter is "R.S.C." (Revised Statutes of Canada), and Not "S.C." (Statutes of Canada). WanukeX (talk) 15:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)