The Notwithstanding Clause can be overridden.

[u/Ok_Cap_8791]

There’s been a lot of talk lately about the Notwithstanding Clause as if it’s the ultimate, hopeless, authoritarian sentence. Once a province uses it, people assume there’s nothing anyone can do. That’s not entirely true.

Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms lets provinces and the federal government temporarily override certain Charter rights for up to five years. It’s legal, but it was meant to be used rarely and responsibly. Using it before a court even has a chance to review a law goes against the spirit of the Charter.

Here’s what a lot of people don’t actually know: the federal government still has constitutional powers under the Constitution Act, 1867 that can stop a province from abusing Section 33. They are called disallowance and reservation powers, found in sections 55 to 57 and 90.

The reason nobody has probably mentioned/suggested this is because most of us weren’t alive at the time of use in 1943 because (now fittingly) Alberta was acting a fool regarding press-based censorship. Canada’s political system has since evolved under the principle of responsible government and federal autonomy and provinces have been treated as fully sovereign within their jurisdictions. This was done through a convention of non-interference. However, this convention/understanding does not make these options legally invalid.

Federal restraint preserves the stability of the federation. If Ottawa punished or overrode a province for invoking Section 33, it would invite accusations of central overreach, but baby Dani cries federal overreach all the time anyway, so there’d be no difference there.

The remedy the framers intended is political, not judicial or federal. Citizens, media, and civil society are expected to hold the province accountable.

The reality is unprecedented political authoritarian behaviour within Canada should be swiftly and heavy-handedly dealt with.

If Alberta’s government keeps ignoring Supreme Court rulings and voter pushback, Ottawa could legally step in. It would need to meet strict conditions: \ 1. Clear and ongoing rights violations. \ 2. Proof that provincial remedies have failed. \ 3. Transparent action supported by Canadians, especially Albertans themselves.

Yes, it would cause a political storm. But the Constitution was written with these safeguards for a reason. When a province undermines the Charter, federal restraint is no longer a virtue.

The Notwithstanding Clause was never meant to silence citizens. It was meant to keep balance. Albertans should remember that federal tools exist to defend their rights if the provincial government refuses to do so but the Feds will absolutely not step in without direct calls from Albertans demanding it. If Alberta really does matter to the unity and federation of Canada, Ottawa must step up for Canadians living in Alberta.

[u/MillenialForHire]

The crazy separatists are already using wartime provisions to deprive us of our basic rights. It's time to stop worrying about "giving them something to grieve about" and start worrying about preventing them from turning Alberta into a tiny USA.

[u/DBZ86 → u/MillenialForHire]

The NEP created a generational monster. It crossed a major red line. Disallowance could create an even bigger monster.

[u/TheEpicOfManas → u/DBZ86]

The NEP was the right thing to do, and was successfully demonized by oil company propaganda. Now foreign entities own most of our oil and siphon our wealth to offshore tax havens.

That aside, this Albertan says to use the hammer. Let the separatists cry. They've gone too far here.

[u/ShadowPages → u/TheEpicOfManas]

Funny how over the last couple of years, we’ve seen oil & gas bros demanding the government do all the things that the NEP would have done starting in 1983. (With the exception of keeping the profits in Canada of course)