C.
D.
Howe Institute
Institut C.
D.
Howe Communiqué
Embargo: For release Tuesday, February 8, 2000, at 10:00 a.
m.
Federal Clarity Act reasonable and
necessary but needs amending,
says C.
D.
Howe Institute study
The federal Clarity Act,...
More
C.
D.
Howe Institute
Institut C.
D.
Howe Communiqué
Embargo: For release Tuesday, February 8, 2000, at 10:00 a.
m.
Federal Clarity Act reasonable and
necessary but needs amending,
says C.
D.
Howe Institute study
The federal Clarity Act, introduced in the House of Commons last December, is a necessary and
logical follow-on from the Supreme Court of Canada’s advisory opinion on the possibility of
unilateral secession by Quebec, says a C.
D.
Howe Institute Commentary released today.
But the
legislation needs amending, the study says, since it would regardas“unclear”anyfuture referendum question that referred to post-secession economic or political arrangements with Canada and since it fails to specify what “yes” result would constitute a “clear” majority in favor of
secession.
The study, “Doing the Rules: An Assessment of the Federal Clarity Act in Light of the Quebec Secession Reference,” was written by Patrick J.
Monahan, Professor of Law at Osgoode
Hall
Less
