Article content

The broad, sweeping and potentially abusive powers under the federal government’s Greenhouse Gas Pollution Act was one major reason for a dissenting opinion from two Saskatchewan Court of Appeal judges.

Judges Ralph Ottenbreit and Neal Caldwell said the act was unconstitutional because it would allow the federal government the power to change the act any way it wanted.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or Federal carbon tax legislation too broad, two judges argue in dissenting opinion Back to video

The judges noted that the act contained 430 references to the word “prescribed” — the definition of which was so broad and open-ended that it allowed the federal government enormous scope.

“The profuse use of the word prescribed in the Act is reminiscent of the statement of that egg-shaped philosopher in Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking Glass (1872) who said, in a rather scornful tone, ‘When I use a word … it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less’,” said the judges.

They said, “Part 1 grants sweeping legislative law-making power to the executive branch of the federal government to adapt or modify the statute itself, including the power to adapt and modify any provision of Part 1 and to redefine words and expressions already defined in the statute.”