Page 4, The Heraid, Thursday, February 19, 1981 te ‘a f- PERIOACE- RUDDY General Office - 635-6357 Published by Circulation - 635-635) Sterling Publishers ‘qe Publisher — Garry Husak qui Editor — Pete Nadeau {. CLASS. ADS... TERRACE - 635-4000 ™ CIRCULATION . TERRACE - 635.6357 Published every weekday‘at 3010 Kalum Sireet. b+ Terrace, B.C. Authorized as second class mail. 7 Registration number 1201. Pastage paid in cash, relurn |. posiage guaranteed. ; - NOTICE OF COPYRIGHT |? The Herald retains full, camplele and sole copyright in “tany advertisement produced and-or any editorial or photographic content published in the Herald. Reproduction is nat permitted without the written daily herald \_ Permission of the Publisher. ff f Asmall coup WASHINGTON (CP) — Ronald Reagan’s choice of Canada for his first foreign visit since becoming U.S. president represents an immediate small coup for Canadian diplomats who lobbied for the honor. But friendly as Reagan Is to his country’s energy- rich northern neighbor, Canadian government officials will face a tough bargainer if many sub- stantial issues on a potentially long agenda are raised during his two-day visit March 10-11. Canada is out of favor in some U.S. legislative _ cireles, mainly because of some aggressive Canadian corporate wheeling and dealing to take over U.S, firms, Reagan may carry a message to _; Ottawa that foreign investment opportunities =) should be made more liberal on bath sides of the border. While Mark MacGuigan, the Canadian external ' affairs minister, says the visit will be primarily “a __. pel-acquainted meeting,” Canadian officials here ° moved quickly after the U.S. presidential election : Nov. 4tourge a working presidential trip ta Ottawa. Es: They wanted a substantive two-day session, 22 rather than a quick tour lke the two-hour swing into Ps Mexico that Reagan made in early January, prior to =: Minister Trudeau was on a world tour at the time. Canadian officials are mildly miffed that no U.S. president has visited since 1972, when former president Richard Nixon went to Ottawa, A planned trip by former president Jimmy Carter was dropped abruptly in the fall of 1979 because of the hostage crisis in ran. With Reagan, there is an extra dash of glamor because of his lingering Hollywood actor's panache, as well as Nancy Reagan's touch of high style. The president will address a joint session of the House of Commons and Senate. But it’s also a chance to bring some long-standing contentious issues directly to the U.S, leader's at- tention and in Ottawa for once rather than Washing- ton. For while it is nine years since the last . presidential trip to Ottawa, Canadian officials =. regularly come to the U.S, capital -—- even to hear :. US. complaints over strictly Canadian issues such ‘as the national energy program with its Ca- >: nadianization proposals that was unveiled by Ot- 7: fawa last fall. MacGuigan, who recently visited Washington to meet U.S, State Secretary Alexander Haig, wants to lalk with Reagan about the unresolved East Coast fishing treaty that the U.S. Senate refuses to ratify. A special negotiator is working on reluctant U.S. senators, but state department officials caution that despite wishes to resolve the impasse, success ign’t assured before the Ottawa meeting.. The Canadian foreign minister ealls the fishing dispute Canada’s most serious bilateral issue with any country. While In Washington, MacGuigan established himself as a firm ally for the U.S. president's anti. Soviet stance by saying he too believes the Soviet Union has been “behaving shamelessly.” Reagan says the Soviets lieand cheat and Western countries must stand together against the Soviet Union. LETTERS WELCOME The Herald welcomes its readers comments. All letters to the editor of general public interest will be printed, We do, however, retain the right 1o refuse to print letters on grounds of possible libel or bad taste, We may also edit letters for slyle and fength. All letters to be considered for publication must be signed. . ACTUALLY THESE DAYS, FORA FREE LUNCH, .. 3 you COULD PROBABLY HIRE THE BRIT'OF YOUR CHOICE TO ._: SAY PRETTY MUCH” WHATEVER YOU WANTED To. Still-secret paper raps Britishstand OTTAWA (CP) The federal government contends in an internal draft dossier that there are serious omissions and errors that undermine a British parliamentary report opposing a Canadian con- stitytional reform package. Span kU 1s » Te sllcecret-domtey is BalSg palit ‘Ws the first detailed rebuttal of ‘the report released three weeks ago by the British Commons committee on foreign affairs headed by Sir Anthony Kershaw. In preliminary form, federal officials say, the draft challenges everything from the Kershaw report's definition of the Canadian federation to the British scholars who advised the committee. By implication, it also contests legal arguments by the provincial governments who oppose Prime Minister Trudeau's reform proposals. A senior federal official, who asked not to be quoted by name, sald it has not been decided what use will be made of the dossier when revision is complete. But it would be ammunition if Ottawa finds it necessary to challenge opponents of the reform procedure in the British government and Parliament, as well as on the home front. External Affairs Minister Mark MacGuigan, who plans a visit to Londen next month but who says it has not been decided whether to compete with the provinces in lobbying British MPs, outlined some federal objections to the Kershaw report last week in Edmonton. The Kershaw committee concluded, in a lengthy study that fuelled controversy in Canada and Britain, that the British Parliament is not obliged to act on the reform package in the face of provincial opposition in Canada, despite the Trudeau govern- ment's insistence that legal tradition requires it. The Canadian Parliament is currently debating the Trudeau government's resolution to patriate the founding British North America Act along with a new charter to safeguard basic human rights, Ineasures to expand some provincial powers over natural resources and a system for deciding future amendments. After passage in Canada, subsequent British legislative action would be required because the BNA Act and the power to make major amend- ments — including patriation — have remained in Britain at Canada's request since 1931. ‘ Britain has never declined to act on previous Canadian requests for amendment and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says her Parliament should act “as expeditiously as possible” after a formal Canadian request is received, ag But the Kershaw, committee and some other _ British MPs have voiced epposition to acting on anything more than patriation and’ a future ” amending fermula in the absence of substantial provincial assent. + Seven of the 10 provinces and the Progressive Conservative opposition in the Canadian Par- liament oppose the Trudeau proposal to proceed after more than 50 years of federal-provincial disagreements on patriation and an amending formula. While the Kershaw recommendations are not binding, they have reinforced opposition to the Trudeau planin Britain and Canada, notably in con- cluding that Britain would be justified in rejecting reform affecting “the federal structure ‘of Canada” in the absence of substantial provincial assent. Federal authorities, while declining to release the draft rebuttal, contend the Kershaw report makes a basic mistake.in defining the federal character of Canada ina way that tends to make the federal and provincial governments equals. This ignores the constitutional reality, the federal argument goes, that some elements of the provincial governments — notably the lieutenant- governors — are creatures of the federal govern- ment and that Ottawa historically is paramount in its capacity to reserve or disallow provincial law. Further, the federal document says, Kershaw. tends to skip over significant precedents for British compliance with unilateral federal government re- quests amending matters that significantly affected federalprovincial relationships. Among several cited are amendments that changed the composition of the Senate, which was established to represent regional and provincial in- terests, and two unilateral 149 amendments. One abolished provinelal legal appeals to Britain and confined them fo the Supreme Court of Canada, a federal creation. The other, admitting Newfoun- dland to Confederation, affected Quebec's territorial boundary and altered the Senate. nil omer COMER, WHEN T GRE) UP We HAD NO SEX EDUCATION IN AY FATHER GAVE Me MY SEX EDUCATION INSTRUCTIONS. STREETS LIKE HE Di He ToLD METS LEARN ABOUT IT, IN THE pf resource ownership or whatever, In @x::, change for allowing Trudeau to have his'Bilt of Rights. . _ The only drawback to Trudeau's barb that It’s hooked him as well. Since the In- troduced his constitutional package last fall, -:. he’s done nothing but wheel and deal, = To appease the Conservatives, Trudeau. added a. property rights clause fo his. Charter, and then removed ltr to mollify the New Democrats. To try to get Saskatchewan. Premier Allan Blakeny on his side, Trudeau offered him a share In International resource: . Jurisdiction. Out of fear that even Liberal Senators might arise from their armchairs in trembling wrath, Trudeau re-inserted Into his package a Senatorial right of veto over future constitutional changes. Just about any well-organized Interest group — women, Indians, civil tIbertartans, the handicapped — has been able to get the wording it wanted In the revised Charter. Whether their clalms are [justified or not is beside the point. Instead, the polnt Is that Trudeau Is buying thelr support as a coun- terwelght to the opposition of the provincial premiers. None .of this ought to shock anyone. Constitutions don't come carved in stone by sage statesmen all looking Ilke elther Thomas Jefferson or Moses. Everywhere, documents get haggled out by politicians trading off thelr competing self-interests, but who, just occasionally, are Insplred to _ alm higher by an idealistic itch, or by a sense of how: history may look ‘back'at theft. wondye Huub aga ffs fGRENIIGI Tren ‘The puzzle about Trudeau‘s wheellng-and:5 dealing, therefore, isn‘t that he's doing It, but that he's dolng It anly with certaln groups.’ Blakeney excepted, Trudeau has treated the premiers, and in particular the Gang of Six who areopposing him In the courts and In London, as If they lacked the political legitimacy of women, Indians, and even, for God's sake, Senators. The six Indeed aren’t an especially Im- posing lot, They can't even agree among themselves about anything except to disagreee with everything Trudau is trying to do. Three of them — Quebec's Rene Levesque; 8.C.'s Bill Bennett and Manitoba’s Sterling Lyon are probably not long for this pollticaf world. But Alberta’s Peter Lougheed and Newfoundland’s Brian Peckford certainly do represent the will of their peoples. And all of the six head governments that have been elected to carry out particular respon- sibilities as defined by the constitution. As one way to appease the provinces, much as other interest groups have been appeased. former Privy Council Clerk Gordon Robertson has suggested that the Charter not be enacted until after a four-year “cooling off period during which federal. provincial negotiations would resume. A better Idea perhaps has been proposed by Carleton University professor G. P. Browne. He suggests that rather thar. “enshrining” the Charter-of Rights in the © constitution, as Trudeau proposed to do in” order to put It out of the reach of politicians both federal and provincial, that the Charter be enacted as a statute with “priority status” over all other legislation. A priority status” Charter would provide full protections.to minority groups. But it could be amended by provincial legisiatures; even though in fact provincial govern- ments would be extremely reluctant to take away rights from groups. Try to imagine a later Quebec government removing from English-speaking migrants to the province the right to educate thelr children In English such as Trudeau’s Charter provides for. Symbollsm rather than the substance would have been changed. The provinces no longer could compaiin -that Trudeau was ramming his Charter of Rights down thelr throats. (Correction: The Premiers still would complain, but thelr publics’ wouldn't belleve them.) . ., lf he goes on the way he now fs golng, Trudeau will win In the end. He’s holding the | high trump cards -- legal and Political, .in' the event of a natlonal referendum. But he'tl leave to his successor a legacy of provincial bitterness and mistrust and sheer bloody- minded recaiclirance for which all of us will pay @ high price. .