Broader powers
Premier says proposed legislation necessary for states of public health emergency
Proposed legislation, posted online Thursday, would give government broad powers to change existing legislation during a state of emergency and would allow a government to continue to do so for up to 90 days after the state of emergency is rescinded.
Similar legislation is proposed for states of public health emergency.
Both are amendments to existing legislation – the Emergency Measures Act and the Public Health Act.
In an interview on Friday, Premier Dennis King said there have been only three past states of emergency in P.E.I.’s history. The current COVID19 state of emergency is unlike all others.
“They average about twoand-a-half days,” King said.
“We’ve been in one for extended periods for weeks now. Our current legislation was never designed to be enacted for that long.”
King said some needed measures taken during COVID-19 have been difficult due to legislative requirements.
He raised the examples of legal orders ceasing evictions, which required a decision by the P.E.I. Supreme Court, as well as having property documents witnessed remotely with an e-signature.
“We’ve literally found hundreds of these things that we need to be able to address.”
The measures will need to be passed by the legislature. As King’s government is a minority, this would require some support from either Liberal or Green MLAs.
King’s government declared a state of public health emergency on March 16 and declared a state of emergency a month later.
Green Opposition leader Peter Bevan-Baker said the legislation was concerning, calling it an “unnecessary power grab”.
“The current iteration of our Emergency Measures Act, the Public Health Act, has not prevented government from doing anything it needed to do to prevent the crisis.”
“I’m at a loss to understand why changes are needed in the first place,” Bevan-Baker said of the existing legislation.
The amendment would allow executive council to change or suspend an enactment if it was viewed to be in the public interest.
“The way that these amendments are drafted, there’s really, quite literally no limit other than the government deciding that it’s in the public interest,” BevanBaker said.
“That’s such a vague and ambiguous term. It really places no limit on government as to what they can do.”
Bevan-Baker added he did not believe that the King government was putting forward these amendments out of malicious intent. But he said that, if enacted, they could be mis-used by a future government.
A media statement from the Opposition suggested the legislation could be used to weaken environmental protections or legislation containing protections for workers.
Liberal interim leader Sonny Gallant also said he has concerns about the legislation. However, an emailed statement from Gallant was critical of the response from the Opposition Greens to the amendments.
“We believe they deserve their day in court and we believe Islanders deserve to hear what the legislation is about,” Gallant said.
“It is kind of a shame that the Greens are making their decision before they have debate. Debate helps to inform Islanders, which is what this is all about. No one is bigger than the legislative assembly, which is the people’s house.”
Gallant added that members of his caucus had been briefed on the legislation but said that this “didn’t provide comfort around the proposed changes to the Emergency Measures legislation”.
The amendments are due to be tabled in next week’s sitting of the P.E.I. legislature, which begins May 26.