[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Barrister]

I know Ford's argument is that it'll save money - I think I heard $25 mil which is overall tiny, but not zero.  And I know Ford had a very tumultuous history when he was on city council.

But does he really think that reducing the size of council is going to mean that Toronto City COuncil is suddenly going to get along with his government?  What's the end goal here?

[Oexmelin]

If I had to venture a guess:

Showing who's boss. Pleasing his suburban base, and their own fraught relationship with Toronto - an equivalent proxies to "liberals" in the US.

[Josephus]

We have another Trump here, is all.

[Camerus]

Sadly, it seems Canada isn't immune to the erosion of democratic norms among our ruling class. Ford is threatening use of the notwithstanding clause over a personal vendetta, a hobby horse, and one which is a non-issue for most people.

Together with that we had earlier this year the Trudeau government's invasion of conscience as a prerequisite for receiving public funding.

Not the direction I'd like Canada headed in, personally.

[viper37]

I know Ford's argument is that it'll save money - I think I heard $25 mil which is overall tiny, but not zero.  And I know Ford had a very tumultuous history when he was on city council.

But does he really think that reducing the size of council is going to mean that Toronto City COuncil is suddenly going to get along with his government?  What's the end goal here?

I'd be sympathetic to Ford if this had been a campaign promise.  If he had come and said "look, I've talked of it before, when I was in the city council, nobody wanted to listen to it then, now it's time to act".

Right now, I have to, unfortunately, side with the Canadian left wing.  As displeased as I am. 

[viper37]

Anyway, back on the trade war topic.

Canada insists on cultural protection for NAFTA

"We've made it very clear that defending that cultural exemption is something fundamental to Canadians," Trudeau said last week. "It is inconceivable to Canadians that an American network might buy Canadian media affiliates, whether it's newspapers or TV stations or TV networks. It would be a giving up of our sovereignty and our identity and that is something that we will simply not accept."

woah.  And he I thought, this kind of thing, it was a sure sign of intolerance, tribalism, something the our dear Prime Minister would always take a stand against and fight for more openness, not close-minded actions to protect something he doesn't believe in (remember, there is no Canadian culture, Canada is the first postnational country in the world

I'd hate to be the first to say it, but it truly reeks of nazism... like all those times Quebec had insisted on something similar to defend French language.

I'll expect a good smacking from the G&M, National Post, Toronto Star and CBC tomorrow morning

here's a start...

I wish Canada was more like Quebec, with its own intense TV and print culture. Quebec would peel our hide if we tried to sell it off to the Americans. I'd like Ottawa to be this implacable and find a way to sustain culture with more than mere cultural protection. We need more rules to keep us from being sucked into the American morass.
damn.  Never thought I'd read something like this written from Toronto.

[HVC]

There's nothing wrong with protecting ones culture. It's when one attacks another under the guise of protection that it become onerous. Like if Canada made a law that all American media had to be half the type size of Canadian media

[viper37]

There's nothing wrong with protecting ones culture. It's when one attacks another under the guise of protection that it become onerous. Like if Canada made a law that all American media had to be half the type size of Canadian media

I guess Quebec could force all media to be owned by Quebecers and that would be fine too and any media broadcasting here to generate Quebec made content.  That would certainly go well with English Canada

[Josephus]

Right now, I have to, unfortunately, side with the Canadian left wing.  As displeased as I am. 

We're not all bad. Some of us even were deodorant.

[viper37]

Right now, I have to, unfortunately, side with the Canadian left wing.  As displeased as I am. 

We're not all bad. Some of us even were deodorant.

And I thought you guys were against everything chemical (except drugs) ?

[viper37]

So, Maxime Bernier has officially launched his new party.

Parti Populaire du Canada.
Popular Party of Canada.

Or something like that.

No web site or party platform, yet.  I think it will lean toward the libertarian spectrum of politics.  Might be good, might force other party to rethink a few of their campaign lines and policies once in power.

I welcome any democratic attempt at exposing one's views.  Am I worried it will divide the rigth and put the Liberal Party in power for 2 decades?  A little.

Imho, this party will have regional appeal in some places.  Max's riding, I'm pretty sure.  Maybe 1 other in Alberta, don't know enough about local politics there to really judge.  Aside that, I can't see it making a dent in the Conservative's votes for the next election.

Building a party for the grounds up in Canada is a tremendous task.  Appealling to all Canadians from coast to coast is the real challenge.  The NDP only managed to elect MPs in Quebec as of a few years ago, despite its foundation in the middle of the last century.

I wish him good luck and I eagerly await his official party platform.

[crazy canuck]

Ford's use of the NTW clause -  If one ignores the context in which he has used it, this is precisely the situation in which it was intended to be used.  The Court struck down legislation using a rather novel and perhaps over reaching interpretation of expression rights.  The NTW was designed to give politicians the last word in such circumstances.

But where Ford went wrong imo is he emphasized that the reason he was using the NTW was because he was elected and the judge was not.  That cannot be the only justification. If it is then on what reasoned basis should any Charter ruling stand?

edit:  Breaking news about a Liberal MP in Ontario crossing the floor to join the Conservative caucus.  Apparently she narrowly won the seat in the last election.  Perhaps she sees the writing on the wall with a shift to the right in Ontario?

[crazy canuck]

Ontario Court of Appeal was very critical of the Chamber's Judges decision to strike down the legislation which reconfigured the Toronto Wards.

It is rare for the Court to deal substantively with the merits of a case on a stay application.  Normally the bar is low and the applying party need only convince the Court that there is an arguable case on appeal.  Stay applications normally turn on equitable factors.

But here the Court made clear it was carefully considering the merits of the lower Court decision.

...our decision will determine whether the election proceeds on the basis of 25 or 47 wards. In these circumstances, greater attention must be paid to the merits of the constitutional claim and, as contemplated by RJR-MacDonald, we must ask whether there is a strong likelihood that the appeal will succeed.

And they found it to be flawed.

The question for the courts is not whether Bill 5 is unfair but whether it is unconstitutional. On that crucial question, we have concluded that there is a strong likelihood that application judge erred in law and that the Attorney General's appeal to this court will succeed.

Without getting into all the legalese - here is the essence of it

The application judge's interpretation appears to stretch both the wording and the purpose of s. 2(b) [expression rights] beyond the limits of that provision.

As I said in my post above, this is exactly the sort of case the Not Withstanding Clause was designed for.  Ford could have better communicated the reasons for his use of the clause, but perhaps politically that was not his aim.  It is possible that he simply wanted to fire up his supporters by pitting himself against the Courts.

The end result is that the Stay has been granted and so the Clause does not need to be invoked and the original legislation stands for this election cycle.

Here is the case.

http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/2018/2018ONCA0761.pdf

[Malthus]

Heh, the original application judge was Ed Belobabba. I knew him as a partner at our firm and, later, as a judge: he's not the most careful logician. He's very much 'outcome oriented' in that if he doesn't like you or your client or their position, he'll find a way to screw you.

The CA decision doesn't surprise me at all.

[Malthus]

edit:  Breaking news about a Liberal MP in Ontario crossing the floor to join the Conservative caucus.  Apparently she narrowly won the seat in the last election.  Perhaps she sees the writing on the wall with a shift to the right in Ontario?

I dunno if there has been any actual shift to the right; the provincial legislation was more a case of throwing the previous (provincial) Liberal bums out, than any heartfelt embrace of the Conservatives.