[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

I think P. may do well with the truck convoy F@ck Trudeau types. But I think he will lose the centrist Conservatives, the Globe and Mail types. He's not going to help them win in Toronto. So in all I don't think he bodes well for the party

He is already splitting the party. Predictably the Reform types skew for him and the rest don't.

I think Jacob has asked a good question, will the Canadian Conservative party go the way of the GOP, or will we just repeat the Reform split.

Hoping PP moderates if he wins is very reminiscent of what people were saying/hoping about Trump.  But there is reason to think this is the PP we will continue to have if he wins a general election. I think we can't underestimate the effect of right wing social media having the same impact on the Canadian right as it has had on the Americans.  And PP will likely continue to play to that crowd.

It's heading for a reform split.

But then you can vote for the non crazy splinter with a clear conscious

The problem is our system depends on an opposition which is a government in waiting.  Other than the Harper opposition years, Liberal governments have not have had to deal with that since the early 80s.

[HVC]

Unless the conservatives can come with another weird robot* to lead the way and keep the fringe in line, I'd prefer that to the chance of a wacky conservative getting power.

*who I did vote for.

[crazy canuck]

Yeah, but it would be better if the Conservatives didn't continually implode hard right.

[viper37]

True, but they won't get to power and won't change anything.

[crazy canuck]

All is not well on our SCC - the majority took a swipe at the minority in the rape shield case released this morning, that is worthy of Languish:

"We have also read the separate dissenting reasons of our colleagues Brown J. and Rowe J. Respectfully, they have mischaracterized our reasons and their effect and disregarded the principle of stare decisis — sweeping aside decades of this Court's binding jurisprudence as "judicial ad hoc-ery"."

[Sheilbh]

Interesting - what was the issue? 

Dissents here are still relatively rare, I think Chris Hanretty did some research on it and found that only 8% of cases have a dissenting judgement. Although the general average of unanimous judgements is quite high at about 75% There's been a big - and very positive - trend towards a single opinion for the court/majority as well and away from everyone doing their own which they used to 30-40 yeas ago

I wonder if there is a cultural impact. There's been suggestions that the Supreme Court here is more bold now than it was as the Law Lords even though their powers didn't, but just by virtue of the title, moving to their own building and the example of other Supreme Courts internationally. I slightly wonder if dissenting is similar and we'll see more of it in the future.

[crazy canuck]

The case was a Charter Challenge of a provision of the Criminal Code which requires an accused to obtain court approval before adducing personal information belonging to the complainant into evidence at a trial.

https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19428/index.do


Dissents are becoming more rare. Even more rare is having a number of separate dissents - in this case there were three.  The majority respectfully disagreed with the third dissenting opinion as interpreting the statutory provisions too narrowly.

[Barrister]

Interesting - what was the issue? 

Dissents here are still relatively rare, I think Chris Hanretty did some research on it and found that only 8% of cases have a dissenting judgement. Although the general average of unanimous judgements is quite high at about 75% There's been a big - and very positive - trend towards a single opinion for the court/majority as well and away from everyone doing their own which they used to 30-40 yeas ago

I wonder if there is a cultural impact. There's been suggestions that the Supreme Court here is more bold now than it was as the Law Lords even though their powers didn't, but just by virtue of the title, moving to their own building and the example of other Supreme Courts internationally. I slightly wonder if dissenting is similar and we'll see more of it in the future.

It's a somewhat narrow issue.  If the Accused has personal documents of the victim on a sexual assault trial (say a diary, or intimate text messages) the Accused needs to notify the victim and get permission of the court to cross-examine on them.

This was introduced in no small part in response to the Jian Ghomeshi trial where the defence lawyer successfully used various private messages sent by the different complainants to Ghomeshi both before and after the alleged sexual assaults.

I haven't done a study but dissents I feel are pretty common at the SCC level.  Provincial appelate courts (which only sit as 3 of 5 person panels) they are much more rare.

This one is definitely odd though because there are three separate dissents, although on first glance they all pretty much agree on what the result should be.

[crazy canuck]

Its as if BB doesn't read my posts 

[Syt]

https://twitter.com/Jason_Ribeiro/status/1543244453145485313?s=20&t=wRkRKZvikeWUPz2sLBx-2Q

"#COVID19AB killed people...a lot of people. But so did the vaccine & so did the mandates."

So I guess this Brian Jean guy seems to be of the "people just die, nothing we can do about it" persuasion?

[crazy canuck]

Worse, he is saying the vaccine kills just like Covid.

Q is alive and well within Canadian conservatives

[crazy canuck]

Brown is disqualified from the race in a process that looks questionable.

[viper37]

Not a great loss.  Then again, not one of them is suitable to be party leader.

[crazy canuck]

Not a great loss.  Then again, not one of them is suitable to be party leader.

No concern about a party kicking out a candidate who had a shot at defeating the extreme right wing favourite, based only on an unproven allegation?

[Grey Fox]

Not a great loss.  Then again, not one of them is suitable to be party leader.

No concern about a party kicking out a candidate who had a shot at defeating the extreme right wing favourite, based only on an unproven allegation?

A crypto bro is also a right wing extremist.