[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Barrister]

Conservatism has always had a mean streak. Fire and brimstone and all that. They have (had?) A few pluses, mainly fiscal, but need a strong leader to keep the baser nature in check.

I really reject that.  Conservatism has never been about being mean.  It's about being cautious and pragmatic - being cautious about not making welfare too generous as you don't want to cause a disincentive to work for example.  But not about being mean.

[HVC]

There's a mean streak to the "others", be it racial minorities, homosexuals, poor, and even women (which are only others to 50% of conservatives). Sure on individual levels a conservative can be a great charitable person, but historically as a group they've pushed hard against equality. I can only, graciously, call that mean.

[viper37]

Our Court of Appeal just released its decision on the appeal from the unsuccessful constitutional challenge to the prohibition of private health care which provides the same services as the public health system.  There is a lot in the decision to digest but one thing really stands out - the Court found no error with the trial judge's findings of fact regarding the negative impact a parallel private system would have on the public system.

what is the difference between this case and the one that lead to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaoulli_v_Quebec_(AG)

[crazy canuck]

It's a good question, and I need to get into the legal weeds a little bit to answer it. In the Quebec case, the lower courts decided much like the BC court of appeal did, That there was no violation of the charter of rights and freedoms. When it got to the supreme Court Canada, the majority decided that the charter does not apply in the first instance but rather the Quebec charter should apply. The Quebec charter does not contain a section similar to section one of the charter of rights and freedoms. It's really on that basis that the appeal succeeded and it is because of the unique application of the Quebec charter within Quebec that it is only in Quebec that private hospitals are permitted.

The BC case will go to the Supreme Court of Canada and that court will now have to deal directly with the application for section 7 and section 1 of the Charter. This will be the case that determines the future of the public healthcare system in Canada generally.

[viper37]

Thanks for the clarification

[Sheilbh]

British politics Twitter very impressed by this Poilievre ad - in particular noting that Starmer could really benefit from doing the same, as he has a relatively normal background, and could use about 80% of the same script (especially against Johnson - may be less effective v his replacement):
https://twitter.com/pierrepoilievre/status/1548364837272428544?s=21&t=BPVp8WW58Xoloxehxoy4zQ

[crazy canuck]

British politics Twitter very impressed by this Poilievre ad - in particular noting that Starmer could really benefit from doing the same, as he has a relatively normal background, and could use about 80% of the same script (especially against Johnson - may be less effective v his replacement):
https://twitter.com/pierrepoilievre/status/1548364837272428544?s=21&t=BPVp8WW58Xoloxehxoy4zQ

Yeah, Labour should be able to occupy that every person space.

It is also messaging which is particularly effective against Trudeau.  One of the many reasons he has to go.

[Oexmelin]

So, apparently, secret trials are a-ok in Canada...

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1899528/proces-fantome-police-cour-appel-indicateur-criminel-quebec

[crazy canuck]

Not in the rest of Canada until the SCC says it is so

[viper37]

So, apparently, secret trials are a-ok in Canada...

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1899528/proces-fantome-police-cour-appel-indicateur-criminel-quebec

I wonder if the Supreme Court will get involved.

[Jacob]

Regarding the recent controversy around Hockey Canada having a reserve fund used for - among other contingencies - paying out compensation to victims of sexual harassment and assault in situations where Hockey Canada is responsible:

I absolutely get that it feels icky as all hell to have a part of membership fees or federal sports dollars be used for those kinds of purposes.

But on the flipside, if Hockey Canada is liable (or potentially liable) it makes sense to have some funds ready to pay for those liabilities (in fact, it seems prudent). Where else can that money come from?

[crazy canuck]

I think the controversy is that there was no disclosure of what the fees were being collected for. Transparency in a nonprofit like that is essential. I agree with you that on its own having a contingency fund for uninsured liabilities can be a good idea.  But that fund needs to be disclosed.  As I understand it, hockey Canada didn't disclose the fund because they did not want to disclose the fact they were paying out sexual assault settlements.   

[Jacob]

I think the controversy is that there was no disclosure of what the fees were being collected for. Transparency in a nonprofit like that is essential. I agree with you that on its own having a contingency fund for uninsured liabilities can be a good idea.  But that fund needs to be disclosed.  As I understand it, hockey Canada didn't disclose the fund because they did not want to disclose the fact they were paying out sexual assault settlements.   

Yeah, I see the point of criticism. And the best answer, of course, is for Hockey Canada to ensure that there's no culture of sexual harassment and assault under its aegis.

[crazy canuck]

I think the controversy is that there was no disclosure of what the fees were being collected for. Transparency in a nonprofit like that is essential. I agree with you that on its own having a contingency fund for uninsured liabilities can be a good idea.  But that fund needs to be disclosed.  As I understand it, hockey Canada didn't disclose the fund because they did not want to disclose the fact they were paying out sexual assault settlements.   

Yeah, I see the point of criticism. And the best answer, of course, is for Hockey Canada to ensure that there's no culture of sexual harassment and assault under its aegis.

Yeah, that is the nub of it. Hiding the fact all this was happening does nothing but perpetuate the culture.  If they had gone public all those years ago with the fact that there was a problem with young men in their programs sexually assaulting women, and set out the plan for what they were going to do to address it, that would have been much better.   

[viper37]

I guess we know why they had a reserve fund for that:
Sexual assault allegations related to 2003 World Junior team under investigation

[...]
TSN has independently interviewed the source who contacted Nater and corroborated their account with two additional sources, including the owner of the video camera used to film the alleged incident.
The sources have requested anonymity because they said they fear recriminations. Each of the three sources told TSN they are willing to testify about the purported video in private before the committee. The three sources independently described the six- or seven-minute video.
The source who contacted Nater works in the hockey industry and said the video began with a Team Canada player standing outside of a room, answering questions as if he were doing a pre-game interview with the person holding the camera, who is not identified.
The player told the camera operator that viewers were about to see "a f---ing lamb roast," the three sources said. After the hallway interview, the camera was then carried into a room with a pool table, the source said.
The video shows roughly a half-dozen players taking turns having sex with a woman who was non-responsive and lying face up on the pool table, the source said.
Two sources said they watched the video on a VHS tape in an apartment in the spring of 2003.
The third source said that one of the players on the 2003 World Juniors team borrowed their video camera during the tournament in Halifax. The recording was on the camera when it was returned to them. That person said they did not inform police about the recording and deleted the video from their camera after being pressured to do so by players. The source said they believe a copy of the video was made when the camera was not in their possession.
None of the three sources reported the video to police or Hockey Canada.
"I didn't want to get in trouble," the owner of the video camera said in a phone interview. "I knew this could get them in trouble."
[...]

...