[DrCaleb]

Coach85 Coach85:

I'm asking what specific scenario would warrant the use of this clause?

$1:

The Parliament of Canada, a provincial legislature or a territorial legislature may declare that one of its laws or part of a law applies temporarily ("notwithstanding") countermanding sections of the Charter, thereby nullifying any judicial review by overriding the Charter protections for a limited period of time. This is done by including a section in the law clearly specifying which rights have been overridden. A simple majority vote in any of Canada's 14 jurisdictions may suspend the core rights of the Charter. However, the rights to be overridden must be either a "fundamental right" guaranteed by Section 2 (such as freedom of expression, religion, and association), a "legal right" guaranteed by Sections 7–14 (such as rights to liberty and freedom from search and seizures and cruel and unusual punishment) or a Section 15 "equality right".[1] Other rights such as section 6 mobility rights, democratic rights, and language rights are inviolable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_3 ... d_Freedoms

This is why the clause exists, to override The Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in the event a law is found by a Judge to violate the Charter. So Ontario has a law that a Judge says violates the Charter, and Ontario will override that decision for five years.

It was meant as a way to prevent the Judiciary from overriding the will of Parliament or a Provincial Legislature.

That's when it should be used; when a Judiciary decision is deemed less important than the suppression of Charter Rights. To date, it's never been used that way.

And FordNation has the balls to declare it's to protect 'democracy'.

[Thanos]

It might be arrogant but it's not illegal. Or unconstitutional. That's the thing that gets forgotten in this country too often, that the provinces have a huge range of powers at their disposal. They could all wipe out every municipal government overnight if they wanted and take full control of the cities away from local leadership and it would all be entirely lawful for them to do so.

[CharlesAnthony]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And FordNation has the balls to declare it's to protect 'democracy'.

Did you expect him to read Wikipoedia out loud on television???

[DrCaleb]

Thanos Thanos:

It might be arrogant but it's not illegal. Or unconstitutional. That's the thing that gets forgotten in this country too often, that the provinces have a huge range of powers at their disposal. They could all wipe out every municipal government overnight if they wanted and take full control of the cities away from local leadership and it would all be entirely lawful for them to do so.

Absolutely. It's not illegal, nor was it when Quebec and Saskatchewan used it.

Specifically denying the right to fair representation is the middle of an election is still a dick move.

[N_Fiddledog]

WARMINGTON: Most support Ford's efforts to downsize city council

$1:

Who would have thought eight in ten Ontarians would side with elected Premier Doug Ford over an appointed judge from the Liberal government eras of Chretien and McGuinty?

Ford did.

Turns out, by using the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to combat what many feel was an activist judicial ruling to use that same charter to stop an elected government’s decision, the premier doesn’t seem to have spent political capital but gain some.

“People want leaders to tackle transit and jobs and to deal with crime,” Ford told the Sun Tuesday of why he is not surprised people are backing him on bringing back the legislature to usher through his plan to reduce the size of Toronto City Council from 47 seats to 25.

And, if you put stock in what Sun readers have to say, it appears he was right.

“Do you support Premier Doug Ford’s decision to use the notwithstanding clause to push ahead with his plan to downsize city council?” was the poll question on torontosun.com.

As of deadline Tuesday a whopping 13,248 voted.

And 80.4% — or 10,651 voters — said yes. The number of those who voted no was 2,597 which adds up to 19.6%.

“Ford is acting on the promises that the people voted him for,” said reader Steve Lombardi.

“Ford said ‘enough’ and actually (has) the balls to fight back hard.”

Wrote Wayne Fraser: “I applaud Doug and company for moving forward with the notwithstanding clause … If this nonsense of a single judge overturning legislation doesn’t stop, then at least let us have the ability to elect judges.”

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/ ... ave-bill-5

[Coach85]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Thanos Thanos:

It might be arrogant but it's not illegal. Or unconstitutional. That's the thing that gets forgotten in this country too often, that the provinces have a huge range of powers at their disposal. They could all wipe out every municipal government overnight if they wanted and take full control of the cities away from local leadership and it would all be entirely lawful for them to do so.

Absolutely. It's not illegal, nor was it when Quebec and Saskatchewan used it.

Specifically denying the right to fair representation is the middle of an election is still a dick move.

There's no denying anyone's right to representation. They will be represented within the framework of the new council.

[llama66]

*fair* representation.

[DrCaleb]

llama66 llama66:

*fair* representation.

^^^

The ratios will change, and how do they know which people will represent them? How can they make an informed decision on who to vote for, if the candidate list will change?

[Coach85]

llama66 llama66:

*fair* representation.

If it's fair that there's the same amount of MP's and MPP's for the City, it's just as fair to have the same amount of Councillors.

Bottom line, Doug Ford is doing this to get back at Toronto Council and Toronto Councillors and downtowners are against simply because it's an idea from Doug Ford. Petty on both sides.

[Coach85]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

llama66 llama66:

*fair* representation.

^^^

The ratios will change, and how do they know which people will represent them? How can they make an informed decision on who to vote for, if the candidate list will change?

There's no legal precedent for what's 'fair'.

Toronto has been operating with the new boundaries since it was changed and there's plenty of time for people to understand who's running in their riding.

[llama66]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

llama66 llama66:

*fair* representation.

^^^

The ratios will change, and how do they know which people will represent them? How can they make an informed decision on who to vote for, if the candidate list will change?

They kinda pulled this shit at the last Calgary Municipal Election. I was expecting to be able to vote for Evan Wolley, instead my Ward consisted of Jeff Farkas (worst Councillor ever), I basically got to waste my vote. Yay.

[DrCaleb]

Coach85 Coach85:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

llama66 llama66:

*fair* representation.

^^^

The ratios will change, and how do they know which people will represent them? How can they make an informed decision on who to vote for, if the candidate list will change?

There's no legal precedent for what's 'fair'.

Toronto has been operating with the new boundaries since it was changed and there's plenty of time for people to understand who's running in their riding.

Perhaps not, but when a councillor is too busy to look at or respond to constituents concerns because they have too many constituents, I'd take that as a starting measure.

[DrCaleb]

llama66 llama66:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

llama66 llama66:

*fair* representation.

^^^

The ratios will change, and how do they know which people will represent them? How can they make an informed decision on who to vote for, if the candidate list will change?

They kinda pulled this shit at the last Calgary Municipal Election. I was expecting to be able to vote for Evan Wolley, instead my Ward consisted of Jeff Farkas (worst Councillor ever), I basically got to waste my vote. Yay.

I've been in (I think) 4 different provincial ridings, and I haven't moved in years. The last one, they pulled the 'Vogon Destructor Fleet' BS by saying the riding redraw plans were announced in a paper no one reads, and were available in County Records if you wanted to find out.

So I researched the wrong candidates, because where I lived changed ridings unexpectedly.

[Coach85]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Perhaps not, but when a councillor is too busy to look at or respond to constituents concerns because they have too many constituents, I'd take that as a starting measure.

That's the thing, what's the right number? I'm sure some Councillors are busy and some don't do much beyond showing up at meetings.

[N_Fiddledog]

Over-representation can be worse than a lack of it.

One might say look at things like the current state of Toronto streets and crime stats to decide which is which there.