Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Roundup: Appointing hypothetical politicians to the bench

Posted on by

At a meeting of the Canadian Bar Association, Rob Nicholson said that they shouldn’t rule out giving judicial appointments to “hypothetical” sitting politicians. No, seriously. This amid continual rumours that they’re eventually one day maybe going to appoint Vic Toews to the Court of Queen’s Bench in Manitoba. He then proceeded to dodge a question about a call to review federal legal aid funding – you know, to make justice accessible to the public in an age where their government continues to make the Criminal Code increasingly complex and at times even nonsensical (if you compare mandatory minimum sentences).

Leona Aglukkaq wants the debate around healthcare to be based around facts and not rhetoric. Hahahahaha! *wipes eyes* Oh, that’s a good one. I’m guessing she’s never actually absorbed the talking points that she has so dutifully memorised.

Charlie Angus is complaining that the Director of Public Prosecutions won’t look into Dean Del Mastro’s electoral financing even though it’s not the DPP’s job, no matter that Angus would like it to be. Seriously, you can’t just invent job descriptions because you want them to do something.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Selecting a window dressing panel

Posted on by

The government has announced the selection panel for recommending the next Justice of the Supreme Court, comprised of three Conservatives, one NDP and one Liberal MP, and as it was pointed out, three lawyers, a PhD in sociology, and a farmer. The judge will have to be from Quebec, as that is the vacancy on the Court. Of course, this whole process is really just window dressing anyway as ultimately this is and always has been a crown prerogative of the Prime Minister anyway.

There are rumours that the government wants to create a permanent secretariat in Public Works to deal with military procurement issues, which everyone else seems to agree is just adding layers of needless bureaucracy without actually solving any of the problems. Meanwhile, the report on the F-35 procurement disaster is overdue according to the government’s timetable, and Public Works has had to put out yet another tender for an independent auditor. Because it never ends.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Mulcair goes to the Stampede

Posted on by

Now that he’s in Calgary for the Stampede, Thomas Mulcair says that they should open up access to the oil sands – but not with new pipelines. Um, okay, because the ones that exist have all that much excess capacity, apparently. (Hint: They don’t really). And he wants more east-west pipelines, but there really, really isn’t enough pipeline capacity there, and it’s way, way more expensive to build such an east-west pipeline than it is to build one to the refineries in Texas, or to the west coast to sell it to Asia. Oh, wait – we don’t want to refine oil in Texas, we want to do it in Canada, where we don’t have refinery capacity in the West, and it would cost billions of dollars to build upgraders and refineries (and would come with a major cost in terms of carbon footprint). And while Mulcair may want the shuttered Shell refinery in Montreal to process oil from the West, assuming they can get pipeline capacity to it, well, no word on how he’d convince them to go for it economically. So…yeah.

Mulcair also appears to be tone-deaf on the “white hatting” tradition of Calgary, for what it’s worth, seeing as he decided to wear a white hat to oppose Harper’s black hat. Seriously. The National Post’s Jen Gerson recounts Mulcair’s day here.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Disingenuous prison “savings”

Posted on by

Vic Toews held a press conference yesterday to say that hey, that big explosion in prisoner populations didn’t happen, so here, let’s reallocate $1.48 billion from corrections back to the Finance Department’s fiscal framework. Except that Toews is being awfully disingenuous here. The provisions from Bill C-10? Most of them haven’t even come into force yet, and some of them won’t until oh, November. Add to that the time it will take the cases that the court sees after such rulings come into force to make their way through the system (since these laws aren’t retroactive), and then, two or three years down the road, we’ll see the effect. So one has to wonder – is Toews trying to manufacture a crisis in the corrections system? We know there is overcrowding and double bunking happening already, we know that there is a rise in prison violence, and we know that there is a time bomb on the way when it comes to that explosion in prison populations. And the endgame? Well, I suspect it may have to do with more private sector involvement in the penal system, as we’ve already heard they’re looking into. Something to consider anyway.

After those Enbridge hearings in the States, Thomas Mulcair says that we should pull the plug on the Northern Gateway pipeline entirely. BC Premier Christy Clark is putting Enbridge “on notice” about pipeline safety.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Clerical errors and attack ads

Posted on by

The Supreme Court heard arguments about the Etobicoke Centre election yesterday, and the crux seem to hang on whether “clerical errors” are enough to overturn votes and “disenfranchise” Canadians. But how many errors are too many and how many should we let slide before it becomes “fatal” to the integrity of the election? It’s actually a weighty issue to ponder, and they have reserved judgement. While it’s supposed to be handled expeditiously, the point was also made that the remedy – a by-election – is time-sensitive, and so one can hope that the Court will be swift in its ruling. (I offered some of my own thoughts as to the arguments here).

The NDP launched their own attack ads in response to those the Conservatives launched against Thomas Mulcair. The crux of the message: Harper created the recession, the deficit, and is now making cuts to the vulnerable. It’s all pretty much demonstrably untrue and contradictory, but since when were attack ads supposed to be entirely factual when the intent is to cast doubt on your opponent? James Moore was quick to respond via the Twitter Machine: “Hope is better than fear.” Touché.

Continue reading →

On Justice McLachlin and the question of record keeping

Posted on by

While watching the Supreme Court hearing on the Etobicoke Centre election challenge this morning, I was struck by a couple of the arguments, and the questions put forward by a couple of the justices, and in particular, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin. The issue in question was record keeping, or the lack thereof in some of the instances in question with the challenge.

The arguments put forward by Ted Opitz’s lawyer suggested that the issues were “mere technicalities” and shouldn’t be used to disenfranchise voters because of mistakes that Elections Canada officials made. This position was challenged – and rightly so. These rules exist for a reason, and the need for documentation and record keeping acts as a safeguard. Chief Justice McLachlin at one point said that the presumption seems to be that since we’re not Afghanistan, we shouldn’t worry about it, even though these kinds of breaches might be questioned in such a country. Justice Abella also at one point asked that if these technicalities don’t matter, then why bother having the Elections Act guidelines at all?

Continue reading →

Roundup: Etobicoke Centre appeal today

Posted on by

Are you ready? The Supreme Court hears the Etobicoke Centre appeal today. This is going to be one to watch, considering how much attention is being focused on the way Elections Canada runs elections, and their training and operations are as much under the microscope here as any particular voter impropriety.

There is talk that the new seat redistribution in BC and in New Brunswick will disproportionately be beneficial to the Conservatives, in large part because new ridings in BC are going to the lower mainland suburbs, while in New Brunswick, Dieppe moves into a new riding, but on balance there shouldn’t be any loss of seats to Liberals or NDP even if the vote spread changes. I’m a bit torn on this assumption that these new ridings in the suburbs of BC will automatically go Conservative. Given that much of the redistribution has reduced the influence of rural ridings (which were over-represented to begin with), and that rural ridings were far more likely to vote Conservative than anything else, one could argue that it makes the ridings more volatile – especially as the “rurban” phenomenon of small urban area at the narrow end of a large rural riding is being blunted in a lot of places. This will create more representative urban and suburban ridings that might actually see their issues addressed rather than swamped by rural concerns. This could put those ridings into play far more, now that the more conservative rural population can’t be relied upon to carry the votes.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Stampede Triumphalism

Posted on by

With it being Stampede time in Calgary, Stephen Harper has made a triumphant “homecoming speech” to the crowd there about how he wants to transform Canada to be one of the “next generation of economic powers,” and that even though all of his changes aren’t popular they are necessary. Note that he again takes credit for Paul Martin’s achievements and for resource prices. Also in attendance were Alison Redford and Danielle Smith, and Redford got more applause than Smith, even though that federal Conservatives tend to be more in the Wildrose Party camp.

As is typical at this time of year, journalists seem mystified that the Liberals are showing the flag in the heart of “enemy territory” – as if there are no Liberals in Alberta, which is not true. Bob Rae says that looking at the elections of Naheed Nenshi and Alison Redford shows that there is an appetite for centrist, progressive politics in places like Calgary – though traditionally this has been harder to achieve at the federal level, as Calgarians tend to vote increasingly conservative the higher level one goes. And add the obligatory Justin Trudeau leadership speculation as he works – and woos – the crowds there.

If you do plan on attending Stampede, here is some expert advice from stylists on how to dress without looking like a complete bumpkin.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Countdown to the Supreme Court hearing

Posted on by

In advance of Tuesday’s Supreme Court hearing, Elections Canada has some new evidence that could cast doubt on some of the ballots that were nullified in the lower court decision. This is one of those rare moments when the Supreme Court will consider new evidence rather than just the factums presented before them.

The question of what to do with Dean Del Mastro continued to play out yesterday as the Liberals tried to get the Ethics committee to reconvene to hear from him, while the NDP decided to quash that idea (apparently it’s too much of a circus for the likes of serial name-caller Charlie Angus), but they instead want Rob Nicholson to refer the case to the Director of Public Prosecutions – even though it’s not actually his job to investigate things. But hey, details, right?

Here are three things that Julian Fantino needs to know about CIDA as he takes over the portfolio. Fantino, meanwhile, gives a bit of a slap to his predecessor when he pledges to bring “fiscal discipline” to the department.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Moral victory at report stage

Posted on by

After 22 hours of solid votes, the omnibus budget bill has passed Report Stage. There were no amendments passed, but the opposition still claims moral victory, and they did turn the public’s attention to the bill, which really was the whole point. The question remains, of course, whether the public will still care by September, let alone by 2015?

The Supreme Court has set a date of July 10th to hear the Etobicoke Centre appeal. Looks like Ted Opitz isn’t going to get the summer barbecue circuit after all (not that he isn’t being given an inordinate amount of Members’ Statements and backbench suck-up questions in QP at the moment).

Continue reading →