What will Doug Ford do now that a judge has blocked his plan to cut Toronto city council?

[冷笑9声]

既然要走合法程序，为什么要说民选政府可以无视政治任命法官的判决？

我提议，这次还是选47个市议员。。。如果担心决策效率低的话，可以在47个议员之上，再搞个9常委？5个、7个也都行。。省长也可以兼任各个多伦多市发展会员会领导小组主席？
@向问天 @冷笑六声 @小地主 @何叔、何夫人 @胡伯伯 靠铺么？

 

[向问天]

法官是法治的一部分， 那个notwithstanding也是法治的一部分。

坚决依法治国。

 

[冷笑9声]

没有天生的政治家。是不是政治家，只有等那些上位的人把事情搞大了，才好评判

摸着石头过河？撞好了就弯道超车？整不好就下次选下去？我看靠铺。

 

[小地主]

我提议，这次还是选47个市议员。。。如果担心决策效率低的话，可以在47个议员之上，再搞个9常委？5个、7个也都行。。省长也可以兼任各个多伦多市发展会员会领导小组主席？
@向问天 @冷笑六声 @小地主 @何叔、何夫人 @胡伯伯 靠铺么？

渥太华人口是大多四分之一，23个local council。。每个council的运行费用二十万左右，包括给councilor开工资，租办公室请助手，。。大多估计也差不多吧?

福特这个砍council说为了给纳税人省钱真说不过去。。去扯皮?民主政治不就是扯皮吗？扯皮才能阻止疯子犯错误。。

保守党出身的zero means zero的市长，最后终究没修成正果成政治家

 

[小地主]

法官是法治的一部分， 那个notwithstanding也是法治的一部分。

坚决依法治国。

不喊口号你会4啊？硬盘录音笔都交出来了吗？

 

[ccc]

渥太华人口是大多四分之一，23个local council。。每个council的运行费用二十万左右，包括给councilor开工资，租办公室请助手，。。大多估计也差不多吧?

福特这个砍council说为了给纳税人省钱真说不过去。。去扯皮?民主政治不就是扯皮吗？扯皮才能阻止疯子犯错误。。

保守党出身的zero means zero的市长，最后终究没修成正果成政治家

如果要砍，也好，那就全省统一标准，多少人口设一个ward。现在动手办，下次全省市选统一按新划分的区来。

十月市选，现在说改就改，不是儿戏么。

 

[ccc]

Former premier Bill Davis, left, and Mayor John Tory laugh as Davis trades quips with the media during a post-council press conference on Dec. 2, 2014. Davis, a key player in the 1982 repatriation of the Constitution, has spoken out against Premier Doug Ford’s use of the “notwithstanding” clause. “The sole purpose of the notwithstanding clause was only for those exceptionally rare circumstances when a province wanted to bring in a specific benefit or program provision for a part of their population — people of a certain age, for example — that might have seemed discriminatory under the Charter,” he said. (David Cooper / Toronto Star)

The man who governed Ontario from 1971 until 1985, told TVO’s Steve Paikin on Tuesday that “making the Charter a central part of our Constitution, Canada’s basic law, was a deliberate and focused decision by the prime minister and premiers.”

Davis warned “the sole purpose of the notwithstanding clause was only for those exceptionally rare circumstances when a province wanted to bring in a specific benefit or program provision for a part of their population — people of a certain age, for example — that might have seemed discriminatory under the Charter.”

“The notwithstanding provision has, understandably, rarely been used, because of the primacy of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for all Canadians,” he told Paikin, who wrote the 2016 definitive biography, Bill Davis: Nation Builder, and Not So Bland After All.

“That it might now be used regularly to assert the dominance of any government or elected politician over the rule of law or the legitimate jurisdiction of our courts of law was never anticipated or agreed to.”

Davis is one of just three living first ministers — along with Newfoundland’s Brian Peckford and Nova Scotia’s John Buchanan — who worked closely with former prime minister Pierre Trudeau to repatriate the Constitution almost four decades ago.

His alarm at the situation roiling Queen’s Park was echoed by former NDP premier Bob Rae, who governed from 1990 until 1995 and hailed Davis for speaking out “with force and clarity.”

“The trouble is it’s not a ‘gambit,’ or about ‘positioning’ or ‘branding,’” Rae said on Twitter.

“It’s about disrespect for democratic and lawful processes. The abuse of power is never a good thing. Populism turns democracy into dictatorship very quickly,” he cautioned.

Former Tory prime minister Brian Mulroney — whose daughter, Caroline Mulroney, is Ford’s attorney general — has also weighed in.

“Everybody knows I’m not a big fan of it and I never have been,” Mulroney said Tuesday of the provision, which he stressed he has not discussed with his eldest child.

“Look, to me, the backbone and the enormous strength of Canada is the independence and the magnificence of our judiciary … That is a major thrust of our citizenship,” he said, referring to the notwithstanding clause as “the most abject surrender of federal authority in our history.”

For her part, Caroline Mulroney insisted she was not fazed by Tory luminaries like her father and Davis entering the fray.

“I’m worried about two things. One, I’m making sure we appeal this decision,” she said of Justice Edward Belobaba’s ruling that Ford’s legislation downsizing of Toronto council was unconstitutional.

“Our government believes it was wrongly decided and I’m worried that the voters in Toronto have clarity on Oct. 22 around the rules governing their election.”

 

[ccc]

Amnesty International on Wednesday condemned the move by Premier Doug Ford, seen here in Queen’s Park on Wednesday, to invoke the “notwithstanding” clause as a “contemptuous” disregard for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (Chris Young / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

“To do so in a case involving the fundamental freedom of expression in a context in which core principles around elections and the underpinnings of our democracy are at stake is particularly disgraceful,” Neve said. “This invocation of section 33 by Premier Ford’s government should be withdrawn immediately. Questions about the interpretation and application of the Charter should be pursued through appeals and left to judges to determine.”

Amnesty released its statement shortly after Ford’s reintroduced bill passed first reading amid a tumultuous day of protest at Queen’s Park in which protesters — including a woman in her 70s — were handcuffed and led from the legislature and several New Democratic representatives were kicked out for banging on their desks.

After the NDP protest, the bill, named the Efficient Local Government Act, passed first reading 63-17. Only the remaining New Democrats, the Liberals, and the lone Green MPP voted against it.

Premier Ford hastily recalled the Legislature to invoke the notwithstanding clause after Justice Edward Belobaba ruled on Monday that an earlier version of the bill violated the freedom of expression for voters and candidates.

“There is no need and should be no place for such a crude provision as the notwithstanding clause,” Amnesty said in its statement, referring to the provision as a “a blatant human rights escape clause.”

“Amnesty International calls on all governments in Canada to refrain from invoking it.”

The notwithstanding clause is a rarely used provision of the charter that allows federal and provincial government to pass laws that violent certain rights and freedoms.

 

[ccc]

The federal Conservatives say Ontario Premier Doug Ford has the legal right to use the Constitution’s notwithstanding clause to move ahead with plans to cut the size of Toronto city council.

Brock Harrison, a spokesman for Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer says the constitution places municipal administration under provincial authority.

Harrison says that Ford made a decision that he is well within the law to make.

The notwithstanding clause gives provincial legislatures and Parliament the ability to usher in legislation that overrides charter provisions, but only for a five-year period.

Ford took the rarely used step Monday after a judge said it was unconstitutional to slash the number of city council seats in the middle of a municipal election without consultation, as it interfered with the right to freedom of expression of candidates and voters.

While Conservative pundits were quick to defend Ford, members of the Conservative party have been largely quiet on the topic until now.

 

[向问天]

Amnesty International on Wednesday condemned the move by Premier Doug Ford, seen here in Queen’s Park on Wednesday, to invoke the “notwithstanding” clause as a “contemptuous” disregard for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (Chris Young / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

“To do so in a case involving the fundamental freedom of expression in a context in which core principles around elections and the underpinnings of our democracy are at stake is particularly disgraceful,” Neve said. “This invocation of section 33 by Premier Ford’s government should be withdrawn immediately. Questions about the interpretation and application of the Charter should be pursued through appeals and left to judges to determine.”

Amnesty released its statement shortly after Ford’s reintroduced bill passed first reading amid a tumultuous day of protest at Queen’s Park in which protesters — including a woman in her 70s — were handcuffed and led from the legislature and several New Democratic representatives were kicked out for banging on their desks.

After the NDP protest, the bill, named the Efficient Local Government Act, passed first reading 63-17. Only the remaining New Democrats, the Liberals, and the lone Green MPP voted against it.

Premier Ford hastily recalled the Legislature to invoke the notwithstanding clause after Justice Edward Belobaba ruled on Monday that an earlier version of the bill violated the freedom of expression for voters and candidates.

“There is no need and should be no place for such a crude provision as the notwithstanding clause,” Amnesty said in its statement, referring to the provision as a “a blatant human rights escape clause.”

“Amnesty International calls on all governments in Canada to refrain from invoking it.”

The notwithstanding clause is a rarely used provision of the charter that allows federal and provincial government to pass laws that violent certain rights and freedoms.

粗暴干涉加拿大内政。

 

[ccc]

 

[ccc]

粗暴干涉加拿大内政。

那就是加拿大的组织，看清楚名字.... Canada。

 

[ccc]

 

[ccc]

Caroline Mulroney, Ontario’s attorney general, leaves in an elevator after scrumming with reporters following question period at the Ontario legislature on Sept. 12, 2018. But instead of distinguishing herself as a defender of law and order, Mulroney is discrediting herself as the enabler of Premier Doug Ford, Martin Regg Cohn writes. (Chris Young / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Until she didn’t.

Eclipsed by Doug Ford in this year’s leadership race, she folded on carbon pricing. Still, she stood her ground on sex-ed.

Until she didn’t.

Article Continued Below
When Ford triumphed, he made her attorney general and, thus rewarded, she revised her position on our sex-ed culture wars and the carbon clash with Ottawa. Still, she vowed to defend the rule of law.

Until she didn’t.

Now, instead of distinguishing herself as a judicious defender of law and order, she is discrediting herself as the enabler of an injudicious premier. Instead of comporting herself as chief law officer of the crown, she is conflating her role with that of Ford factotum.

Mulroney is not solely responsible for the Ford fiasco, whereby the premier has invoked the “notwithstanding” clause of the Charter of Rights for the first time ever in Ontario. But by virtue of her unique cabinet position, she bears a higher burden to rein in recklessness, to oppose arbitrariness, to advocate for the rule of law, to remind us of political norms and constitutional conventions (see: U.S. President Donald Trump versus Attorney General Jeff Sessions).

Consider, for example, the primacy of freedom of association, the principle of non-interference in democratic elections, the practice that judges should be respected and not reviled. Where is the attorney general when Ford flouts legal conventions and lashes out at the judiciary?

When the premier demonizes judges as political appointees who dare not judge him, let alone overrule him — claiming that an elected premier reigns supreme until the next vote, free from judicial scrutiny — does the attorney general not caution him, counter him, or contradict him? If this is not what she signed up for last year, why not sign her name to a resignation letter by way of protest?

It is a fair question for Mulroney, not just because of her onerous responsibilities as attorney general, but her legacy as the daughter of a consequential prime minister whose name she has surely profited from (conveniently condensing her full name, Caroline Mulroney Lapham, when she entered politics). She benefited not merely in name recognition, but unrivalled fundraising power whenever Brian Mulroney made an appearance on her behalf.

As Mulroney acknowledged Wednesday, her father has always denigrated the Charter’s notwithstanding clause, and he did so again unequivocally this week, noting that as PM he “had no interest in using it, no matter what.”

No matter what. Assuredly not for a partisan-motivated brawl with Toronto city council (for which Ford forgot to seek an electoral mandate).

“That’s why I opposed it then, and that’s why I oppose it today,” Brian Mulroney said. “And, no, I haven’t discussed this with my daughter.”

Why should he? After all, a daughter cannot be bound by her father’s views, just as a son like Justin Trudeau is not answerable for Pierre Trudeau’s thoughts as prime minister.

But when another party elder speaks out — in the person of Bill Davis — does not our attorney general take note? Davis is not a blood relative, but his DNA is no less Tory than Mulroney’s and he is himself a father of the Charter of Rights.

In a rare intervention, Davis stressed that the notwithstanding clause was conceived as a compromise that assumed politicians would abide by political norms. Any override of the Charter’s protections was intended as an instrument of last resort to resolve difficult contradictions, not as a routine weapon in the premier’s “toolbox” (as Ford described it) that would put judges back in their box.

As Davis told TVO’s Steve Paikin: “That it might now be used regularly to assert the dominance of any government or elected politician over the rule of law or the legitimate jurisdiction of our courts of law was never anticipated or agreed to.”

Caroline Mulroney is not alone in her betrayal of the Charter. Other lawyers in the Progressive Conservative caucus, who should also know better, are displaying similar fealty to Ford instead of loyalty to the Constitution — like, for example, Doug Downey, a former treasurer of the Ontario Bar Association; and Deputy Premier Christine Elliott, who has long had a special interest in human rights law.

“Why on Earth would we want to expose ourselves by plunging recklessly into such a controversial issue?” Elliott once said when condemning a proposal that would weaken human rights in Ontario.

That was in 2009, when Elliott warned the PCs against alienating voters by eliminating the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. What does Elliott say now?

What about the other ministers and caucus members who were supposed to act as a check on the untrammelled power of Ford? And what do voters think of a premier’s hidden agenda to expend so much political currency and constitutional capital on a sudden showdown with city council over seat size?

In the free vote held at Queen’s Park Wednesday, not a single member of the PC caucus dared to vote against first reading of the premier’s shameful disruption and destabilization of municipal politics in the middle of an election — notwithstanding the devastating judgments of two party elders who found Ford has overstepped by overriding the Charter’s protections.

For Mulroney and her fellow Tories at Queen’s Park, their dreams of power have finally been realized. Just not quite the way they first envisioned their wishes coming true.

 

[ccc]

PM says Liberals will always defend charter, as Ford prepares to override it

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau addresses the Liberal Party National Caucus meeting in Saskatoon on Wednesday, September 12, 2018. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Matt Smith

Joan Bryden, The Canadian Press
Published Wednesday, September 12, 2018 1:08PM EDT
Last Updated Wednesday, September 12, 2018 6:28PM EDT

SASKATOON -- Justin Trudeau kicked off a Liberal caucus retreat Wednesday with a distinct election flavour, including a ringing declaration that his party will always stand up for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The prime minister did not mention Ontario Premier Doug Ford but his assertion came just as the Ford government was reintroducing legislation to reduce the size of Toronto's city council -- using the Constitution's notwithstanding clause to override the charter.

"Our government will always stand up for the rights of Canadians and will always respect the Charter of Rights and Freedoms," Trudeau said in French as he opened the two-day caucus retreat.

"I think that bears repeating. We will always defend and uphold the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the fundamental rights and freedoms of every Canadian," he reiterated in English.

The caucus retreat is aimed at plotting strategy for next week's resumption of Parliament but Trudeau's opening remarks left little doubt Liberals are also preparing for the next federal election just over a year from now.

Trudeau opened the retreat by recounting his government's accomplishments since it came to power in 2015.

He boasted that the Canada Child Benefit has lifted more than 300,000 children out of poverty. And he said his government's middle class tax cut and investments in infrastructure have boosted the economy and resulted in a "historically low" unemployment rate.

"Our focus from the very start has been real progress that makes a real difference in people's lives and delivers results for Canadians," he said.

By contrast, Trudeau accused Andrew Scheer's Conservatives of being "stubbornly" opposed to measures to help the middle class and to fight climate change, "jeopardizing the future of our planet and our kids."

What's more, he said, "they have absolutely no plan to grow our economy.

"After 10 years under Stephen Harper of slow growth, rising income inequality and inaction on the environment, they're offering the same flawed approach. Well, that's completely unacceptable," Trudeau said.

But it's not just federal Conservatives the Liberals are preparing to campaign against. With Trudeau's indirect dig at Ford over the charter and his refusal during a later meeting with Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe to back down from the federal carbon pricing plan, the Liberals signalled their readiness to campaign against provincial conservatives as well.

"I was disappointed, to be honest," Moe said following his tete-a-tete with the prime minister.

"It's no secret that we've had a frosty relationship when it comes to economic files," he added, calling on the federal government to repeal its carbon pricing plan and legislation to beef up environmental impact assessments.

Moe's government is going to court to challenge the constitutionality of the federal plan to impose a tax on carbon emissions in those provinces that don't come up with their own carbon pricing scheme by January. Ford's government has vowed to join that challenge.

Just prior to Moe's meeting with Trudeau, Environment Minister Catherine McKenna made it clear the feds have no intention of budging on the issue.

While provinces are best positioned to develop their own climate change plans, McKenna said: "We've been also clear and the prime minister's been extremely clear that if provinces don't take serious climate action, if they don't recognize the cost of pollution, that we will have to step in and we will return the revenues to individuals directly."

McKenna said Saskatchewan has the highest per capita emissions in the country.

Moe signalled that the federal Liberals will have another fight on their hands if they move to ban handguns and assault weapons in Canada -- as some Liberal MPs and Toronto and Montreal city councils are urging the government to do.

"Here in Saskatchewan, we come from a society where hunting and being outdoors is deeply ingrained. We would not endorse the banning of firearms here in the province," he said.