Big Media was saying nothing about the free speech deal until a few days ago, when the OHRC whispered the word "media."
Suddenly, the doors are open and the editorials are like Times Square confetti. The Toronto Sun, Winnipeg Free Press, Calgary Herald, Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, and National Post.
All right, so the Post was in on the act early, but the rest? Nothing. Notice especially that the Winnipeg and Calgary papers didn't have much of a dissenting view of the CHRC, but are suddenly freaked out by what's happening in Ontario.
As I've said before, frame the free speech debate as a free press issue, and it changes everything. Nothing gets people going like self-preservation.
Incidentally, you might like to read this statement from the Ontario Human Rights Commission. It concerns the new Act coming into effect on June 30, 2008. The statement is on their website, under the heading, Our Changing Mission. I found this part pretty interesting:
In some ways, the new law enhances the OHRC’s independence. We will file our annual report directly to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, instead of through the Attorney General, as we currently do. We will have the power to monitor and report on anything related to the state of human rights in the Province of Ontario.Hmmm. Notice the boldface? That's theirs.
Our powers to review legislation and policies, for example will be very broad. The new law refers to our ability to consider whether legislation is inconsistent with the intent of the Code. We will have a role in dealing with “tension and conflict” and bringing people and communities together to help resolve differences. Our current role as a developer of public policy on human rights is made explicit in the new legislation, as is the way those policies can be used in issues that are before the Tribunal.
You should always be nervous when the words very broad and power appear in the same sentence.
Interpreting law, skipping the Attorney General, lobbying the legislature. Quite a lot? That's nothing. Check out these two sentences:
"We will have the power to conduct public inquiries, initiate our own applications (formerly called ‘complaints’), or intervene in proceedings at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO)...The OHRC may also apply to the HRTO to state a case to the Divisional Court where it feels the HRTO decision is not consistent with OHRC policies."
Just so you're clear: if no one complains about your actions, come June, the OHRC can file a complaint (excuse me, application) against you themselves. They can then bring that case to the tribunals. If the tribunals don't give them the answer they are looking for, they can tell the tribunal to send the case to a divisional court. If they don't like the answer from the divisional court, they can lobby the legislature to change the law.
And the Attorney General never has to see any of it.
I like that line from above: "In some ways, the new law enhances the OHRC’s independence."
No kidding.
1 comment:
This is creeping socialism, this reporting function goes back to the U.N. and is part of the stipulations to a treaty we signed under the Trudeau regime. The CHRC also wants to achieve this reporting status. Like the OHRC the CHRC wants to institute "Social Condition" as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Both proposals are power grabs. Social Condition is the most worrisome, it is social engineering on Stalinist scale and attempts to guarantee equality of outcome. In the 2000 CHRA review it was recommended that Social Condition be adopted despite concerns expressed that it could potentially allow the CHRC to subvert the authority of parliament.
Few thought section 13 would be abused either;)
Post a Comment