Remembering Jack Layton

CBC's 22 Minutes fondly remembers the late NDP leader:

(via RedTory)

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

TORONTO EMPLOYMENT LAW • TORONTO CIVIL LITIGATION & ESTATE LITIGATION • TORONTO FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Rae Days

Is there anyone in Canada who doesn't believe that Bob Rae will ultimately wind up as the "permanent" leader of the Liberal Party, once this interim, kabuki thing is over?

(Not that there's anything wrong with that...)

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

TORONTO EMPLOYMENT LAW • TORONTO CIVIL LITIGATION & ESTATE LITIGATION • TORONTO FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Privacy Commissioner Responds on Veterans Affairs Investigation "Request"

Canada's Privacy Commissioner, Jennifer Stoddart, has announced her office will conduct a privacy audit of the federal Veterans Affairs department, after last week's shocking reports that confidential medical records regarding a critic of the department were widely circulated in ministerial briefing notes.

The Privacy Commissioner's office made it clear Wednesday that its audit of the Ministry's privacy policies was commenced at its own intiative, and not due to any request from the Ministry, as had been suggested by the Veterans Affairs Minister, Jean-Pierre Blackburn.

An email received Tuesday sets out a statement by the Privacy Commissioner:

I understand that the Veterans Affairs Minister made public earlier today the fact that he has asked our Office to conduct a broader investigation of privacy issues within his department.

I know you’ve been following this issue and wanted to provide the following update from our Office:

The Privacy Commissioner welcomes the minister’s invitation to conduct a systemic investigation into the privacy policies and practices of his department.

The Commissioner has advised Minister Blackburn’s office that her investigation into a complaint about the handling of one veteran’s personal information has raised concerns about the possibility of systemic privacy issues. As a result, she had already decided to initiate an audit of the department’s privacy practices.

Investigations are an important tool used to examine specific incidents. An audit will examine whether there are systemic issues that need to be addressed.

As part of this audit, the Privacy Commissioner’s Office will examine the department’s policies and practices against federal privacy requirements. We are still in the process of determining the scope of this audit and the timeline for its completion.

Our Office’s investigation into the individual complaint is in its final stages and we will be in a position to comment on our findings shortly.

Regards, Valerie


Valerie Lawton
Senior Communications Advisor /
Conseillère principale en communications
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada

More on the controversy from CTV: Veterans Affairs facing privacy investigation

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

TORONTO EMPLOYMENT LAW • TORONTO CIVIL LITIGATION & ESTATE LITIGATION • TORONTO FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Census Challenge to Be Heard in Federal Court

CBC reports that the Federal Court of Canada will hear argument today on a Charter challenge by a Francophone association to the Harper government's voluntary "census" law:

The Federation of Francophone and Acadian Communities of Canada has asked the court to void the Harper government's new policy, but it also wants an injunction that would keep the new census from being distributed this year.

The federation, which has also filed a complaint with Canada's official languages commissioner about the census change, argues that the government's new policy violates not only the Official Languages Act, but also the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The case is listed as FÉDÉRATION DES COMMUNAUTÉS FRANCOPHONES ET AL. c. SA MAJESTÉ LA REINE ET AL. (JR-Bilingual) - S. 18.1 Application for Judicial Review.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

TORONTO EMPLOYMENT LAW • TORONTO CIVIL LITIGATION & ESTATE LITIGATION • TORONTO FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

“Totally, Totally Illegal” under the Federal Privacy Act

Canadian Press reports on an emerging scandal centered on Stephen Harper's Conservative government:

Confidential medical and financial information belonging to an outspoken critic of Veterans Affairs, including part of a psychiatrist's report, found its way into the briefing notes of a cabinet minister.

Highly personal information about Sean Bruyea was contained in a 13-page briefing note prepared by bureaucrats in 2006 for then-minister Greg Thompson, a copy of which was obtained by The Canadian Press.

...Mr. Bruyea has filed a formal complaint with the federal privacy commissioner, whose investigation continues. He has also filed a court challenge, claiming a breach under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

...Retired colonel Michel Drapeau, a lawyer and expert in privacy law, expressed shock on viewing the documents. Mr. Drapeau said it was the worst breach of privacy he'd seen in decades of practising law, calling it “totally, totally illegal” under the federal Privacy Act, which allows for the collection of information for specific purposes.

“The way I read the briefing note, it clearly comes across that this is a way to impugn his reputation and to come across as someone who is less than stable, less than able to speak confidently and accurately about veteran's issues,” Mr. Drapeau said in an interview Tuesday.

(h/t - Rick Mercer on Twitter)

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Update:

More on this from CTV: Psych report of veterans critic improperly accessed. Galloping Beaver also weighs in: What?!!!

- GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

TORONTO EMPLOYMENT LAW • TORONTO CIVIL LITIGATION & ESTATE LITIGATION • TORONTO FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Canadian Bar Association: Keep Mandatory Long-Form Census

The Canadian Bar Association has called upon federal Industry Minister Tony Clement to drop plans to scrap Canada's mandatory long-form census.

CTV reports:

OTTAWA — The group representing Canada's lawyers says changes to the census will make it tougher for people who suffer serious personal injuries to get proper compensation.

In a letter to Industry Minister Tony Clement, the Canadian Bar Association calls for the return of the mandatory long-form census, saying lawyers and judges use the information to help determine how much injured clients should claim in court.

The association says the ditching of the mandatory form will especially hurt women, children, the disabled and others without a regular work history.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Update:

Strangely, the CTV link above has been edited, and no longer references the CBA position. The actual CBA press release is here.

GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Coming Soon: The Conservative Party Infomercial Channel?

Warren Kinsella is surprisingly too kind to his friend, Kory Teneycke, a Conservative party stalwart who has made application to the CRTC to bring a Fox-News style cable channel to Canada's airwaves.

Mr. Kinsella simply could have pointed out the obvious - this appears little more than a barely-veiled attempt to launch a Conservative Party infomercial channel, not a news channel at all.

No, thanks.

(Or as Don Newman succinctly put it, "the absolute last thing this country needs.")

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Former SCC Justice John Major Speaks Out Against Bilingual Court Bill

Former Supreme Court of Canada Justice John Major spoke out earlier this week against Bill C-232, legislation now before the Senate that would require that all future appointees to the Supreme Court be functionally bilingual.

As reported by the Ottawa Citizen:

The issue, which has quietly simmered for about two years, has erupted into fierce debate in legal and language-rights circles, with retired Supreme Court judge John Major leading the charge against the pending legislation.

"The stakes are so high in some cases you just want the best people you can get," said Major, a unilingual Calgarian.

"If the test is the most competent versus the most competent who is somewhat bilingual, my own opinion is that I want the most competent judge.

"It's the same as surgery. I want the best doctor, I don't want the linguist."

Major predicted that the bill, if it becomes law, will be impossible to implement in Western Canada, where the vast majority of lawyers and judges do not speak French.

"The chances are the most competent judge will have spent a lifetime in English."

"You'd have to go quite a way down the line to find the bilingual one, which most of the time, in this part of the world, means compromising legal ability," Major said.

Mr. Justice John C. Major served on the Supreme Court of Canada from 1992 to 2005. His Supreme Court of Canada biography is here.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

The Argument for a Bilingual Supreme Court of Canada

Jean Leclair, professor of constitutional law at the Université de Montréal, delivers a forceful argument in today's Montreal Gazette in favour of legislation, currently before the Senate, requiring that future Supreme Court of Canada appointees be functionally bilingual:

Bilingualism for Supreme Court justices is necessary not just from a symbolic standpoint; it is an issue of competence.

Not only does a unilingual English judge lack direct access to scholarship or decisions written in French, but more importantly, the Constitution itself expressly states that both the French and English versions of federal legislation have official status. As a consequence, to interpret an ambiguous federal provision, judges must be knowledgeable in both languages since "a principle of bilingual statutory interpretation holds that where one version is ambiguous and the other is clear and unequivocal, the common meaning of the two versions would a-priori be preferred" (Daoust, 2004 SCC 6).

...If unilingual anglophones are to be appointed to the Supreme Court, cut the competence nonsense. Just tell us that French is not an important asset for potential appointees. This would come as no surprise to Quebec jurists as Canada is the only multilingual federation where one - outside Quebec - can be hired to teach constitutional law without being able to read, let alone understand, the literature written in both official languages.

While Professor Leclair's flippant dismissal of the "compentency argument" as nonsense is not particularly convincing, the balance of his position provides a strong articulatation of the statutory interpretation aspect of the pro-bilingualism argument.

I am not sure, however, how frequently the Court's determination of a matter will depend on resolving the kinds of linguistic ambiguities Professor Leclair cites as decisive in this debate.

It would be a significant stretch, in my view, to elevate that occasional interpretive chore to the level of deal-breaker, at the expense of all other considerations, in selection of the most qualified judges for Canada's highest court.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Bilingual Supreme Court of Canada Bill to Die in Senate?

Via Big City Liberal:

Here is Manitoba Senator Donald Neil Plett, a Harper appointee:

"I am very proud to say that our Government is guided by the principles of merit and legal excellence in the selection and appointment of judges to Canada’s superior and federal courts. Therefore, we will not support Mr. Godin’s Bill.

Bill C-232 would hinder regional representation by reducing the pool of highly qualified candidates from regions where fewer individuals are capable of hearing a case in both official languages."

Notice the use of "we"; I am assuming this means that the Tory Senators will be voting as a bloc, and not that Mr. Plett prefers the majestic plural.

I've previously articulated my own opposition to Bill C-232 here and here.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

More on the 'Bilingual Supeme Court of Canada' Bill

Canadian Press reports on the legal community's reaction to Bill C-232, an Act to require that all future Supreme Court nominees be functionally bilingual:

Reviews from the legal community are scathing.

"Stupid," "scary," "ill-conceived" and "pandering" are just some of the adjectives used to describe New Brunswick MP Yvon Godin's proposal -- and those come from lawyers and jurists who believe the bill is actually well-intentioned.

"I think it's a bad idea; a very, very bad idea," said David Scott, a pre-eminent Ottawa lawyer who has represented federal commissions of inquiry, the Government of Canada and former prime minister Jean Chretien.

To reiterate my own views:

This vital judicial institution should not be compromised on the altar of feel-good politics.

The proposed amendment is a truly bad idea that should be dropped.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Bilingualism and the Supreme Court of Canada

The National Post gets it right on Bill C-232, which will amend the Supreme Court Act to require that all future appointees to the Court be functionally bilingual in French and English, Canada's two official languages:

If Bill C-232--a private member's bill that passed in the House of Commons last month -- is approved by the Senate, future seats on the Supreme Court of Canada will be reserved only for judges who are fluently bilingual. Judges who speak only French or only English will be barred. This puts the linguistic cart before the judicial horse and makes language skills more important than legal acumen. It also ensures that in the future our top court will be dominated by judges from Quebec and small pockets of bilingualism in Ottawa and New Brunswick.

If Mr. Godin's bill were already the law of the land, only two of the current sitting justices would have qualified for their current posts; none of the English-speaking judges would have. Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, for instance, would not have made it, despite being one of the most competent chief justices in recent history. Are she and the other half dozen unilingual French or English judges unfit as a result of their unilingual ability? Is the need for judges to have arguments translated really threatening justice at our highest court?

...According to the last census, 42% of francophones claim fluency in both official languages, while just under 10% of anglophones do. But only tiny fractions of both bilingual populations would ever be fluent enough to make it to the court. Should Mr. Godin's bill pass the Senate, the Supreme Court would become so unreflective of this country's people it would rapidly lose credibility as a national institution.

The Bill, which is now before the Senate after passing Third Reading in the House on March 31, 2010, provides:

An Act to amend the Supreme Court Act (understanding the official languages)

1. Section 5 of the Supreme Court Act is renumbered as subsection 5(1) and is amended by adding the following:

(2) In addition, any person referred to in subsection (1) may be appointed a judge who understands French and English without the assistance of an interpreter.

It is difficult to envision how the proposed change will result in a more qualified and competent Supreme Court of Canada, at least based on today's Canadian demographics.

This vital judicial institution should not be compromised on the altar of feel-good politics.

The proposed amendment is a truly bad idea that should be dropped.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Rick Mercer on the Harper Prorogue and Afghanistan

Rick Mercer:

It is ironic that while our parliament has been suspended we are a nation at war. On New Year's Eve we greeted the news that five Canadians were killed in a single day with sadness but not surprise. We are at war because ostensibly we are helping bring democracy to Afghanistan. How the mission is progressing is open for debate but this much is certain – at present there is a parliament in Afghanistan that it is very much open for business. Canada has no such institution.

In Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai's government faces fierce opposition at every turn; many of his cabinet choices have been rejected in a secret ballot by the more than 200 parliamentarians that sit in the legislature. Simply closing parliament down and operating without their consent is not an option for Hamid Karzai; to do so would be blatantly undemocratic or at the very least downright Canadian...

(via Alison at Golloping Beaver)

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Canada's Chief Justice: Government, Courts Must Respect Civil Liberties in War on Terror

Canada.com reports on comments by the Supreme Court of Canada's Chief Justice, Beverley MacLachlin at an Ottawa event yesterday:

OTTAWA — Canada's most senior judge cautioned Tuesday against going overboard in the fight against terrorism by putting too much emphasis on the 9/11 attacks in the U.S. at the expense of sacrificing civil rights and charter protections.

Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin's warning that lawmakers, judges and citizens must heed the big picture comes as the federal government's war on terror is taking a beating in the nation's courts.

"The fear and anger that terrorism produces may cause leaders to make war on targets that may or may not be connected with the terrorist incident," McLachlin told the Ottawa Women's Canadian Club in a luncheon speech Tuesday.

"Or perhaps it may lead governments to curtail civil liberties and seek recourse in tactics they might otherwise deplore . . . that may not, in the clearer light of retrospect, be necessary or defensible."

...The challenge in putting civil liberties on equal footing is that terrorist acts themselves breed fear that "there is a terrorist around every corner" who must be caught at all costs, she said.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Ottawa's Strange Bedfellows

From the irrepressible LeDaro (Harper survives confidence vote):

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

The Conservative-NDP Coalition

Read about it.

Who was it, again, who said that coalition with the "socialists" is a bad thing that "will do long term, real damage to the country?"

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Update - September 16, 2009

Make that the Conservative-Socialist-Separatist coalition.

- GJW

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Jeff Jedras: On "Scary Stephen" and the Secret Harper Tapes

National Post contributor Jeff Jedras on the significance of the secret Harper videotapes:

No, what is damning about that tape, what will not be part of the public pitch the Conservatives will be making, is the foreshadowing of what a Conservative government would do with its majority. It was a brief re-emergence of the Scary Steve that Harper has largely managed to hide in government.

He ranted against socialists and separatists, he complained about left-wing ideologues on the courts and in the public service, he equated groups that fought for rights for minorities, for the disabled, for women, as left-wing fringe groups. He mocked multilateralism in foreign policy. He re-emphasized that he wants to get rid of the gun registry. He mocked government-sponsored child care programs.

And in addition to the message was the tone: angry, spiteful, negative. A very different message and tone then sweater-vest Steve.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Harper Unplugged: Liberal Government Would Do "Long-Term, Real Damage to Canada"

Judging by his inflamed rhetoric at a recent "closed to the media" Conservative Party session in Northern Ontario, it appears our Prime Minister fears that a Liberal government may soon be in the cards:

"Do not be fooled for a moment. If we do not get a majority, the Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois will combine and they will form a government. They will deny this until they're blue in the face in an election campaign, but I guarantee you, if we do not win a majority, this government will have a Liberal Government, propped up by the socialists and the separatists. That government may not last very long, but every day it is in office it will do long term, real damage to this country. This country cannot afford a government like that. If they force us to the polls - if they get together and force us to the polls - we have to teach them a lesson and get back there with a majority and make sure their little coalition never happens."

Funny, I thought it was the current Harper government whose likely, short-lived survival has entirely depended on prop-ups from the "socialists and separatists."

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Kinsella on Kinsella

Richard Albert has a light-hearted and entertaining profile of Warren Kinsella, Liberal Party strategist extraordinaire, in The Politic today.

See: Warren Kinsella: Prince of Darkness

Most amusing is Mr. Kinsella's discussion of his 1997 electoral loss as candidate in B.C.'s Vancouver South riding:

Honest to God: I ran because I felt I had a contribution to make. At the time, my wife thought I was crazier than usual–I think she voted against me, truth be told–but it was an honour and privilege. We hadn’t won the riding in a generation, but it seemed like the right thing to do at the time.

Some folks insinuate that I was parachuted into the riding, but that isn’t true: I fought for months to get the nomination, and was thrilled when I won it at a nomination meeting. But a variety of factors (calling an election during the ’97 Winnipeg flood was one) led to my keester getting kicked.

My wife, then pregnant with the second of four children, was delighted.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG

Canada's Mayors Respond to "Buy American" Plan

Canada's mayors have announced their own plan for retailiation against U.S. "buy-American" mandates.

From CBC's Canadian mayors pass anti-'Buy American' resolution:

In response to the 'Buy American' provisions of the U.S. stimulus package, Canada's mayors narrowly passed a resolution Saturday that could potentially block U.S. companies from bidding on city contracts.

The resolution was passed at the Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference in Whistler, B.C., by a vote of 189-175.

The resolution says the federation should support cities that adopt policies that allow them to buy only from companies whose home countries do not impose trade restrictions against Canadian goods.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WISE LAW BLOG • SUBSCRIBE TO WISE LAW BLOG