The Shotgun Blog
« Stephen Harper issues statement on Holocaust Remembrance Day | Main | Mia Farrow to fast to end violence in Darfur. Why not binge drink instead? »
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Shaking up Canada's human rights commissions
Dan Shapiro with the Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership has reviewed Ezra Levant's Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights.
Published here on the Western Standard, Shapiro writes:
Ezra Levant, accused of violating human rights law for publishing the infamous Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, has written a book which tells of his experiences in the maw of the Alberta Human Rights Commission and makes a principled case for better protecting freedom of speech in Canada.
Using rulings from several jurisdictions, Shakedown: How Our Government is Undermining Democracy in the Name of Human Rights, depicts Canada’s Human Rights Commissions (HRC) as a “grievance industry,” – a weed, you might say – soaking up taxpayer dollars to combat fictitious discrimination.
And Levant yields his weed wacker with abandon: rather than pruning out only some of the Commissions’ powers, he indiscriminately razes the flower bed itself.
So, are you a "pruner," someone like Shapiro who believes Canada's human rights commissions should be reformed to protect free speech, leaving everything else in the "flower bed" in place? Or are you a "weeder," someone like Levant who would pull these commissions out by the roots?
Posted by Matthew Johnston
Posted by westernstandard on April 22, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
Reform is simply not possible. They along with hate crime laws are contrary to any democratic and free society. Laws exist already to deal with real issues and there must be no right not to feel offended. As for hate crime laws, a crime is a crime and to assume that others know what the perpetrator's thoughts were at the time is ridiculous.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-04-22 2:08:00 PM
Somehow, I tend to go with Ezra as the Human Rights commissions along with the Liberal Party of Canada seem not to have noticed the slapping they have been getting in almost every MSM paper and among bloggers.
This link to Page 26 of the LPC Policy document (courtest of Blazing Cat Fur) suggests they are just waiting for a change in government. And now "Social Condition" as a grounds for discrimination?
Name that tune "What condition is your condition in"?
"124. Human Rights Commission
WHEREAS visible minorities, refugees, women, seniors and children are subject to discrimination and injustice that is not addressed by federal legislation;
WHEREAS
• Canada has ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, without adopting an overall policy reflecting its commitments;
• the Immigration and Refugee Board has not established the Refugee Appeals Division required by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act;
• the country does not have a federal office monitoring the implementation of its national and international commitments;
WHEREAS the CHRC has a limited mandate that does not include the power to reprimand or prosecute and federal responsibility for human rights is divided among several non-centralized government agencies;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the next government to ensure that:
• the mandate of the CHRC is expanded to include type of citizenship status and socio-economic class as a ground of discrimination;
• all legislative bodies, needs and recommendations for the protection of human rights be centralized in the CHRC;
• the CHRC be given the power to monitor the implementation of our commitments and obligations to enforce its recommendations;
• the CHRC be accountable to the House of Commons and be given an appropriate budget;
• the CHRC put in place temporary or standing sub-commissions such as a sub-commission for children and a sub-commission for gender equity and equality."
Posted by: The LS from Sk | 2009-04-22 2:15:40 PM
What do you expect? The Liberal party specifically targets female voters. And what better way to get a woman's ear than to pretend to be interested in her problems and promise special treatment?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-04-22 2:24:47 PM
This LPC disaster would make Canada a concentration camp, freedom-of-speech-wise.
Posted by: dewp | 2009-04-22 2:25:27 PM
Dewp, women as a whole have never had much use for the rule of law. When applied fairly, everyone is equal. They don't want to be equal; they want what they want and won't take kindly to anything that says they can't have it. To be fair, you can also observe such behaviour among men, particularly in trade unions.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-04-22 2:50:45 PM
It is not just the woman and child part that is odd. It was this little add on bit of EMPIRE Building that scares me. The Marxist/Stalinist elements are really pushing.
WHEREAS the CHRC has a limited mandate that does not include the power to reprimand or prosecute and federal responsibility for human rights is divided among several non-centralized government agencies;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the next government to ensure that:
• the mandate of the CHRC is expanded to include type of citizenship status and socio-economic class as a ground of discrimination;
• all legislative bodies, needs and recommendations for the protection of human rights be centralized in the CHRC;
• the CHRC be given the power to monitor the implementation of our commitments and obligations to enforce its recommendations;
• the CHRC be accountable to the House of Commons and be given an appropriate budget;
Posted by: The LS from Sk | 2009-04-22 2:53:17 PM
"• the CHRC be accountable to the House of Commons and be given an appropriate budget;"
Zero?
Posted by: K Stricker | 2009-04-22 3:07:43 PM
I am a Caterpillar, not the bug, but the diesel-powered piece of earth moving equipment. A D4, D5 or D8. A fleet of them. The entire structure of our society must be dismantled so we can live peacefully, exclusively using voluntary exchange without the territorial monopoly of violence that 'government' has seized since we ceased being hunter-gatherers. 'Democracy' has only replaced the rule of institutionalized, hereditary nepotism, with rule by the purposefully disingenuous who tell the gullible whatever they want to hear. The next advancement of civilization is the end of involuntary 'shared' ownership of everything we have or make; to one where what we say, and what we own or do, as long as it is peaceful, is not dictated to by others. If I don't do things that hurt you, what I do is none of your damn business, even if I'm outnumbered 29,999,999 to 1. If you want to do something, pay for it yourself and stop stealing from me. You have no right to steal from me individually. You cannot transfer a right that you don't have to another entity you call 'government'. All government action that would be illegal for an individual, is solely enforceable through threats of violence. Not really a civilized way to run a 'free' country now is it? Dismantling the HRC is the tiniest possible baby step. The first step in a journey of thousands of miles.
Posted by: John Skillman | 2009-04-22 4:22:52 PM
John Skillman
"Not really a civilized way to run a 'free' country now"
We have not had a free country for many decades. It seems that all legislation is now driven by activists that know what's good for everyone else and the shallow end of the gene pool generates the most votes. The HRC is a prime example of that theory.It's a country dominated by weenies,whiners and wingnuts. They all know what's good for you......you will abide.
Posted by: peterj | 2009-04-24 10:47:19 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.