As they’ve decided they run the country anyway;
This morning, Federal Court of Canada Justice Anne Mactavish delivered a sharply worded judgement slamming a decision, made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s cabinet, to deny some refugee claimants the benefits of Canada’s publicly funded health care system.
Except that they aren’t “refugees”.
And they’re “benefits” not available to us.
Here’s her contact info.
The Government needs to hold firm on this one or we are being run by an unelected body, Socialist to the core, and we may as well forget about voting, our democracy is a farce. If this doesn’t anger the masses we’re doomed.
We the people need to rise up and fast, bombard this individual with our displeasure.
The Federal Court is a joke. They have a very high percentage of their stupid decisions overturned. But all that said, it is long past time to put the judiciary in its place. That is, after all, why the Notwithstanding Clause was put into the Constitution. And it has as much validity as the Constitution itself. So use it and use it often.
Quebec routinely uses the notwithstanding clause and the point is being reached that the federal government will have to use it simply to govern. The Supreme Court is attempting to micromanage governance. This cannot be what the Lord God Trudeau intended.
Hold fast Mr. Prime Minister Stephen Harper,
The SC judges are in place to interpret Canadian Law as written by duly elected Parliamentarians and not meant to re-write the LAW OF THE LAND!
I AM, Joseph Molnar, Woodstock Ontario, Canada.
Time to adopt an immigration policy similar to Australia’s.
Well, the judge can always put her money where her big mouth is. If I don’t care about giving refugees special medical services, no amount of gnashing of teeth is going to give her or anyone else the right to force me to part with my property. In fact, if it’s a progressive nitwit doing the gnashing, these days I am even less sympathetic.
Contact info?? Despite a judge taking upon themselves the job of a politician, they may not appreciate being criticized for their enlightened legislation. The old girl might even imagine herself quite the democrat, personally saving the free world. Careful!
Sent ‘my judgement’ of her 256 page dissertation. As her premise was flawed she wasted a lot of her time. And mine. Everybody needs a little shove once in awhile to remember to be humble.
She sent back American deserters and that withstood Supreme Court challenge when they refused to hear it. She’s not totally hopeless, she just thinks people awaiting deportation deserve more free stuff than my kids. American deserters made me shake my head because all they had to do was resign the military with a less than honorable discharge. Anyone who is stupid enough to join the military not realizing they might have to fight a war should be supervising range targets.
Canadian Justice is not about the Rule of Law. “It must conform to the UN code of Social Justice”.. so said a (U of Sask) professor of law in his opinion letter to the leader Post (2005)
A Canadian Lawyer/Judge is a glorified social worker
Any complaints should go to Ban Ki-Moon..Fools!
C&P of my email sent just now. Good afternoon.
I must admit that this is a rather curious decision you’ve handed down from Mt. Sinai.
The first question that needs to be asked is “How is it that those who are not Canadian get more extensive and free (as in “have not paid into the system” free) healthcare than the 34 million or so Canadians have access to? If those of us who actually pay taxes are subsidizing those that have no rights to our health care, dentistry and other myriad services, why should we bother?
Secondly, perhaps one might use a little less shaming and emotional language if one is supposed to be respected as a member of Canada’s Federal bench. Why would one feel the need to insert “innocent and vulnerable children” into a bench judgment? Indeed the saying is correct: if one says something is “for the children”, a whole bunch of adults are about to be treated like some.
Third, why are you referencing the Charter when those who have been denied their claims are not Canadian? Why would someone who is not Canadian have any standing whatsoever with regards to any Charter clauses? The Charter exists for Canadians, not for those who seek to fraudulently claim things that are not theirs.
Finally, these benefits are for those who have already been denied refugee status since, well, it’s unfounded. The only benefit they should have coming to them is a coach seat on the first jet headed in their home nation’s general direction.
Perhaps a little less leftism and socialism might be warranted in any future judgments you seek to burden us Canadians with, no?
Thanks.
“He has made his decision, now let *him* enforce it!” – Andrew Jackson.
Maybe we could do with a little of that in this country. It seems the courts simply will not allow nor tolerate a democratically elected responsible government answerable to Parliament making any decisions that go against left-wing dogma.
It’s past time for this government to truly grow a spine and start invoking the Notwithstanding Clause. It should have been done for Insite. If they’d done it then, closed that abomination of a facility down, and stuck to their guns, they’d have won over a lot of their base who think they’ve gone soft, established the precedent, and delivered a much-needed message to our judicial overlords to mind their place in our system of government.
Probably too late now. The judges know that Harper won’t fight back, so they feel completely unrestrained in slapping him around at every turn these days.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: this fascination with the “Rule of Law” is going to come back and bite us in the rear. The elevation of the “lawyer” class to some kind of ruling elite coupled with the fact that the “law” means whatever the hell that elite say it means ensures that any liberty we had will be removed through onerous legislation that only they can interpret. See bill C68 with the greyer than fog storage rules for but one example.
The PM probably won’t challenge this because the “court of public opinion” will be against him, as usual, and most Canadians have sucked the “we CARE about people, not like those dastardly Americans” propaganda from the teat of “progressiveness”.
Several points to remember before jumping all over this.
Orders in Council are NOT law. The judge might well have treated this very differently if the IFHP 2012 policy had been implemented by legislation rather than Cabinet order.
The suggestion to elect judges is probably foolish. If you think that judicial activism is a problem now, just look at the shambles in the United States.
You need to read carefully paragraphs approximately 930-950. This is the core of the legal finding the judge makes. Looks to me like the GOC screwed up royally in presenting the legal arguments as to why IFHP 2012 should remain in force.
Issues of fairness are muted by the fact that refugees, legitimate or not, often come to Canada with health problems including communicable diseases that constitute a public health concern. So of course they have immediate health requirements not required for Canadian citizens. We do not live in a country where tuberculosis is endemic.
Finally, the actual finding does not overthrow IFHP 2012. It suspends it for four months for the government to develop a response to the court’s ruling.
It’s time for the people of Canada to start a class action suit against the federal court. This descision is totally ridiculous. Surely there is a lawyer around who will take this on Pro Bono. It’s time for Judges to be elected
“Orders in Council are NOT law.”
Oh? Funny, I could have sworn that OIC’s were used to restrict and/or deprive Canadians of their property.
Orders in council are laws no different from that written directly in legislation and lots of people convicted for breaking an order in council are in the same prison.
Shambles?
We have an unelected body not interpreting the law but designing it. The Americans have their state’s rights and the Constitution. We have cronyism and Trudeau’s failed legacy.
So the judge is saying that having the health care system my kids have is cruel and unusual punishment. That is friggin weird.
With you scar. As a self employed person, I have the came cruel and unusual punishment which is embellished by the fact I live in Liberal Ontario where I would have to wait months to access some treatments. I am sure the judge in question has a gold plated plan paid for by my taxes.
What the hell is happening?
The judges don’t make laws and can’t slam government (except socialist).
They have no right to dictate to the Canadians what they should pay for.
This is dictatorship by proxy, the unelected, unaccountable former lawyers, need to say one more.
And furthermore, the parliament of this country should strip the judges from immunity of And furthermore and so on and so forth (as the bottom feeders like to say) the parliament should pass a law to prevent the judges to alter laws just because they say so, they have no capacity to do these things.
Those characters live in a cocoon, they are so removed from everyday working stiffs its like they live on another bloody planet.
More later.
This really sucks and your correspondent is an immigrant.
Time for the Government to grow a set of balls and show these unelected unaccountable socialist dictators who really runs this country. I’m absolutely sick and tired of “judges” making shit up as they go along… How do these effing judges become so arrogant and stupid that they believe they run the damn country. Start using the Not withstanding clause of Trudeaus Charter of elitist rules as we go… and to Judge Mackintosh, you wanna be a politician, then run for office you effing idiot!
That’s not jurisprudential language, it’s emotional, overtly politicized, activist language.
Note too the passive voice: “..shocks the conscience…”
The sentence should have ended as this:
……should strip the judges from immunity of criticism from anyone that choses to do so.
One commenter sez (sic) this:
You need to read carefully paragraphs approximately 930-950.
Well, who wrote that?
Of course it was another lawyer that wrote the stupid thing for future make work consideration.
If not, he or she should be obviously fired for total incompetence.
You think, that is going to happen?
There is a bridge in Florida swam for cheap.
People, don’t doubt this, the bottom feeders write these stupid things to make financial kill in future. Otherwise they would have no way to charge obscene amounts for spewing shit.
Now do you all see why I stopped voting several years ago? There is no point anymore in even voting your choice of candidate. Why not just let these f**ktard judges rule us, and be done with it. Perhaps when Canadians care enough to make judicial appointments an election issue, you might get somewhere. Till then, I’ve got far better uses for a nice weekday evening than playing charades with Elections Canada.
“Yes, judges are bad and the Charter is bad. How dare the courts rule against the Fuhrer’s laws? If only the Fuhrer was supreme.”
Scratch a Conservative and you find a fascist…
My gosh, between dealing with city council in my hometown of Nanaimo and activist judges in Ontario, I’m getting mighty tired of tilting at windmills. Nonetheless, here’s what I sent to Judge McTavish:
—————————–
Dear Judge McTavish;
With all due respect, as a Canadian citizen and lifelong taxpayer I am fed up with unelected persons such as yourself, determining public policy. Determining public policy is the reason we have elections. How is it that your ‘infinite wisdom’ trumps that of the Members of Parliament whom we choose to make law on our behalf?
Regarding your edict that the government (read: taxpaying Canadians) are responsible for the medical needs of refugee claimants from Afghanistan and Iraq, need I remind you that the peoples of these regions have been making war upon one another for more than ten centuries and that they will likely continue doing so well into the future. Canada is a generous nation, but we are not responsible for the tragic needs of every refugee created due to political/social/religious conflict. Like many apparent ‘progressives’ you may well claim the moral high ground, professing to have your personal “conscience shocked” and yours standard of decency “outraged”. And like many progressives, you expect everyone else to assuage your outrage with public money.
Meanwhile, I spent yesterday afternoon with my wife and twelve other patients who have waited a year or more for knee surgery – and this in a small town of 43,000 people. Multiply this by similar situations in every community in Canada. Apparently lifelong Canadians should have no “legitimate expectation on the part of the stakeholders” for a reasonable standard of care. Where is your outrage that seniors, citizens of Canada who have contributed not only to the ‘system’ but to your generous salary and pension, suffer pain and misery while waiting unconscionable time for treatment?
I empathize with those who suffer at the hands of tyrants, despots and radical religious leaders, but my point is that it is up to our duly elected officials to make those decisions and not up to someone with a lawyer’s education and fortunate enough to be ‘chosen’ to a federal judgeship, who then takes it upon themselves to determine public policy.
“It’s Time To Elect Our Judges”
Hey. You spelled Eject incorrectly.
Scratch a Conservative and you find a fascist…
Posted by: lberia on July 4, 2014 10:34 PM
Scratch lberia and you get shit under your fingernails.
Iberia “Scratch a Conservative and you find a fascist…”
Makes no sense. Most Conservatives want less government. Iberia – do your nails!
Lawyer (and Judges) are loyal to the Bar. By extension, Lawyer politicians’ loyalties to the Bar take precedence over their responsibilities to their electorate.
Born Canadians are just slaves to Illegals is what this judgement amounts to. Time to be able by vote to rescind Court appointments . To have the power by populace to impeach these collectivists from the Trudeau era. Being born Canadian means nothing, you haver to have racial identity, or be an enemy of our Nation to get justice, now even healthcare these interlopers demand. With the shameful cabal of lawyers & ambulance chasing doctors.
Judicial activism is a stain on democracy.
e-mail sent !! it aint nice either
Mine sent as well.
Now, if somebody could just provide an e-mail for the Supreme court.
I have glanced only at paragraphs 930-950 so far.
Section 12 of the Charter of Rights states that “Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel or unusual treatment or punishment”. I would have thought this applied to legal punishments for crimes committed, not to the removal of a tax-paid freebie. When “social programs” are interpreted to include the “right” to live at everyone else’s expense, then the country will go down the toilet in quick succession. This is the inevitable result of the 2011 InSite ruling, one of the worst in the history of the Supreme Court of Canada. At least one SCC judge (Louise Arbour) tried to pull a fast one of this nature in the 2002 Gosselin case, but the rest of the Court didn’t go along with it.
Commentators far more knowledgeable than I have argued that you can have widespread immigration or a welfare state, but not both. It’s time to move the welfare state into the voluntary charity sector where it belongs.