Not the appointment itself. Robert Astley, former president and CEO of Clarica Life Insurance Company, is a fine chair the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. But the timing, to a major federal position just before the election, is just not right.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
A new way to fulfill Maimonides highest degree of charity
An interesting, and legitimate, non-profit organization called Kiva (www.kiva.org), allows you to lend as little as $25 to a specific low-income entrepreneur in the developing world.
Small amounts of capital can jump start a business in the Third World. It's a bit like that old saying 'give a hungry man a fish you feed him today; teach a hungry man to fish and you feed him forever'.
Maimonides wrote of the Eight Degrees of Charity (Rambam, Hilchot Mat'not Ani'im 10:1,7) saying:
There are eight levels of charity, each greater than the next. The greatest level, above which there is no other, is to strengthen another by giving him a present or loan, or making a partnership with him, or finding him a job in order to strengthen his hand until he needs no longer [beg from] people. For it is said, "You shall strengthen the stranger and the dweller in your midst and live with him," {Leviticus XXV:35} that is to say, strengthen him until he needs no longer fall [upon the mercy of the community] or be in need.
Using Kiva you can fulfill Maimonides highest level of charity and in a practical way make the world a better place. You choose who to lend to - whether a baker in Afghanistan, a goat herder in Uganda, a farmer in Peru, a restaurateur in Cambodia, or a tailor in Iraq - and as they repay their loan, you get your money back. It is a powerful and sustainable way to help someone right now to lift themselves out of poverty.
Here's where you can join:
https://www.kiva.org/app.php?page=register&_isc=865762fc-cdbf-102b-ac3c-ecd46065da15
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
Small amounts of capital can jump start a business in the Third World. It's a bit like that old saying 'give a hungry man a fish you feed him today; teach a hungry man to fish and you feed him forever'.
Maimonides wrote of the Eight Degrees of Charity (Rambam, Hilchot Mat'not Ani'im 10:1,7) saying:
There are eight levels of charity, each greater than the next. The greatest level, above which there is no other, is to strengthen another by giving him a present or loan, or making a partnership with him, or finding him a job in order to strengthen his hand until he needs no longer [beg from] people. For it is said, "You shall strengthen the stranger and the dweller in your midst and live with him," {Leviticus XXV:35} that is to say, strengthen him until he needs no longer fall [upon the mercy of the community] or be in need.
Using Kiva you can fulfill Maimonides highest level of charity and in a practical way make the world a better place. You choose who to lend to - whether a baker in Afghanistan, a goat herder in Uganda, a farmer in Peru, a restaurateur in Cambodia, or a tailor in Iraq - and as they repay their loan, you get your money back. It is a powerful and sustainable way to help someone right now to lift themselves out of poverty.
Here's where you can join:
https://www.kiva.org/app.php?page=register&_isc=865762fc-cdbf-102b-ac3c-ecd46065da15
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
An election thought
"Remember that your virtuous deeds do not appear as virtuous to your foes; so view everyone with charity"
I read this in a prayer book today and thought just how true it is.
As we enter the election it is best to remember that all Parties (even the Bloc) are trying to do good for the peoples of Canada. We may disagree as to what should be done but all Parties are made up of people of good faith and honour.
They all deserve our respect.
Victims of Crime Left to Doubt Justice
As reported yesterday, with the case details and passages of the decision, Kelly Ellard won her appeal and has been sent back for a fourth trial in the killing of Reena Virk.
As a practical matter Ellard may make a deal whereby she pleads to, say, manslaughter and is released for time served (or something like that).
The trouble is not with this specific case -- the Court of Appeal decision seems sensible on its face -- but with the impression to the community as a whole.
Two high profile and old murder convictions were set aside yesterday -- this case and another in Ontario (also reported on this blog) -- and the public is entitled to ask 'why'? Aren't trials supposed to be speedy, conducted by judges learned in the law and, in general, final? How can a case be so difficult that it needs to be repeated four times?
Both cases that were overturned yesterday were convictions set aside in the face of very significant evidence suggesting guilt. It may be that in each case the convictions were unsafe but the community sees only the apparently guilty being given new trials where cogent evidence of guilt will not be used.
Virk family reels as Ellard wins fourth trial in beating death
ROD MICKLEBURGH
More than a decade after the death of their teenage daughter – swarmed, beaten, then drowned in a savage killing that drew worldwide attention – the heartaches for the family of Reena Virk keep on coming. In a stunning decision believed to be without legal precedent, the B.C. Court of Appeal has ordered yet another trial – a fourth – for Kelly Ellard, first convicted of second-degree murder eight years ago for her role in Reena's death.
"There are no words to describe the feeling that I have," Reena's mother, Suman Virk, said yesterday, staring blankly at reporters gathered outside her Victoria home. "Shock. Disbelief. I can't believe it."
The Virks and Reena's grandparents, Tarsen and Mukand Pallan, were in court throughout Ms. Ellard's preliminary hearing and three subsequent trials, full of grim details about Reena's slaying on a moonlit November night in 1997.
But now, with the latest setback, they say they are finished with the process.
"I think we want to wash our hands of this now, and live our life," father Manjit Virk said bitterly. "No more do I want to place any trust in this system. … It has become like a sad joke."
Majority Government? A word of caution
Pre election polls are often misleading because most people don't really consider who to vote for until the election begins. As a result, pre election polls can reflect unthinking responses -- responses that can change during an election.
That said, the polls are not meaningless.
A majority Conservative government would be in a position to pass whatever legislation in wanted without the hindrance of other parties or their views.
Perhaps this is what Canadians want -- but my sense is that the last Parliament, with the give and take amongst the various Parties worked fairly well.
Another minority term would not necessarily be so terrible. But that's not an easy argument to make -- vote against the Conservatives so as to ensure they proceed carefully once they win.
Frankly the better approach for Liberals is to say 'Our Party is better for Canada. Give us a mandate to govern'.
The Conservatives have done well insofar as they have adopted Liberal positions. The Conservative's best argument is that they are slightly bluer Liberals -- basically centre right, but only a little right and not an agent of radical change. They have to argue, in effect, elect us and we will still be what you already have. But remember, the Conservatives are not a middle of the spectrum Party -- the Red Tories are an extinct breed federally. (Pragmatic and sensible Tories exist but they aren't even slightly leftist).
Liberals are a big tent Party and, while focused on the centre, have room for those both right and left of the middle. (I am certainly on the right within the Liberal fold).
A Liberal majority government would be the same as a Liberal minority government -- broadly central, socially liberal, fiscally conservative.
A Conservative majority government might be the same as the minority has been -- but I doubt it. Without minority status and without a left wing in the Party to keep happy the Conservatives will inevitably drift right.
Fearing Harper could win a majority, rivals sound early alarm
CAMPBELL CLARK AND DANIEL LEBLANC From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Stephen Harper's opponents are breaking out sharp early warnings as polls suggest the Conservatives are rising toward majority-government territory, with the Bloc Québécois already saying the Tories are close, and the Liberals planning to start the campaign on an attack footing.
Even before the campaign begins Sunday, Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe issued the kind of stop-a-majority plea that is usually a last-ditch tactic. The Liberals, reluctant to follow suit because it implies they are ceding their chance at power, nonetheless hinted that the prospect of a Tory majority might shake up voters.
In Montreal on Friday, Mr. Duceppe used the Conservatives' boost in the polls to argue that Quebeckers must elect Bloc MPs or Mr. Harper will have free rein.
"His objective is to enact his hidden agenda in its entirety, in a majority government," Mr. Duceppe said at a news conference."That's what he wants, a majority government, and let's not fool ourselves, a majority is within his reach." The Liberals are preparing to open the campaign by attacking Mr. Harper's record in an attempt to hobble his advantage in the rankings as best person to be prime minister. They will leave their own platform for a second wave.
And while Liberal strategists deem an overt plea to prevent a Tory majority a strategic mistake – because it would imply they don't expect to win – some hinted the polls on the eve of this election campaign might at least shake up their voters.
"Canadians … will always have a thought in the back of their mind, which is, 'Imagine if this were a majority Conservative government,'" said Montreal Liberal MP Denis Coderre.The party's national campaign co-chairman, Senator David Smith, said: "A lot of people will be thinking that to themselves. But I'm not saying it."
On Friday, Mr. Harper removed any lingering doubts that he will call an election when his office announced he will visit Governor-General Michaëlle Jean tomorrow morning at 8:05 to ask her to dissolve Parliament. Election day is expected to be Oct. 14.
Mr. Harper directly called the head of the Canadian Jewish Congress to explain his decision to hold the vote at the start of the Jewish celebration of Sukkot, noting that people can vote in advance polls.
And on the last working day before the writ is dropped, Mr. Harper nominated a new Supreme Court judge, Thomas Cromwell, made a raft of political appointments and struck a deal with General Motors in which the company will commit to production and investment in two Ontario plants.
A Strategic Counsel poll in Tuesday's Globe and Mail showed that the Conservatives have 37 per cent support, placing them within striking distance of a majority government, typically reached at about 40 per cent.
On Thursday, the CBC released an Environics survey showing the Conservatives at 38 per cent, the Liberals at 28 per cent and the NDP at 19 per cent.
And a new poll by Innovative Research Group also shows the Tories moving in on majority territory.
Innovative Research Group does not re-distribute undecided voters in its surveys, but instead counts respondents that say they will vote for a party or are leaning toward it. And its results give the Conservatives a strong lead, with 36 per cent, compared with 29 per cent for the Liberals and 13 per cent for the NDP.
Full story here:
http://m.avantgo.com/ui?ag_url=52616e646f6d4956797ebed392be4fcfa59b2bf289f447c6c02bee8704e2efa18429fbbca057f60b8dc3c2c55d4b9f6507b520d28795820ae530cc4c62bebe3b469bdc3b6e042abda5a63844806b8af0&ag_channel=4179&showNav=0&ms=globeandmail
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
Friday, September 5, 2008
C. S. Forester
"But it is not the measure of a man's duty to avoid blame. "
St Elizabeth of Hungary, 1958
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
Details on New Supreme Court Judge
With thanks to "TRIWIA" for pointing out the link, here are some more details of the new nomination for S.C.C. appointment.
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal Judge Thomas Cromwell was nominated today to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court of Canada.
Thomas Cromwell's recent decisions on the Nova Scotia bench focused on family law and employment issues. He is said to be a ``generalist'' who is ``faithful to the text of the law but doesn't ignore the context either.''
The nomination cuts short the work of a Supreme Court Selection Panel made up of five members of parliament which has so far failed to provide a shortlist of candidates.
Cromwell, 56, who speaks English and French, will replace Justice Maurice Bastarache, who retired June 30.
Cromwell graduated with a law degree from Queens University in Kingston, Ontario, in 1976. He received a Bachelor of Civil Law degree from University of Oxford a year later. Cromwell was an executive legal officer at the Supreme Court of Canada from 1992 to 1995 and was appointed to the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal in 1997.
Nova Scotia Court of Appeal Judge Thomas Cromwell was nominated today to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court of Canada.
Thomas Cromwell's recent decisions on the Nova Scotia bench focused on family law and employment issues. He is said to be a ``generalist'' who is ``faithful to the text of the law but doesn't ignore the context either.''
The nomination cuts short the work of a Supreme Court Selection Panel made up of five members of parliament which has so far failed to provide a shortlist of candidates.
Cromwell, 56, who speaks English and French, will replace Justice Maurice Bastarache, who retired June 30.
Cromwell graduated with a law degree from Queens University in Kingston, Ontario, in 1976. He received a Bachelor of Civil Law degree from University of Oxford a year later. Cromwell was an executive legal officer at the Supreme Court of Canada from 1992 to 1995 and was appointed to the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal in 1997.
Virk Murder -- New Trial for Ellard
This has been a bad day for trial verdicts in homicide cases.
As can be seen below the British Columbia Court of Appeal has overturned, again, Kelly Ellard's conviction for murdering Reena Virk. I append a link to the CTV story and details from the B.C. Court's actual decision.
B.C. appeal court overturns Kelly Ellard's conviction
A B.C. woman will face a fourth trial in the murder of a Victoria teenager after the B.C. Court of Appeal overturned her conviction.
At her third trial in 2005, a jury convicted Kelly Ellard of second-degree murder in the 1997 death of Reena Virk.
The case grabbed national headlines because a swarm of teenaged girls had set upon Virk, a troubled and unpopular teen, beating her up and leaving her under a bridge in a Victoria suburb.
In its 60-page decision released Friday, the court said inconsistent testimony and the trial judge's charge to the jury on how one witness's testimony should be handled were the main reasons.
"The history of this case suggests in light of the error, the verdict cannot stand safely," Justice Edward Chiasson wrote in concurrence with Justice David Frankel, who wrote on behalf of the court.
Story here:
http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20080905%2fellard_court_080905
The case summary and most relevant passage of the decision follow:
The appellant appealed her conviction on a charge of second degree murder. She sought an acquittal on the basis that the verdict is unreasonable, or cannot be supported by the evidence. In the alternative, she sought a new trial on the basis that the trial judge erred in: (a) failing to give the jury a special caution with respect to the possibility of collusion between various Crown witnesses, and (b) permitting the Crown to re-examine a particular witness to show that she had made prior statements under oath consistent with her evidence at trial. Held: appeal allowed, and a new trial ordered. There was a body of evidence which, if accepted by the jury, supported its finding that the appellant had participated in killing the victim. In light of the manner in which the trial had been conducted there was no need for a special caution, as the jurors would have been well aware of the need to consider the potential for collusion between witnesses. However, the trial judge erred by failing to give the jury a limiting instruction with respect to the use that can properly be made of prior consistent statements. Low J.A. dissented on the basis that there was no need for such a limiting instruction.
For the decision of the Court:
[85] The most recent summary of the law regarding the inadmissibility of prior consistent statements, the exception when an allegation of recent fabrication is made, and the use to be made of such statements if they are admitted, is found in the judgment of Mr. Justice Bastarache in R. v. Stirling, 2008 SCC 10, 229 C.C.C. (3d) 257:
[5] It is well established that prior consistent statements are generally inadmissible (R. v. Evans, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 629; R. v. Simpson, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 3; R. v. Béland, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 398). This is because such statements are usually viewed as lacking probative value and being self-serving (Evans, at p. 643). There are, however, several exceptions to this general exclusionary rule, and one of these exceptions is that prior consistent statements can be admitted where it has been suggested that a witness has recently fabricated portions of his or her evidence (Evans, at p. 643; Simpson, at pp. 22-23). Admission on the basis of this exception does not require that an allegation of recent fabrication be expressly made — it is sufficient that the circumstances of the case reveal that the “apparent position of the opposing party is that there has been a prior contrivance” (Evans, at p. 643). It is also not necessary that a fabrication be particularly “recent”, as the issue is not the recency of the fabrication but rather whether the witness made up a false story at some point after the event that is the subject of his or her testimony actually occurred (R. v. O’Connor (1995), 100 C.C.C. (3d) 285 (Ont. C.A.), at pp. 294-95). Prior consistent statements have probative value in this context where they can illustrate that the witness’s story was the same even before a motivation to fabricate arose.
. . .
[7] However, a prior consistent statement that is admitted to rebut the suggestion of recent fabrication continues to lack any probative value beyond showing that the witness’s story did not change as a result of a new motive to fabricate. Importantly, it is impermissible to assume that because a witness has made the same statement in the past, he or she is more likely to be telling the truth, and any admitted prior consistent statements should not be assessed for the truth of their contents. As was noted in R. v. Divitaris (2004), 188 C.C.C. (3d) 390 (Ont. C.A.), at para. 28, “a concocted statement, repeated on more than one occasion, remains concocted”; see also J. Sopinka, S. N. Lederman and A. W. Bryant, The Law of Evidence in Canada (2nd ed. 1999), at p. 313). …
As can be seen below the British Columbia Court of Appeal has overturned, again, Kelly Ellard's conviction for murdering Reena Virk. I append a link to the CTV story and details from the B.C. Court's actual decision.
B.C. appeal court overturns Kelly Ellard's conviction
A B.C. woman will face a fourth trial in the murder of a Victoria teenager after the B.C. Court of Appeal overturned her conviction.
At her third trial in 2005, a jury convicted Kelly Ellard of second-degree murder in the 1997 death of Reena Virk.
The case grabbed national headlines because a swarm of teenaged girls had set upon Virk, a troubled and unpopular teen, beating her up and leaving her under a bridge in a Victoria suburb.
In its 60-page decision released Friday, the court said inconsistent testimony and the trial judge's charge to the jury on how one witness's testimony should be handled were the main reasons.
"The history of this case suggests in light of the error, the verdict cannot stand safely," Justice Edward Chiasson wrote in concurrence with Justice David Frankel, who wrote on behalf of the court.
Story here:
http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20080905%2fellard_court_080905
The case summary and most relevant passage of the decision follow:
The appellant appealed her conviction on a charge of second degree murder. She sought an acquittal on the basis that the verdict is unreasonable, or cannot be supported by the evidence. In the alternative, she sought a new trial on the basis that the trial judge erred in: (a) failing to give the jury a special caution with respect to the possibility of collusion between various Crown witnesses, and (b) permitting the Crown to re-examine a particular witness to show that she had made prior statements under oath consistent with her evidence at trial. Held: appeal allowed, and a new trial ordered. There was a body of evidence which, if accepted by the jury, supported its finding that the appellant had participated in killing the victim. In light of the manner in which the trial had been conducted there was no need for a special caution, as the jurors would have been well aware of the need to consider the potential for collusion between witnesses. However, the trial judge erred by failing to give the jury a limiting instruction with respect to the use that can properly be made of prior consistent statements. Low J.A. dissented on the basis that there was no need for such a limiting instruction.
For the decision of the Court:
[85] The most recent summary of the law regarding the inadmissibility of prior consistent statements, the exception when an allegation of recent fabrication is made, and the use to be made of such statements if they are admitted, is found in the judgment of Mr. Justice Bastarache in R. v. Stirling, 2008 SCC 10, 229 C.C.C. (3d) 257:
[5] It is well established that prior consistent statements are generally inadmissible (R. v. Evans, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 629; R. v. Simpson, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 3; R. v. Béland, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 398). This is because such statements are usually viewed as lacking probative value and being self-serving (Evans, at p. 643). There are, however, several exceptions to this general exclusionary rule, and one of these exceptions is that prior consistent statements can be admitted where it has been suggested that a witness has recently fabricated portions of his or her evidence (Evans, at p. 643; Simpson, at pp. 22-23). Admission on the basis of this exception does not require that an allegation of recent fabrication be expressly made — it is sufficient that the circumstances of the case reveal that the “apparent position of the opposing party is that there has been a prior contrivance” (Evans, at p. 643). It is also not necessary that a fabrication be particularly “recent”, as the issue is not the recency of the fabrication but rather whether the witness made up a false story at some point after the event that is the subject of his or her testimony actually occurred (R. v. O’Connor (1995), 100 C.C.C. (3d) 285 (Ont. C.A.), at pp. 294-95). Prior consistent statements have probative value in this context where they can illustrate that the witness’s story was the same even before a motivation to fabricate arose.
. . .
[7] However, a prior consistent statement that is admitted to rebut the suggestion of recent fabrication continues to lack any probative value beyond showing that the witness’s story did not change as a result of a new motive to fabricate. Importantly, it is impermissible to assume that because a witness has made the same statement in the past, he or she is more likely to be telling the truth, and any admitted prior consistent statements should not be assessed for the truth of their contents. As was noted in R. v. Divitaris (2004), 188 C.C.C. (3d) 390 (Ont. C.A.), at para. 28, “a concocted statement, repeated on more than one occasion, remains concocted”; see also J. Sopinka, S. N. Lederman and A. W. Bryant, The Law of Evidence in Canada (2nd ed. 1999), at p. 313). …
Thomas Cromwell for Supreme Court of Canada
Prime Minister Harper has just announced his appointment to replace Justice Bastarache, bypassing the committee system and before Parliament is dissolved.
Right to Counsel
Il guasti gridano fuori per vendetta
On April 13, 2001, Robert Badgerow was convicted of the first-degree murder of Diane Werendowicz.
Ms. Werendowicz’s body was found in a ravine in
Ms. Werendowicz’s murder remained unsolved for many years. In 1997, a police task force was formed to investigate a number of unsolved crimes that had taken place in the same ravine. As a result of scientific advances, DNA profiling was then available and the Centre for Forensic Sciences was able to extract a DNA profile from the semen found at the scene of the murder. The police sought DNA samples from several suspects, including Mr. Badgerow; he refused.
Forensic testing on something Mr. Badgerow used and threw away confirmed that his DNA matched the DNA profile of the semen found on Ms. Werendowicz’s body.
Mr. Badgerow was arrested for the murder of Ms. Werendowicz.
Following his arrest, he gave a videotaped statement to the police in which he denied knowing or recognizing the deceased or having any involvement in her murder. On being informed that the police had a DNA match, Mr. Badgerow said he did not have an explanation and it would be up to his lawyer to answer any more questions.
At trial, the Crown alleged that the appellant sexually assaulted Ms. Werendowicz in the ravine, strangled her with her purse, and drowned her in the creek. Among other things, the Crown relied on the DNA evidence, an audiotape of a 911 call made two days after the murder in which the caller provided details of the murder that were not widely known, the evidence of several witnesses who identified Mr. Badgerow’s voice as that of the 911 caller, and his statement to the police in which he denied any relationship with the deceased, an apparent fabrication.
Today’s decision of the Court of Appeal in R. v. Badgerow, 2008 ONCA 605 sets aside the conviction on the basis that Mr. Badgerow was not given a sufficient opportunity to talk to his lawyer before being questioned by the police.
The Court summarizes the facts regarding speaking to counsel as follows:
[10] Following his arrest, the appellant asked to speak to a specific lawyer, Neil Jones. When he was unable to reach Mr. Jones, he attempted to contact two other lawyers and eventually spoke to one of Mr. Jones’s partners. After a brief telephone conversation with the partner, the appellant told the arresting officer that he had instructed the partner to keep trying to get in touch with Mr. Jones. On being asked by the arresting officer if he was satisfied he had spoken to counsel, the appellant said yes, but asked if he could make another call. The arresting officer refused and proceeded to interview the appellant.
The Court ruled, as set out below, that the right to counsel was breached and there must be a new trial, presumably without the statements made to the police being adduced at trial.
[44] It is well established that the police have both informational and implementation duties in relation to s. 10(b) of the Charter. Where an accused asks to speak to a particular lawyer on arrest or detention, the police are obliged to give the accused a reasonable opportunity to exercise his or her right to counsel of choice and to hold off in questioning the accused so long as the accused is reasonably diligent in exercising the right: see, for example, R v. Bartle (1994), 92 C.C.C. (3d) 289 (S.C.C.); R. v. Manninen (1987), 34 C.C.C. (3d) 385 (S.C.C.).
[45] As the trial judge noted, there is also ample authority that what the police are required to say and do in a particular case to fulfill their duties under s. 10(b) will depend on what the accused says and does and what the police could reasonably surmise in the circumstances: see, for example, R. v. Ross (1989), 46 C.C.C. (3d) 129 (S.C.C.); R. v. Tremblay (1987), 37 C.C.C. (3d) 565 (S.C.C.); R. v. Top (1989), 48 C.C.C. (3d) 493 (Alta. C.A.).
[46] Although the police cannot be expected to be mind readers, they are not entitled to ignore statements by an accused that raise a reasonable prospect that the accused has not exercised his or her s. 10(b) rights. Rather, where an accused makes such a statement, the police must be diligent in ensuring that an accused has a reasonable opportunity to exercise his or her rights, and may not rely on answers to ambiguous questions as a basis for assuming that an accused has exercised his or her rights.
…
[56] Because the appellant was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to consult with counsel of his choice prior to making a statement to the police, he was deprived of the opportunity to obtain proper advice that would have allowed him to make an informed choice about whether to speak to the police. This is not a case in which it is obvious that the appellant was intent on making a statement; nor is it a case in which the reliability of the conscriptive evidence somehow obviates the impact on trial fairness of admitting the statement.
Some might wonder if the constitutional right to counsel was intended to apply so strictly and if so, whether in light of the nature of the evidence and the police officer’s good faith (as found by the trial judge), the administration of justice could be brought into disrepute by the evidence being admitted.
Mad-cow class action gets judge's clearance
This may be a very big case
The Globe and Mail
Kirk Makin
A $10-billion class action lawsuit targeting the federal government for economic losses caused by a devastating outbreak of mad-cow disease in 2003 has been given a green light to proceed.
Madam Justice Joan Lax of Ontario Superior Court permitted the class action yesterday by 115,000 cattle farmers to pass the all-important stage of legal certification, noting that the evidence they have amassed "speaks to the enormity of the economic consequences to cattle farmers from the discovery of bovine spongiform encephalopathy.
"BSE was a catastrophic event for Canadian cattle farmers," Judge Lax added.
The case will proceed to trial unless the defendants elect to settle - as is commonly the case after a class action is certified.
In her ruling, Judge Lax explicitly rejected a federal argument that a messy courtroom battle could play into the hands of the U.S. cattle lobby, which hopes to permanently close the border to Canadian beef and cattle products. "This may be a difficult political decision, but it is not a reason to deny certification," she said.
The class action faults federal inspectors for negligently allowing a situation where a single case of bovine spongiform encephalopathy - a fatal neurological disease in cattle that is transmitted when healthy cattle eat food containing the rendered remains of infected cattle - closed international borders to Canadian cattle.
The plaintiffs allege that the diseased cow was infected as a direct result of the failure of a federal program set up to monitor 198 cattle imported from Britain in the late 1980s. They claim that 80 of the 198 cattle, which could potentially have been exposed to BSE in Britain, were negligently allowed to enter the food chain.
Regardless of who was at fault, "BSE was a common disaster for cattle farmers," Judge Lax said yesterday. "Immediately following May 20, 2003, the livestock of all cattle farmers was worth significantly less. Cattle and calf receipts were cut in half. Foreign sales were eliminated for all."
Cameron Pallett, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in an interview that the government's failure in the case "wasn't just a screw-up, it was a cover-up.
"Given that the Prime Minister has continually brought to our attention his fundamental belief in family values - and given the widespread and incontrovertible suffering caused by the BSE crisis to hard-working Canadian farm families - one can only hope he would choose this moment to step up to the plate and compensate these people for the losses caused by the gross negligence of his predecessors," he said.
Government lawyers vigorously opposed certification before Judge Lax, arguing that the farmers' cases have little in common with one another, and that existing compensation programs offer a better solution to their problems.
However, Judge Lax said that the negligence issue can be resolved with relative speed at an eight- to 12-week trial, giving the farmers access to justice in a case where no individual farmer could possibly have taken on the government alone.
While the class action also targeted the company that allegedly manufactured the contaminated feed, Ridley Inc., Judge Lax approved a measure yesterday that effectively eliminates it from the legal fray.
Ridley agreed to pay a $6-million settlement to the plaintiffs - a sum that will be used to cover legal fees for the continuing litigation, Mr. Pallett said.
"Even if we had turned them into a smoking crater, Ridley didn't have enough money to provide meaningful compensation to the class members," Mr. Pallett remarked. "Not even close."
DAY OF PRAYER AND FASTING FOR CHRISTIANS IN INDIA
In light of the comments at the GOP Convention last night this Vatican story has special interest.
VATICAN CITY, 5 SEP 2008 (VIS) - The presidency of the Italian Episcopal Conference (CEI), taking up the appeal launched by Benedict XVI, has today(the liturgical memory of Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta) called allItalian dioceses to observe a day of prayer and fasting for Christians in India.
This initiative, which may also be celebrated on a different day established by the diocesan bishop, is "a sign of spiritual closeness and solidarity with our brothers and sisters of India, so sorely tried in the faith", says a CEI communique.
On 27 August, the Pope called for an immediate end to acts of violence against Christian communities in the Indian state of Orissa, which began following the murder of the Hindu leader Swami Lakshmananda Saraswati.
Benedict XVI invited "religious leaders and civil authorities to work together to restore among the members of the various communities the peaceful coexistence and harmony which have always been the distinguishing mark of Indian society".
For his part, Cardinal Varkey Vithayathil C.SS.R., major archbishop of Ernakulam-Angamaly of the Syro-Malabars and president of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of India, called all the dioceses of his country to observe a day of prayer and fasting on Sunday 7 September, so as to express "solidarity with all the victims and prayer for all our missionaries in India, who are facing most trying and difficult times for the sake of the Gospel".
VATICAN CITY, 5 SEP 2008 (VIS) - The presidency of the Italian Episcopal Conference (CEI), taking up the appeal launched by Benedict XVI, has today(the liturgical memory of Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta) called allItalian dioceses to observe a day of prayer and fasting for Christians in India.
This initiative, which may also be celebrated on a different day established by the diocesan bishop, is "a sign of spiritual closeness and solidarity with our brothers and sisters of India, so sorely tried in the faith", says a CEI communique.
On 27 August, the Pope called for an immediate end to acts of violence against Christian communities in the Indian state of Orissa, which began following the murder of the Hindu leader Swami Lakshmananda Saraswati.
Benedict XVI invited "religious leaders and civil authorities to work together to restore among the members of the various communities the peaceful coexistence and harmony which have always been the distinguishing mark of Indian society".
For his part, Cardinal Varkey Vithayathil C.SS.R., major archbishop of Ernakulam-Angamaly of the Syro-Malabars and president of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of India, called all the dioceses of his country to observe a day of prayer and fasting on Sunday 7 September, so as to express "solidarity with all the victims and prayer for all our missionaries in India, who are facing most trying and difficult times for the sake of the Gospel".
Green Shift Injunction -- Cui Bono?
The timing here is quite interesting.
I suppose it might be that the election will spur more reference to the Green Shift etc and that explains why there may be an injunction sought.
On the other hand there has been lots of time to move before now and bringing an injunction now as opposed to, say, two weeks ago, suggests there may be a reason to seek very public relief now. Cui Bono?
'Green Shift' firm steps up legal action against Grits
A Toronto-based environmental consulting firm has asked the courts to keep the Liberal Party of Canada and its candidates from using the name Green Shift for its policy platform.
Jennifer Wright, owner of Green Shift Inc., first accused the Liberals of infringing on the trademarked name of her company in July, but speculation of an imminent federal election moved her to get the case in front a judge as soon as possible.
"Basically I'm hoping to stop them from destroying our name because if it goes through an election we're forced with re-branding our entire company," Wright told CTV.ca in a phone interview Thursday. "We're just fighting to do everything we can to keep our name intact and to keep it associated with the environmental company and the integrity that it upholds and not have it politicized."
She added: "They are taking more and more of the ownership of the name every day, even in the way the media reports on them it becomes almost synonymous with the Liberal party."
Full story here:
http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20080904%2fgreenshift_suit_080904
I suppose it might be that the election will spur more reference to the Green Shift etc and that explains why there may be an injunction sought.
On the other hand there has been lots of time to move before now and bringing an injunction now as opposed to, say, two weeks ago, suggests there may be a reason to seek very public relief now. Cui Bono?
'Green Shift' firm steps up legal action against Grits
A Toronto-based environmental consulting firm has asked the courts to keep the Liberal Party of Canada and its candidates from using the name Green Shift for its policy platform.
Jennifer Wright, owner of Green Shift Inc., first accused the Liberals of infringing on the trademarked name of her company in July, but speculation of an imminent federal election moved her to get the case in front a judge as soon as possible.
"Basically I'm hoping to stop them from destroying our name because if it goes through an election we're forced with re-branding our entire company," Wright told CTV.ca in a phone interview Thursday. "We're just fighting to do everything we can to keep our name intact and to keep it associated with the environmental company and the integrity that it upholds and not have it politicized."
She added: "They are taking more and more of the ownership of the name every day, even in the way the media reports on them it becomes almost synonymous with the Liberal party."
Full story here:
http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20080904%2fgreenshift_suit_080904
The New CBC Radio -- Top 40 designed by a committee?
What is the deal with the New CBC?
CBC One is excellent and remains so. While I don't always agree with the political slant (and there is one) the programs are thorough and thoughtful -- public broadcasting worth listening to.
CBC Two was a bit sleepy. Classical music punctuated with silly chatter. But Canadian performers got a platform and no matter where you were in Canada you could get decent music.
No more.
CBC Two kept the chatter (if anything it's worse) but dumped the good music (ok, they have a show or two with classical but that's it). Turn on CBC Two and you hear a mix of hits from the 90's and recordings that aren't and weren't hits (for good reason).
It's a bit like the Lite-FM stations but with worse music and more talk. (And radio reports -- not CBC radio I might add -- say that CBC has blocked e-mail complaints about the format change from getting to the President of CBC).
Now I am listening, but I'm doing so to see if CBC Two is really as sad as it seems.
So far it is.
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
CBC One is excellent and remains so. While I don't always agree with the political slant (and there is one) the programs are thorough and thoughtful -- public broadcasting worth listening to.
CBC Two was a bit sleepy. Classical music punctuated with silly chatter. But Canadian performers got a platform and no matter where you were in Canada you could get decent music.
No more.
CBC Two kept the chatter (if anything it's worse) but dumped the good music (ok, they have a show or two with classical but that's it). Turn on CBC Two and you hear a mix of hits from the 90's and recordings that aren't and weren't hits (for good reason).
It's a bit like the Lite-FM stations but with worse music and more talk. (And radio reports -- not CBC radio I might add -- say that CBC has blocked e-mail complaints about the format change from getting to the President of CBC).
Now I am listening, but I'm doing so to see if CBC Two is really as sad as it seems.
So far it is.
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
McCain's Speech
He's hardly Obama in terms of lifting an audience but he plays to his strengths.
Strong, expressly praising Obama, talking of changing Washington (who was in power for the last few years? Space aliens?) the speech was solid.
McCain came across as realistic and a leader for tough times. Expectations for the speech were low and he exceeded them. The expectations for Obama's speech were so high no one could meet them. The result -- a McCain win, at least as regards convention speeches.
Obama needs to regroup -- my sense is that the Straight Talk Express is cruising along in high gear... .
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Military leaders
Watching the GOP Convention I was struck by the emphasis on military connections. McCain of course, a military hero from generations of soldiers. But also Palin; her ties to the military were emphasized.
Now, I am not opposed to the military -- I signed on to the Reserve myself out of a sense of duty (and yes adventure).
But civil leadership is a central feature of America's government and while a military background is not bad it's hard to see why it's necessary.
Unless, perhaps, a military background will give a sense of what force cannot do.
Maybe a nation at war needs a Commander in Chief who knows the military first hand.
Perhaps President Bush believed in 'Mission Accomplished' because he didn't have the first hand experience needed to know when, and when not, a situation is in hand?
If this is true then whither Canada? We are at war as well. And a nasty war too -- I support the mission but Afghanistan is no picnic. Perhaps we have been lucky in having leaders (of both Parties) who are modest and recognize, even without military background, the limits on force.
Now, I am not opposed to the military -- I signed on to the Reserve myself out of a sense of duty (and yes adventure).
But civil leadership is a central feature of America's government and while a military background is not bad it's hard to see why it's necessary.
Unless, perhaps, a military background will give a sense of what force cannot do.
Maybe a nation at war needs a Commander in Chief who knows the military first hand.
Perhaps President Bush believed in 'Mission Accomplished' because he didn't have the first hand experience needed to know when, and when not, a situation is in hand?
If this is true then whither Canada? We are at war as well. And a nasty war too -- I support the mission but Afghanistan is no picnic. Perhaps we have been lucky in having leaders (of both Parties) who are modest and recognize, even without military background, the limits on force.
Conservatives, Bloc in virtual tie in Quebec, poll finds
Quebec will be key in the coming election
RHÉAL SÉGUIN
From Friday's Globe and Mail
The Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois are deadlocked in a virtual tie in Quebec, with polling numbers suggesting that Stephen Harper is poised to make major inroads in the province as he prepares to call an election this weekend.
The poll conducted by Léger Marketing for The Globe and Mail and the Montreal daily Le Devoir finds that the majority of Quebeckers are satisfied with the Conservative government, but still perceive the Bloc as being best suited to defend Quebec's interests in Ottawa. The survey also finds Quebec voters have serious doubts about Stéphane Dion's leadership credentials.
According to the poll, voters have less confidence in the Liberal Leader than they do in Mr. Harper on issues such as the economy, public finances, inter-provincial relations and fighting the war in Afghanistan.
However, Mr. Dion is viewed as a stronger leader on the environment and in promoting Canadian and Quebec culture.
According to the poll, conducted between Aug. 29 and Sept. 3, 30 per cent of Quebeckers would vote for the Conservatives, another 30 per cent would vote Bloc Québécois, 23 per cent for the Liberals, 11 per cent for the NDP and 5 per cent for the Green Party.
"The question Quebeckers will be asking is do they want a majority Conservative government. If the answer is no they will vote Bloc, and if the answer is yes they will vote Conservative," said pollster Jean-Marc Léger, the president of Léger Marketing. "This is at the heart of the campaign in Quebec. Quebeckers believe Stephen Harper will form the next government. They just aren't sure yet whether it should be a majority or a minority government."
In the 2006 election, the Bloc received slightly more than 42 per cent of the vote, compared to the Tories' 25 per cent and the Liberals' nearly 20 per cent. The Bloc won 51 of the province's 75 ridings that year, the Liberals 13 and, in a major breakthrough, the Tories won 10 seats, mostly in the Quebec City region. Once again, the Harper Conservatives are striking at the heart of the Bloc's traditional support in the province's predominantly francophone areas. In the Quebec City region, the poll shows, the Conservatives have 50 per cent in popular support, well ahead of the Bloc Québécois at 20 per cent and the Liberals at 11 per cent.
In other predominantly francophone regions, the survey finds the Bloc holding on to the slimmest of leads with 35 per cent of popular support, followed closely by the Conservatives at 34 per cent, with the Liberals trailing at 20 per cent.
"The race is wide open, and outside of Montreal it is a two-way race between the Bloc and the Conservatives where the Liberals are being squeezed out of the picture," Mr. Léger said.
The Montreal region still remains fertile ground for Mr. Dion's Liberals, with 29 per cent of support, especially among the metropolitan area's anglophone and ethnic communities. Support for the Bloc was at 28 per cent in voter-rich Montreal, while the Harper Conservatives, who have yet to win a seat on the Island of Montreal, were at 22 per cent.
Full story here:
http://m.avantgo.com/ui?ag_url=52616e646f6d4956c3ba8aabcd5ef1150ba954e411353060ca3a9782af6840e548c9028316e3874baea72f1e0c103d7eb7d7f3aeaa74104eba852b6364690575a66b885dbd2202159789173569dcc25a&ag_channel=4179&showNav=0&ms=globeandmail
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
Keays and Wallace Damages in Wrongful Dismissal
A significant question in wrongful dismissal law is the impact of the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Keays on Wallace damages.
On the face of it Keays changes everything in terms of bad faith in wrongful dismissal.
The analysis in Keays (whether it decreases, or as some suggest, increase potential damages) is different in almost all respects from that in Wallace.
As a result, it is of great interest to see the analysis of the Court of Appeal dealing with Wallace damages not that Keays has been released.
Oddly, this week's Court of Appeal decision in Evangelista v. Number 7 Sales Limited, 2008 ONCA 599 deals with the Keays decision as if it did not change the law from Wallace.
The case rules:
Wallace Damages
[17] The appellant argues that the trial judge erred in awarding the respondent three months Wallace damages. In particular, the appellant takes issue with the trial judge's conclusion that there existed a "toxic work environment" when the appellant constructively dismissed the respondent.
[18] The trial judge carefully and thoroughly reviewed all of the circumstances surrounding the respondent's dismissal. He accepted the respondent's evidence and rejected the evidence of the appellant where it differed. He concluded that the appellant demonstrated palpable insensitivity in the manner in which it dealt with the respondent. The appellant was disingenuous and subjected the respondent to undue pressure at a time the respondent was in poor health. The respondent felt humiliated and let down by the conduct of the appellant. The trial judge's characterization of this environment as "toxic" was entirely reasonable.
[19] The trial judge's findings of fact supported an award of damages under the principles set out in Wallace v. United Grain Growers Ltd., [1997] 3 S.C.R. 701.
[20] After the argument of this appeal, the Supreme Court of Canada released its judgment in Honda Canada Inc. v. Keays, [2008] S.C.J. No. 40. Obviously, the trial and this appeal were not argued on the basis of the law as set out in Honda. That said, given the trial judge's strong findings of fact, I see no reason to interfere with the Wallace award.
Ivanhoe cheese Inc. recalls products for listeria contamination
Canada's food watchdog and Ivanhoe Cheese Inc. on Wednesday issued a recall of certain cheese products distributed in Ontario because they may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes.
The recall affects the following Ivanhoe, Great Canadian and Igbal products with best before dates ranging from Feb. 20 to March 1, 2009:
- Cheddar.
- Marble (Brick and Cheddar).
- Asiago.
- Gouda.
- Swiss.
- Parmesan.
- Mozzarella.
- Havarti.
- Colby.
- Brick.
- Feta.
The cheese products were sold in grocery stores and at deli counters.
Full story:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/cbc/080904/canada/consumer_ivanhoe_recall?printer=1
Conservatives bypassing election rules with pre-writ blitz of taxpayer-funded campaign literature
WINNIPEG - A nation-wide Conservative blitz of taxpayer-funded campaign literature in the weeks before a general election is an attempt to bypass electoral spending limits at public expense, Liberal Member of Parliament Mark Holland said today.
"Conservatives are abusing their House of Commons printing and mailing privileges because they know an election is coming," said Mr. Holland, MP for Ajax-Pickering, Ontario. "Now even some Conservatives are speaking out and saying this is wrong."
Mr. Holland pointed to comments made yesterday by retiring Red Deer Conservative MP Bob Mills, who said he doesn't agree with the mailings. Mr. Holland also noted that an Angus Reid poll released Monday showed half of Canadians polled believe a recent Conservative mailing was a violation of House of Commons rules because it is "in fact campaign material."
"I was especially struck that 36 per cent of people identifying themselves as Conservatives told the pollster the flyer is an abuse," said Mr. Holland. "Based on the calls to my office, I think this strategy is backfiring on Stephen Harper."
MPs are allowed to send bulletins called "householders" four times a year to their own constituents. Additionally, they can mail flyers called "ten percenters" within their ridings or elsewhere in Canada. Ten percenters may be sent as often as once a day, but the quantity that may be printed is limited to 10 per cent of the households in the sending MP's constituency.
Mr. Holland recently filed a formal complaint with House of Commons Speaker Peter Milliken about a campaign leaflet sent to his riding by six Conservative MPs. The complaint was accompanied by a letter from the nonpartisan Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel which expressed a legal opinion that this Conservative mailing was "electoral" and therefore illegal.
"They are abusing taxpayer-funded House of Commons resources for electoral purposes, and they are doing this pre-writ to bypass Elections Canada spending limits - just like they did with the in-and-out scam," said Mr. Holland. "This is a party that believes in one rule for themselves and another rule for everyone else. The Conservative Party should repay Canadian taxpayers for all mailing and printing costs of these campaign brochures."
"Conservatives are abusing their House of Commons printing and mailing privileges because they know an election is coming," said Mr. Holland, MP for Ajax-Pickering, Ontario. "Now even some Conservatives are speaking out and saying this is wrong."
Mr. Holland pointed to comments made yesterday by retiring Red Deer Conservative MP Bob Mills, who said he doesn't agree with the mailings. Mr. Holland also noted that an Angus Reid poll released Monday showed half of Canadians polled believe a recent Conservative mailing was a violation of House of Commons rules because it is "in fact campaign material."
"I was especially struck that 36 per cent of people identifying themselves as Conservatives told the pollster the flyer is an abuse," said Mr. Holland. "Based on the calls to my office, I think this strategy is backfiring on Stephen Harper."
MPs are allowed to send bulletins called "householders" four times a year to their own constituents. Additionally, they can mail flyers called "ten percenters" within their ridings or elsewhere in Canada. Ten percenters may be sent as often as once a day, but the quantity that may be printed is limited to 10 per cent of the households in the sending MP's constituency.
Mr. Holland recently filed a formal complaint with House of Commons Speaker Peter Milliken about a campaign leaflet sent to his riding by six Conservative MPs. The complaint was accompanied by a letter from the nonpartisan Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel which expressed a legal opinion that this Conservative mailing was "electoral" and therefore illegal.
"They are abusing taxpayer-funded House of Commons resources for electoral purposes, and they are doing this pre-writ to bypass Elections Canada spending limits - just like they did with the in-and-out scam," said Mr. Holland. "This is a party that believes in one rule for themselves and another rule for everyone else. The Conservative Party should repay Canadian taxpayers for all mailing and printing costs of these campaign brochures."
Appeal review of trial fact finding
An appeal court does not reconsider the factual findings of the trial court. This is true even if the appeal courts doubts the trial findings.
See, for example, today's decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. Benjamin, 2008 ONCA 602:
[7] There are aspects of the complainant's evidence that are troubling. The trial judge addressed these issues, particularly her evidence concerning the manner in which the appellant broke in to her hotel room. This evidence was central to the break and enter charge. The physical evidence did not support the complainant's evidence as to how the appellant gained entry. She offered an explanation for the absence of physical evidence to support her assertion that the appellant broke the lock as he entered. She claimed, for the first time in cross examination, that the appellant fixed the lock at some later time. While one may wonder about the credibility of this explanation it was for the trial judge to assess this explanation in the context of the entirety of the evidence and make his own determination of the complainant's credibility. The trial judge did exactly that. He referred to this evidence, acknowledged the concern with respect to the accuracy of this part of the complainant's evidence. He also referred to the absence of any confirmatory evidence on this part of the complainant's evidence. Ultimately however he accepted her evidence that the appellant forced his way into the hotel room. That finding was enough to warrant a conviction on the break and enter charge. It is not our function to retry the case or make our own assessment of the evidence. We cannot interfere with the trial judge's finding.
See, for example, today's decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. Benjamin, 2008 ONCA 602:
[7] There are aspects of the complainant's evidence that are troubling. The trial judge addressed these issues, particularly her evidence concerning the manner in which the appellant broke in to her hotel room. This evidence was central to the break and enter charge. The physical evidence did not support the complainant's evidence as to how the appellant gained entry. She offered an explanation for the absence of physical evidence to support her assertion that the appellant broke the lock as he entered. She claimed, for the first time in cross examination, that the appellant fixed the lock at some later time. While one may wonder about the credibility of this explanation it was for the trial judge to assess this explanation in the context of the entirety of the evidence and make his own determination of the complainant's credibility. The trial judge did exactly that. He referred to this evidence, acknowledged the concern with respect to the accuracy of this part of the complainant's evidence. He also referred to the absence of any confirmatory evidence on this part of the complainant's evidence. Ultimately however he accepted her evidence that the appellant forced his way into the hotel room. That finding was enough to warrant a conviction on the break and enter charge. It is not our function to retry the case or make our own assessment of the evidence. We cannot interfere with the trial judge's finding.
Harper testifies in court that he personally authorized Cadman offer
This story cannot be completely correct -- Harper has not testified in court expect in the sense he delivered an affidavit and was examined on it. What will be interesting is to see how, if at all, this plays in the election.
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper has testified that he personally authorized an offer made to late MP Chuck Cadman in 2005 for help defeating the Liberal government.
In sworn testimony filed Wednesday in Ontario Superior Court, Harper said it happened after he heard Cadman was willing to side with the Tories but couldn't because of financial distress and fear of losing an election.
It was Harper's first detailed account of his role in the so-called Cadman affair and, during four hours of testimony, he offered two different versions of when he first learned about Cadman's financial troubles.
Harper said he approved the overture to Cadman on May 18, 2005, the day before a crucial confidence vote, after receiving a message from his top political organizer and campaign manager, Doug Finley.
Full story here:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080903/national/harper_cadman
Sarah Palin's speech
The cadence was a bit weak to begin but she improved as she went. She has to stop waving her hands about. As speeches go it was alright; not great but it didn't need to be. Expectations are low and all she need to is exceed them.
A few dog whistles -- references to acting as a "servant" -- but nothing extreme.
She spoke of her family and said how some blessings were challenges -- a good way to deal with her daughter's pregnancy. She spoke of her special needs child and how electing her would put an advocate for such children in the White House.
The attacks on Obama were a touch too harsh but she is trying to grab the Hillary vote.
Perhaps unexpectedly she made a point of praising Harry Truman and her husband's union membership -- pitching for the ordinary American.
Overall, not too bad; her policies may not be to my taste but as a technical matter she did just fine. We may see a Vice President Palin as the first woman Vice President (and maybe President one day).
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
A few dog whistles -- references to acting as a "servant" -- but nothing extreme.
She spoke of her family and said how some blessings were challenges -- a good way to deal with her daughter's pregnancy. She spoke of her special needs child and how electing her would put an advocate for such children in the White House.
The attacks on Obama were a touch too harsh but she is trying to grab the Hillary vote.
Perhaps unexpectedly she made a point of praising Harry Truman and her husband's union membership -- pitching for the ordinary American.
Overall, not too bad; her policies may not be to my taste but as a technical matter she did just fine. We may see a Vice President Palin as the first woman Vice President (and maybe President one day).
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Unilateral and Mutual Rectification
Rectification is permitted to ensure that a document reflects what the document was intended to reflect. The easiest example is where two party agree to transfer a property for an agreed upon price and the price is incorrectly written down in a purchase and sale agreement.
A court will not allow a slip of the pen to change what was actually agreed to.
Where the parties agree to one thing and what is understood between them is written down wrongly there is a mutual mistake. Rectification is fairly straightforward here. Where one party along is mistaken and the other party, realizing the mistake, stands silent the issue is more complex.
Generally, where there is a mutual mistake it is easier to obtain rectification than where rectification is sought in the context of a unilateral mistake.
Today's Court of Appeal decision in Royal Bank of Canada v. El-Bris Limited, 2008 ONCA 601 clarifies the law:
2. The Remedy of Rectification
[13] Rectification is an equitable remedy designed to ensure that one party is not unjustly enriched at the expense of another. A court will rectify an inaccurately drawn written agreement so that it conforms to the agreement the parties intended to make. In Downtown King West Development Corp. v. Massey Ferguson Industries Ltd. (1996), 28 O.R. (3d) 327 at 336 (C.A.), Robins J.A. explained the remedy's underlying rationale, while acknowledging that rectification cannot be used to correct every mistake.
The remedy of rectification is available only in certain defined circumstances and cannot be invoked to correct every mistake. In principle, rectification is permitted, not for the purpose of altering the terms of an agreement, but to correct a contract which has been mistakenly drawn so as to carry out the common intention of the parties and have the contract reflect their true agreement. The remedy is normally granted only where the mistake is mutual or common to the contracting parties.
[14] RBC, however, argues that to obtain an order for rectification Ellis must show more than a common intention. He must also satisfy Sylvan's [[2002] 1 S.C.R. 678. ]four prerequisites to rectification. I do not agree.
[15] Sylvan was a case of unilateral mistake. The party seeking rectification, because of his own negligence, had mistakenly signed an inaccurately drawn document. Binnie J., writing for court, set out four prerequisites for parties seeking rectification for unilateral mistake: (i) a previous oral agreement inconsistent with the written document; (ii) the other party knew or ought to have known of the mistake and permitting that party to take advantage of the mistake would amount to unfair dealing; (iii) the document can be precisely rewritten to express the parties' intention; and (iv) each of the first three prerequisites must be demonstrated by convincing proof.
[16] The case before us is not a case of unilateral mistake. On the trial judge's reasonable view of the record, it is a case of common mistake: when entering into the written agreement neither party intended to create two independent $700,000 obligations. Both thought the obligations were connected
[17] The prerequisites in Sylvan do not apply to cases of common or mutual mistake. The following statement by Binnie J. para. 31 of Sylvan clarifies the scope of the application of the prerequisites: "The traditional rule was to permit rectification only for mutual mistake, but rectification is now available for unilateral mistake (as here), provided certain demanding preconditions are met." Sylvan, in effect, broadened the circumstances in which courts could rectify a unilateral mistake, allowing rectification subject to the "demanding preconditions" outlined above. It left untouched the circumstances, under the "traditional rule," in which courts could rectify a mutual or common mistake. See also John D. McCamus, The Law of Contracts ( Toronto: Irwin Law, 2005), at 555-62; Wasauking First Nation v. Wasausink Lands Inc., [2004] O.J. No. 810 at paras. 76-85 ( C.A. ) (discussing Sylvan but not applying the Sylvan preconditions to a case of mutual mistake).
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
Election Planning -- We Can and Will Win!
Federal Liberal MPs flocked to Winnipeg on Tuesday for the first day of a crucial caucus meeting where they will plan for the fall election that Prime Minister Stephen Harper is expected to call later this week.
The election call, which could come as early as Friday, is expected to schedule Oct. 14 as an election date.
The anticipated election has shifted the agenda for the three-day caucus meeting from preparing for a new parliamentary session to a strategy session to formulate a plan to attack the Conservatives while healing internal party rifts that have surfaced in recent weeks.
Full story here:http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/09/02/liberal-caucus.html?ref=rssThree Canadian soldiers killed in attack in southern Afghanistan
KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Military officials say three Canadian soldiers have been killed and five others wounded when they were attacked during a patrol in southern Afghanistan.
Stéphane Dion said:
It is with great sadness that Canadians are once again grieving the loss of three brave soldiers killed in the line of duty in Afghanistan.
The tragic and untimely deaths of Corporal Andrew Grenon, Corporal Michael Seggie and Private Chadwick Horn remind us of the ongoing dangers that our men and women in uniform face every day in the embattled country. Their valiant efforts to bring peace and stability to the Afghan people in a place where peril is ever-present is something that Canadians will remember, and will always be proud of.
On behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada and our parliamentary caucus, I offer my sincere condolences to the family, friends and comrades of Cpl. Grenon, Cpl. Seggie and Pte. Horn. You will never be forgotten.
Stéphane Dion said:
It is with great sadness that Canadians are once again grieving the loss of three brave soldiers killed in the line of duty in Afghanistan.
The tragic and untimely deaths of Corporal Andrew Grenon, Corporal Michael Seggie and Private Chadwick Horn remind us of the ongoing dangers that our men and women in uniform face every day in the embattled country. Their valiant efforts to bring peace and stability to the Afghan people in a place where peril is ever-present is something that Canadians will remember, and will always be proud of.
On behalf of the Liberal Party of Canada and our parliamentary caucus, I offer my sincere condolences to the family, friends and comrades of Cpl. Grenon, Cpl. Seggie and Pte. Horn. You will never be forgotten.
Judge Apologizes
Remarkable story from today's Globe -- Kirk Makin is a treasure.
Ontario judge apologizes to police, Crown
The Globe and Mail Wed 03 Sep 2008 Page: A5 Section: National News Byline: Kirk Makin
Source: JUSTICE REPORTER
In an 11th-hour bid to save his 24-year career on the bench, Mr. Justice Paul Cosgrove of the Ontario Superior Court apologized yesterday for damaging the reputations of law-enforcement officials when he tossed out a 1999 murder charge against an Ottawa woman, Julia Elliott.
However, a lawyer for Judge Cosgrove, Chris Paliare, denied that his client was a rogue judge who harboured a deep-seated vendetta toward the Crown.
"No one - including Judge Cosgrove - would ever hold up the Elliott case as a model judicial proceeding," Mr. Paliare conceded at the commencement of a rare Canadian Judicial Council inquiry into whether Judge Cosgrove ought to be removed from the bench.
Mr. Paliare said that his client has come to recognize that his accusations were unpleasant for the many Crown and police officials he skewered and that Judge Cosgrove "expresses his sincere regret for that."
However, Judge Cosgrove continues to hold an "unflinching view" that his decisions were founded in good faith and were reasonable at the time, Mr. Paliare added.
A 73-year-old former federal cabinet minister, Judge Cosgrove is only the eighth judge to have a complaint proceed to a formal, public inquiry. The CJC panel could potentially recommend that the full judicial council ask federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson to end Judge Cosgrove's career - just two years short of his retirement date.
The complaint against him was lodged in 2004 by Ontario's Ministry of the Attorney-General. It alleged that, by accusing prosecutors and police of committing 150 breaches of the Charter of Rights, Judge Cosgrove had continued a long pattern of unfair behaviour toward the Crown.
The complaint took issue with numerous allegations of deception and collusion made by Judge Cosgrove. It said that he had gravely damaged public confidence in the Crown. The complaint also said that Judge Cosgrove had created havoc in the prosecution ranks by repeatedly prohibiting officials from communication with one another about the sprawling Elliott case.
However, Mr. Paliare described the trial yesterday as a spectacular, one-of- a kind proceeding in which Judge Cosgrove - " a judicial workhorse" - had found himself faced with prosecutors and defence who were locked into "a long, bitterly contested proceeding that featured many bizarre twists and turns.
"Judge Cosgrove would be the first to say that nothing that he has experienced in his lengthy, judicial career - before or since - prepared him, or could have prepared him, adequately for what he faced in the Elliott case," Mr. Paliare said.
At the same time, he added, Judge Cosgrove had good reason to maintain a healthy suspicion of the police and Crown. He said that it had recently emerged that a senior police officer in the Elliott investigation had "essentially confessed" to counselling junior officers to conceal evidence and obstruct justice in another murder case. Moving quickly to the attack yesterday, Mr. Paliare denounced the use of some evidence at the hearing as irrelevant and unfair. "If the rules of evidence don't apply, why don't you tell me right now what rules do apply?"
Mr. Paliare also noted that, unlike most other complaints against judges - which involve allegations of sexist comments, intoxication or conflict of interest - the Cosgrove complaint goes to the heart of a judge's sacrosanct right to decide cases without fear or favour.
© 2008 CTVglobemedia
Ontario judge apologizes to police, Crown
The Globe and Mail Wed 03 Sep 2008 Page: A5 Section: National News Byline: Kirk Makin
Source: JUSTICE REPORTER
In an 11th-hour bid to save his 24-year career on the bench, Mr. Justice Paul Cosgrove of the Ontario Superior Court apologized yesterday for damaging the reputations of law-enforcement officials when he tossed out a 1999 murder charge against an Ottawa woman, Julia Elliott.
However, a lawyer for Judge Cosgrove, Chris Paliare, denied that his client was a rogue judge who harboured a deep-seated vendetta toward the Crown.
"No one - including Judge Cosgrove - would ever hold up the Elliott case as a model judicial proceeding," Mr. Paliare conceded at the commencement of a rare Canadian Judicial Council inquiry into whether Judge Cosgrove ought to be removed from the bench.
Mr. Paliare said that his client has come to recognize that his accusations were unpleasant for the many Crown and police officials he skewered and that Judge Cosgrove "expresses his sincere regret for that."
However, Judge Cosgrove continues to hold an "unflinching view" that his decisions were founded in good faith and were reasonable at the time, Mr. Paliare added.
A 73-year-old former federal cabinet minister, Judge Cosgrove is only the eighth judge to have a complaint proceed to a formal, public inquiry. The CJC panel could potentially recommend that the full judicial council ask federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson to end Judge Cosgrove's career - just two years short of his retirement date.
The complaint against him was lodged in 2004 by Ontario's Ministry of the Attorney-General. It alleged that, by accusing prosecutors and police of committing 150 breaches of the Charter of Rights, Judge Cosgrove had continued a long pattern of unfair behaviour toward the Crown.
The complaint took issue with numerous allegations of deception and collusion made by Judge Cosgrove. It said that he had gravely damaged public confidence in the Crown. The complaint also said that Judge Cosgrove had created havoc in the prosecution ranks by repeatedly prohibiting officials from communication with one another about the sprawling Elliott case.
However, Mr. Paliare described the trial yesterday as a spectacular, one-of- a kind proceeding in which Judge Cosgrove - " a judicial workhorse" - had found himself faced with prosecutors and defence who were locked into "a long, bitterly contested proceeding that featured many bizarre twists and turns.
"Judge Cosgrove would be the first to say that nothing that he has experienced in his lengthy, judicial career - before or since - prepared him, or could have prepared him, adequately for what he faced in the Elliott case," Mr. Paliare said.
At the same time, he added, Judge Cosgrove had good reason to maintain a healthy suspicion of the police and Crown. He said that it had recently emerged that a senior police officer in the Elliott investigation had "essentially confessed" to counselling junior officers to conceal evidence and obstruct justice in another murder case. Moving quickly to the attack yesterday, Mr. Paliare denounced the use of some evidence at the hearing as irrelevant and unfair. "If the rules of evidence don't apply, why don't you tell me right now what rules do apply?"
Mr. Paliare also noted that, unlike most other complaints against judges - which involve allegations of sexist comments, intoxication or conflict of interest - the Cosgrove complaint goes to the heart of a judge's sacrosanct right to decide cases without fear or favour.
© 2008 CTVglobemedia
Ancient royal burial chamber found in Egypt
Here's a story out of Egypt that really makes you stop and think. Gosh, here is political news from nearly 4,000 years ago. I wonder if people will be talking about the Dion/Harper battle in the year 6,000? (well, I don't wonder -- they won't; if there are people then that is!).
Cairo, September 1 : Egyptian archaeologists have uncovered the burial chamber and coffin of King Senusret II, who was believed to have ruled Egypt from 1897 BCE to 1878 BCE.
The burial chamber was found in Al Lahun, the town built by Senusret, which became Egypt's political capital during the 12th and 13th dynasties, and where the king built his pyramid.
"The coffin is made of pink granite and the burial chamber is lined with red granite," said Ahmed Abdel Aal, head of antiquities in Fayum, south of Cairo.
The team also discovered "corridors and passageways inside the pyramid built to mislead thieves," he added.
Wooden parts belonging to the king's boat were also found as well as alabaster and ceramic containers decorated with hieroglyphs.
Senusret II was known for launching major irrigation projects in the Fayum area, turning vast areas of marshland into cultivable land.
The burial chamber was found in Al Lahun, the town built by Senusret, which became Egypt's political capital during the 12th and 13th dynasties, and where the king built his pyramid.
"The coffin is made of pink granite and the burial chamber is lined with red granite," said Ahmed Abdel Aal, head of antiquities in Fayum, south of Cairo.
The team also discovered "corridors and passageways inside the pyramid built to mislead thieves," he added.
Wooden parts belonging to the king's boat were also found as well as alabaster and ceramic containers decorated with hieroglyphs.
Senusret II was known for launching major irrigation projects in the Fayum area, turning vast areas of marshland into cultivable land.
Reports from Japan say North Korea has restarted its nuclear bomb
North Korea, of course, claims the
United States is to blame. I guess it's easier to blame them than anyone else.
United States is to blame. I guess it's easier to blame them than anyone else.
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
Highest minimum wage in Canada
Nunavut's new $10-an-hour minimum wage will take effect this Friday, Sept. 5, an increase of $1.50 over its current $8.50.
That will make it the highest minimum hourly rate in Canada.
When they voted on it in June, members of the legislative assembly said they wanted it to reflect the higher cost of living in Nunavut.
In a news release, the government said the new rate will apply to all employees, regardless of age.
The wage hadn't increased since September 2003.
Ontario has the next highest minimum wage in Canada at $8.75 an hour. That will increase to $9.50 next March, still 50 cents short of Nunavut's.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
From First Things
Last Minute Sales
Joseph Bottum
From a religious publisher, an email just arrived urging me to take advantage of a sale on “End Times Books.” Why are they so heavily discounted? What does the publisher know that the rest of us don’t? The whole thing makes me a little nervous.
Joseph Bottum
From a religious publisher, an email just arrived urging me to take advantage of a sale on “End Times Books.” Why are they so heavily discounted? What does the publisher know that the rest of us don’t? The whole thing makes me a little nervous.
Oil drops below $110 as Gustav fades
This is good news, albeit on a temporary basis. We need to shift away from carbon based energy sources to nuclear, solar, wind and whatever else works. (Of course it blasted the TSX today)
NEW YORK - Oil fell below $110 a barrel on Tuesday for the first time since April as traders bet the U.S. oil industry would recover quickly from Hurricane Gustav.
Early indications that oil installations suffered only minor damage from the storm returned the market's focus to bearish factors including slowing global energy demand growth, rising inventories and a stronger U.S. dollar.
U.S. crude settled down $5.75 at $109.71 a barrel after trading as low as $105.46. London Brent crude settled down $1.07 at $108.34 a barrel.
U.S. crude settled below its 200-day moving average price for the first time since May 2007, which is considered by many traders evidence that prices may fall further. Oil prices have tumbled nearly $40 a barrel since the July 11 record high of $147.27 as bullish sentiment has evaporated.
Back to school; back to the past
One of the things that seems so unfair as a teacher is that the students stay the same age but I age. Ha ha ha.
Kidding aside, it is striking how unchanged the students are over time. Their attitudes, fears, competences are all the same as a decade or more ago -- I suspect the same as a century ago (I gave my first class was in 1980 as a TA and the students seem very much now as they did then).
It is easy to complain about how the world has gone from bad to worse over time. We all see our youth as the Golden Age of hard working, polite and ambitious young people. But if we are honest we will admit that at least some of us were lazy, loud mouthed louts with the ambition of a slug. Some of us grew up to be leaders in society while others grew to be street people. Just like the students in my class today.
The past is much like the present. We may have some fancy toys -- and technical knowledge does grow from generation to generation -- but wisdom does not. We are our parents.
Perhaps the ancient Egyptians were right in seeing the world as a wheel. There really is nothing new under the Sun.
Kidding aside, it is striking how unchanged the students are over time. Their attitudes, fears, competences are all the same as a decade or more ago -- I suspect the same as a century ago (I gave my first class was in 1980 as a TA and the students seem very much now as they did then).
It is easy to complain about how the world has gone from bad to worse over time. We all see our youth as the Golden Age of hard working, polite and ambitious young people. But if we are honest we will admit that at least some of us were lazy, loud mouthed louts with the ambition of a slug. Some of us grew up to be leaders in society while others grew to be street people. Just like the students in my class today.
The past is much like the present. We may have some fancy toys -- and technical knowledge does grow from generation to generation -- but wisdom does not. We are our parents.
Perhaps the ancient Egyptians were right in seeing the world as a wheel. There really is nothing new under the Sun.
John Deere Welland Plant Closes
Deere & Co.,the world's largest maker of farm machinery, is blaming the strong loonie for the decision to close its factory in Welland, Ont., costing the Ontario economy 800 manufacturing jobs.
The factory makes utility vehicles and attachments for commercial and consumer equipment and for agricultural uses.
Production at the plant will be moved outside Canada by the end of 2009, with the first jobs being cut at the end of February, the company said Tuesday.
The Canadian Auto Workers union, which represents the workers, said it planned to fight with all its might to keep the plant open.
A loss of 800 jobs to foreign countries. I hope this not a sign of things to come.
The factory makes utility vehicles and attachments for commercial and consumer equipment and for agricultural uses.
Production at the plant will be moved outside Canada by the end of 2009, with the first jobs being cut at the end of February, the company said Tuesday.
The Canadian Auto Workers union, which represents the workers, said it planned to fight with all its might to keep the plant open.
A loss of 800 jobs to foreign countries. I hope this not a sign of things to come.
Conservatives strong ahead of election call
I don't like it but here it is... .
TORONTO (Reuters) - Canada's ruling Conservatives are within reach of gaining the support they need to win a majority government as Canada gears up for an October election, according to an opinion poll released on Tuesday.
TORONTO (Reuters) - Canada's ruling Conservatives are within reach of gaining the support they need to win a majority government as Canada gears up for an October election, according to an opinion poll released on Tuesday.
The Strategic Counsel survey, in the Globe and Mail newspaper, showed the Conservatives with support of 37 percent of voters, just below the 40 percent threshold that pollsters say gives a strong chance of winning a majority government.
That's well above the 29 percent support the survey showed for the opposition Liberals, and the 17 percent polled by the left-wing New Democrats. The environmentalist Greens polled 9 percent.
Separated at birth???
Competition for Flocke ?
Flocke got an additional long-legged competition:
Since August 9th, at the giraffe`s enclosure, the giraffe baby Epesi is up for mischief. The “little one” is nearly 1.80 meter tall and already weighs 50 kilo. Epsesi has almost the same weight as our “bundle of wool” Flocke.
Flocke weighs about 60 kilo, but only the height of 1.20 meter standing upright. Nevertheless, Epesi is not a suitable playmate for Flocke, because in the long run, Flocke would like the little fellow too much – that is to say that she would like to eat her.
Expert Testimony and Potential Bias
Today’s Court of Appeal decision in Deemar v.College of Veterinarians of Ontario, 2008 ONCA 600 makes clear that a trier of fact, faced with an expert who may not be impartial, may properly strike the evidence of that expert in entirety.
The Court holds:
[20] While the Discipline Committee might have struck the advocacy in the report and allowed Dr. Deemar to file the balance of the report, it chose to strike the whole report and disqualify Dr. Leslie from testifying.
[21] It is up to the trier of fact to qualify a proposed expert witness. The party tendering the proposed expert witness must satisfy the trier that he or she possesses not only the necessary expertise, but the requisite independence as well. For example, the trier may refuse to qualify a person of unquestioned expertise who is closely related to the tendering party.
[22] Here the Discipline Committee found that Dr. Leslie had “strayed from the function of an expert” and had taken on “the role of advocate and possibly the role of the trier of fact”. The Discipline Committee noted that an expert must have a minimum requirement of independence and cited authority that “if the person rendering the evidence assumes the role of advocate, he or she can no longer be viewed as an expert in the legally correct sense…”. Perricone v. Baldassara, [1994] O.J. No. 2199 at para. 17. Dr. Leslie’s demonstrated lack of the independence provided an ample basis for the Discipline Committee’s to refuse to accept Dr. Leslie as an expert witness.
[23] The Discipline Committee also determined that Dr. Leslie could not give any evidence at the discipline hearing because of her recent relationship with the College. Dr. Leslie had been the College’s Registrar for most of the period during which the complaint against Dr. Deemar was under investigation. While Dr. Leslie had not personally dealt with the complaint, she was administratively responsible for it. The fact that all of the Discipline Committee’s members were on the College Council when the College terminated Dr. Leslie’s employment presented the Discipline Committee with a difficult dilemma. This combination of circumstances made it unseemly, at the very least, for Dr. Leslie to testify regarding the merits of the complaint. The Discipline Committee addressed the dilemma by ruling that Dr. Leslie could not appear as a witness. The
[24] A resolution of the dilemma required the balancing of the interests of the member and the interests of the administration of justice generally. Dr. Deemar’s interest was in controlling her defence to the complaint. At the same time there was a public interest in the prompt disposition of allegations of professional misconduct against a member of a regulated profession.
[25] In my view, assuming the standard of review is correctness, the ruling of the Discipline Committee correctly balanced the interests of the member and the interests of the administration of justice generally. In ruling that Dr. Leslie could not appear as a witness, the Discipline Committee noted that Dr. Deemar had ample opportunity “to obtain a separate expert opinion that was equally valid”. Thus, the Discipline Committee’s decision struck a reasonable balance between the individual and public interests at stake.
[26] By contrast, the stay ordered by the
[27] I find support for that view that Dr. Deemar was accorded procedural fairness in the decision of Rothstein J., sitting as a trial judge of the Federal Court in Drummond v.
Monday, September 1, 2008
News from Jesuit Refugee Service
The Jesuits have an e-mail service listing some of the remarkable work being done by the Jesuit Refugee Service. Remarkable, and dangerous, work is being done by the Jesuits. The e-mail service is worth subscribing to.
One story follows:
SOUTH AFRICA: ZIMBABWEANS NOT RECOGNISED AS REFUGEES
On 11 July, the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) expressed its concern that
Zimbabweans fleeing violence at home were not being properly screened at the
South African border, leading to the possible deportation of refugees.
According to the UN agency, Zimbabweans coming to South Africa speak of killings and beatings and have brutal injuries all over their bodies.
Since the March presidential and parliamentary elections in Zimbabwe, the
number fleeing to South Africa has increased dramatically. In the last 40 days alone, South Africa has sent back some 17,000 Zimbabweans through the Beit Bridge border post, despite earlier calls from human rights organisations to halt all deportations. The organisations have also urged South Africa to grant
exceptionally Zimbabweans temporary legal status which would allow them to
stay in the country, an option which is foreseen in national legislation.
Of 35,000 Zimbabwean asylum seekers who arrived in South Africa in 2006 and
2007, only 500 have been recognised as refugees, according to government
data. UNHCR stated that given the number of daily deportations, its staff were could only interview some five percent.
JRS, working in South Africa since the late 1990s, has noticed the recent change in the displacement of Zimbabweans. In the past a huge percentage were young single people fleeing poverty at home, more and more the new arrivals consist of families fleeing political violence.
"The trend is changing, we are getting entire family units, many with physical
injuries, seeking asylum," said Thandi Hadebe, JRS South Africa project director in the northern border town of Mahkado in Limpopo province.
Since the start of June, this JRS office in the north of the country has helped
more than 200 Zimbabweans a day.
The majority of Zimbabweans are entering South Africa through unauthorized border points, risking their lives to navigate dangerous rivers, barbed wire fences and random police controls.
There are presently more than 138,000 registered refugees and asylum seekers
in South Africa, coming from a wide range of countries. Zimbabweans have also sought refuge in other countries.
JRS DISPATCHES is sent from the International Office of the Jesuit Refugee Service, on-line: http://www.jrs.net;
To subscribe or unsubscribe to Dispatches go to
http://www.jrs.net/lists/manage.php
James Morton
1100 - 5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
Looks like an election on Sukkot after all
It's hard to believe, but it seems the Prime Minister is actually considering an election on Sukkot (October 14). The first and second days of Sukkot are full religious holidays and observant Jews can work (or vote) on neither day. Despite being reminded of the holiday it seems the Prime Minister is going ahead with the vote.
The festival of Sukkot, also known as Chag'ha Succot, the "Feast of Booths" (or Tabernacles), is named for the huts (sukkah) that Moses and the Israelites lived in as they wandered the desert for 40 years before they reached the Promised Land. These huts were made of branches and were easy to assemble, take apart, and carry as the Israelites wandered through the desert.
The festival of Sukkot is instituted in Leviticus 23:33 et seq. No work is permitted on the first and second days of the holiday. Work is permitted on the remaining days.
Dion calls meeting with Harper a 'charade'
Liberal Leader Stephane Dion says he left a meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper Monday afternoon with a clear message: There will be a fall election.
"(Harper) doesn't want Canadians to have too much time to see he is ill-prepared to face the economy . . . he doesn't want to face byelections," Dion told reporters.
Dion called the 20-minute meeting a "charade" and repeatedly took Harper to task for his willingness to call an election before the fixed election date of October 2009.
Harper is expected to dissolve Parliament this week and set an election date for Oct. 14 of this year.
The festival of Sukkot, also known as Chag'ha Succot, the "Feast of Booths" (or Tabernacles), is named for the huts (sukkah) that Moses and the Israelites lived in as they wandered the desert for 40 years before they reached the Promised Land. These huts were made of branches and were easy to assemble, take apart, and carry as the Israelites wandered through the desert.
The festival of Sukkot is instituted in Leviticus 23:33 et seq. No work is permitted on the first and second days of the holiday. Work is permitted on the remaining days.
Dion calls meeting with Harper a 'charade'
Liberal Leader Stephane Dion says he left a meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper Monday afternoon with a clear message: There will be a fall election.
"(Harper) doesn't want Canadians to have too much time to see he is ill-prepared to face the economy . . . he doesn't want to face byelections," Dion told reporters.
Dion called the 20-minute meeting a "charade" and repeatedly took Harper to task for his willingness to call an election before the fixed election date of October 2009.
Harper is expected to dissolve Parliament this week and set an election date for Oct. 14 of this year.
GOP Convention -- Why Palin
Even without George Bush in the Twin Cities, the GOP cannot escape its miserable record over the last eight years.
So you can see why Sarah Palin was such an appealing pick for John McCain. Along with all the things she brings to the table -- fresh face, mother of five, hockey mom -- Palin is notable for what she doesn't bring: a track record.
If McCain had picked any of the far more experienced candidates on his short list, they would have come fully equipped with a long paper trail implicating them in the horror show that is the Republican Party of the last eight years. Palin has barely left a footprint on the GOP scene.
Click here to read more.
<http://nl.huffingtonpost.com/link.php?M=291065&N=628&L=3049>
-
New Orleans Dodges A Bullet
New Orleans dodged a bullet -- or so it seems -- and that's great news! New Orleans would have just vanished if another Katrina hit.
Reports so far say a weakened hurricane Gustav closed in on flood-prone coastal Louisiana on Monday, bringing punishing wind and sheets of rain. But the storm veered away from New Orleans, where only a few holdouts and those that refused to abandon Bourbon Street remained.
Quebec poutine festival confirms working-class dish now haute cuisine
I grew up eating poutine (it was a local dish in Hamilton) and had no idea it was French Canadian until years later when I went to college... .
Drummondville, Que. - A foie gras poutine served at a festival in the central Quebec town Drummondville confirms the dish's place in the world of haute cuisine.
One of the purported birthplaces of Quebec's best-known dish - the french fry, cheese curd and gravy melange - held its first poutine festival last weekend.
Mario Patry was the professional chef in charge of the Festival de la poutine de Drummondville.
"That's mine, that's my creation," he said of the foie gras poutine being sold.
"People want to eat better and better. And they're connoisseurs."
Full story here:http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080831/national/que_poutine_fest
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)