Milestones Matter

Tuesday April 17, was Charter Day.  It marked thirty years since Pierre Elliott Trudeau signed on behalf of Canada a document that enshrined our rights in law.  I started a thread over on the Hawthorne Villager about it, and it quickly disintegrated into Trudeau bashing.

It got me thinking about the Canadian Identity, and how milestones matter. In the last two weeks two important anniversaries were marked.  The first was the 95th anniversary of Vimy Ridge.  Canada was barely 50 years old.  At the outset of World War I Canadian soldiers were scattered among British regiments fighting under British commanders.  At Vimy Ridge they were gathered together forming four divisions under a Canadian commander and asked to fight.  In the war's context it wasn't a very significant battle, but after it was done Canada had an army.  And that made it very significant for Canadian history.


  On April 17, 1982 the  Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was officially signed into law.  Before then Canada enjoyed a kind of half-nation status; some decisions could be appealed to the British Privy Council as late as the 1970's. Until the Constitution and Charter's passage Canada was ruled by the British North America Act- something that originally created the country.  There were no firm rights for First Nations, and the Provinces had little idea on their responsibilities; ie: what they had to provide for the citizens.

Thanks to the Charter, as of 1982 Canadians had their rights enshrined- as close to set in stone as you could get.  It made it illegal for someone to be discriminated against based on their colour, sexual orientation, or religion.  It guaranteed people the right to vote in an election, and the right to stand themselves for election.  It cemented people's freedoms of mobility- to leave the country/ province.  It guaranteed that citizens were treated fairly under, and before the law (people were given a free trial).  In short, and in hindsight it was a remarkable achievement.  Making it even better, did you know the Charter of Rights served as inspiration for something similar in South Africa?

And that's why I'm disappointed in the Harper government for marking it with merely a press release; a statement.  I get that it's a hyper partisan atmosphere in Ottawa these days; and Pierre Trudeau was after all a Liberal.  But he did get the leaders of 10 different provinces and territories to agree on something- and that's an achievement few Prime Ministers have been able to duplicate since.  And arguably the charter and its stated freedom of expression is the reason why politicians can call each other names.  Shouldn't such an achievement have greater recognition?

Canada is so eager for newcomers to appreciate our culture, and history. It's time we started making milestones matter despite the politics behind them.  You never know, that could be the start of a different identity apart from being "not American."

Thoughts on Bill C-30

Much has been made the last week of bill C-30, or its more formal title: Investigating and preventing Criminal Electronic Communications Act.  I had a look at the summary page of it and I don't really find anything wrong with the first part of it.  Part 1 looks like an attempt to  formalize relations between police and Internet Service Providers (I.S.P.) as it comes to gathering information for criminal investigations.  It's at least the start of reigning in the so-called lawless Internet.

Part two of the bill goes way too far.  Our system is built on checks and balances; the judges check the police for example. Bill C-30 gives police too much power, and judges not enough to check them.  According to the charter of rights and freedoms, Canadians have the right to a fair trial; to be seen as equal before and under the law.  Part 2 of the legislation violates that.  It gets rid  of the fairness angle of it because it allows a warrant to be valid for up to a year.  In addition clause C requires the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to report on the interceptions of private communications made without authorizations.  Assuming the Minister the ultimate authority on Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, who checks his authority?

Canadians have a right to privacy as well under the charter.  The Minister of Public Safety; whomever that is shouldn't get the right to read my private email or check whatever websites I'm looking at. I'd imagine this legislation could be brought bear on journalists in a professional setting as well.  Hypothetically speaking, let's say I'm investigating a government scandal that could bring down a politician , and I'm emailing a source.  And using this legislation the government gets a hold of that email.  Does this mean that under Bill C-30 the government could find a way to kill my story?  When last I checked freedom of  the press was included in the charter as well. 

 Section 2 also provides for an amendment to the Criminal Code as it deals with hate speech.  The definition of hate speech is extremely vague... how about a discussion on that, and how it applies to regular law, before we apply it to the Internet?

Overall as it is now this bill gives me the chills. I'm glad it's been sent back to committee for further study and possible rewrites.  Members of Parliament looking at the legislation should have learned two things from the controversy about the bill.  One is that Canadians aren't stupid, we know when our rights and freedoms are being threatened.  Second is a quick reminder to read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms before proposing to change it in such a fundamental way as this legislation would.  People who forget these two lessons will be as thoroughly mocked as Vic Towes.