Hudak's Proposed Changes To OHRT Would Drive Up Costs

From Ontario News Watch,  human rights lawyer Andrew Pinto:

Critics of the system, citing a backlog of 4,000 cases, have said they want the tribunal run more like a court. 

But the rules of evidence used in courts could require complainants to hire lawyers, as well as pay doctors and other expert witnesses to testify in person, said Pinto.

Under the current system, those who have lodged a complaint with the province's human rights tribunal can submit documents signed by their doctors as evidence, he explained.

We don't know much about Hudak's plan, other than that his "reforms" are supposedly intended to clear-up the 4,000 case backlog.  Cost issues aside, I can't see how requiring expert witnesses to appear in person would speed matters along.  In fact, one of the means by which Hudak would cut eliminate "frivolous complaints" would be to restore the Ontario human rights regime to its pre-2008 state, when cases were screened by the Ontario Human Rights Commission before going to the tribunal.  This is arguably a better way of doing things, but since the '08 changes were billed as time-saving measures designed to speed up the process, returning to the old ways will almost certainly not do anything about that back-log.

Hudak On Human Rights...Approaching Coherence, Or No?

Walker Morrow, "The Kid", supplies us with a Youtube of Tim Hudak's address to the Nepean Chamber of Congress, and a transcript of the moment (at about the12:30 minute mark on the clip) when Hudak backs down from his promise to eliminate the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal. 

Hudy says:

"We will empower the Tribunal to dismiss frivolous applications at a preliminary stage, by restoring the provisions of the Ontario Human Rights Code that were taken out. We will create new standards for the Human Rights Tribunal, so the process follows clear rules similar to those used in the courts, and we will consult with experts who will work in the system to develop ways to improve the quality and the legal expertise of Tribunal adjudicators. And finally, we will review the Commission and Tribunal to ensure the efficient use of your tax dollars, the same process each and every government agency, board, and commission will be subjected to under a PC government, and ensure those dollars are used to support the most vulnerable in our society."

The provisions that Hudak refers to were changed in 2008, when it was decided that any complaints should go straight to the tribunal rather than through the intermediary of  the Ontario Human Rights Commission.  This move was controversial at the time, but  billed as a time-saving maneuver:  cases would be resolved more quickly by removing a step in the process.  So while there is an argument to be made for returning to the old ways, claiming (as Hudak has also  done) that it will help clear up the back-log of 4,000 unresolved complaints is ridiculous.  If anything, his proposed reforms will have the opposite effect.

And of course this is not the kind of change Randy Hillier supporters wanted when they threw their support to Hudak at the 2009 PCPO leadership convention.  They wanted the Tribunal axed.  Assuming you believe Hudak will do no more he says he will, his plan amounts to mere tinkering around the edges. 

Not With A Bang, But A Whimper...

...the Speechy conflict comes to an end. Tim Hudak ditches his plan to abolish the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal, and Randy Hillier--whose idea it was originally--bows to his leader.

PS. Warren thinks Hudak's lying. I don't think it matters. Timmy has to choose one variety of poision or another. It looks like he's chosen to enrage the party's Libertarian wing. It will be interesting to see what Jack MacLaren , Hillier's successor at the Landowners association, says about this latest development.

Tory Turmoil: Your Saturday Morning Round-Up!

New stories on the PCPO civil war breaking out in Eastern Ontario. Two of them mention Hudak's promise to abolish the Ontario Human Rights Commission, a promise made to attract Hillier delegates to the Hudak cause during last year's PCPO leadership convention.

If you recall, in the run-up to that convention, provincial Tory leadership contenders fell over one another moving right so as to appeal to Hillier's gang of "rural libertarians". So, for example, Frank Klees promised to make "White's Only" signs legal again (or, more precisely, strike down that portion of the Ontario Human Rights Code that made them illegal). However, Hillier saw through that scheme...it wasn't radical enough for him...and eventually Hudak upped the ante, promising to chuck out the whole provincial human rights apparatus and replace it with...something...some day.

But, as Michael Warren notes in his Owen Sound Times editorial, Hudak hasn't talked about this plan much since winning the leadership race. And that's not surprising. Polling at the time showed that such a pledge would be a vote evaporator among the general populace. So Hudak put it in a little box and never spoke of it again.

Except that now he may have to so as to keep Randy Hillier inside the PCPO tent. Therefore, a sincere thanks (from myself and all Ontario Liberal supporters) to Randy Hillier for taking that item off the secret agenda and putting it squarely back on the, well, non-secret agenda.

Hudak Edging Away From OHRC Abolition?

From an email to PCPO supporters, his latest policies:

* An immediate one-year payroll tax holiday on new hires to encourage job creation.

* Eliminating the land-transfer tax for one year to spur construction jobs and make the dream of home ownership more affordable for middle-class families.

* A new approach to public sector wage agreements that reflect the realities faced by the taxpayers that foot the bill.

Nothing there about abolishing the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Guess that item has been relegated to the secret agenda.

Comes The Dawn

I wanted to take another crack at the results of an Ipsos poll that came out yesterday. It asked Ontario voters:

Would you consider voting for the Ontario PC Party in the next election if its newly elected leader supported scrapping Ontario's human rights tribunal?

...and they basically responded (75%) with a hearty "Hell no!". Some PCPO supporters are just coming to realize what's happening with their leadership race. From the BT forum:

Its a very stuipid political plan. While the plan may resonate with an element of the base, and make you party leader, its something the Liberals will beat you over the head iwth in a general election.

[...]

Promising to `scrap`them is a huge strategic mistake which gives our opposition a huge target in the next election. I would question the leadership ability of anybody who promises to scrap them.

From Christian Conservative:

It's still bothering me, I thought it had been all sorted out, but I heard Tim talking about the HRC issue again. To me, it's the third rail of this race... you touch it and you're dead.

And (just to sum up) what has happened is that two of the four leadership candidates (alleged front runner Tom Hudak and rural seperatist Randy Hillier), who have vowed to abolish the tribunal, have rendered themselves unelectable in Ontario. I would further argue that Frank Klees' more modest proposal, to allow "Whites Only" signs and "No Irish Need Apply" want ads back in the province, would prove similarly unpalatable to Ontario voters should he become PCPO leader.

That leaves us with Christine Elliot--moderate, female--the McGuinty government's worst nightmare (and Warren Kinsella's!). But, no! She may be among the front runner's at this point, but Christine is too damn Liberal and incorrectly gendered for the PCPO base. Watch an "anyone but Christine" movement to appear between now and the convention. Whispers of rebellion are already in the air!

So in the end we will wind up with the Ontario Conservative Party embracing a totally toxic policy, making Kinsella's job in the McGuinty war-room next time out trivially easy, and a Liberal government in Ontario from now until the cows come home.

I remember a case on our side of the fence, when the federal libs ran on a "tax on everything". We knuckled down and maintained a brave face and prayed that the whole damn thing wouldn't go nuclear. Fun stuff! Soon it will be the turn of my Ontario conservative brothers to learn what happens when you walk up to one of the third rails of Canadian politics and start licking it.

PS. A bit of a mini-kerfuffle blew up last when it was revealed that he Elliot campaign paid for the poll in question. Mind you, IPSOS has a rep to maintain and probably wouldn't juice its questions too severely, and in any case (see 1st link above), Elliot's people have released the poll. Other than the use of the term "scrap", which Hudak and Hillier have employed on several occasions, nothing seems too untoward about it.

Frank Klees Will Lift Prohibition On Racist Signs?

At least I think that's what he's proposing:


(Queen’s Park) Newmarket-Aurora MPP and PC Leadership Candidate Frank Klees tabled a Private Member’s Bill that is an essential first step to refocusing the Ontario Human Rights Commission on its original mandate and it received First Reading in the Ontario Legislature today.

The Bill, entitled the “Human Rights Code Amendment Act, 2009” will remove Section 13 from the Ontario Human Rights Act. This is the section that Klees and many observers of the Human Rights Commission and its companion, the Human Rights Tribunal, point to as the section of the Act that has given rise to what Klees refers to as the “over-reach” of the HRC Commission into matters dealing with freedom of expression and freedom of speech.


Actually, though, this is incorrect. As I have written previously, section 13.1 of the Ontario Code prohibits you from publishing materials that announce "an intention to discriminate". It reads:

A right under Part I is infringed by a person who publishes or displays before the public or causes the publication or display before the public of any notice, sign, symbol, emblem, or other similar representation that indicates the intention of the person to infringe a right under Part I or that is intended by the person to incite the infringement of a right under Part I. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, s. 13 (1).

But 13.1 does not cover broader forms of free expression, as Barbara Hall noted in her critique of Mark Steyn's writing in Macleans:

Section 13 of the Code makes it illegal to display or publish certain kinds of offensive material. But its limits on freedom of expression are narrow. For the Code to apply, the offending item must be a notice, sign, symbol, emblem or other similar representation that indicates an intent to infringe, or incite others to infringe, a right under the Code. Therefore, a sign would fall within this section, but a five-page article conveying the same message would not.

So, in Klees Ontario, would it become possible to have signs like "No blacks need apply" hanging from your shop window? Or, as I wondered here, has Mr. Klees simply confused the federal with the provincial human rights code?

Or, is he assuming that Ontario PC rank and filers, the folks whose votes he is trolling for in his quest to become party leader, are too stupid to distinguish the one from the other?

Will Randy Hillier Call For The Abolition Of The Ontario Human Rights Commission

...when he announces his run for the Tory leadership this morning? The folks at SDA and FreeD seem to think so. Furthermore, Randy's been on the phone with FreeD's Connie Fournier.

It isn't enough that a man wants to run the province who has advocated rural Ontario separatism, been incarcerated, and who as a plan B advocates the creation of an elected Ontario Senate to wrest power from the cities, now this same man is set to cuddle up with every far right wing-nut in the province.

In several months time I predict a crater where the Ontario Conservative Party used to be, no matter who wins the leadership. And you might as well hand Dalton a crown.

Update: Yep. Randy Hillier's gone full-on wingnut:

Hillier said he wants to introduce what he calls a Freedom of Association and Conscience Act that would allow people to "not be compelled or coerced into actions or associations they find objectionable," replace the Ontario Human Rights Commission "and other quasi-tribunals with real judges in real courts," and have an elected Senate in Ontario, according to the release