That's not surprising. Interesting, though, in how Storseth chose to frame the repeal (in part at least) as a "tough on crime" measure:
Acts of hate speech are serious crimes that should be investigated by police officers, not civil servants, he said, and the cases should be handled by “real judges and real lawyers,” instead of a quasi-judicial body like the human rights commission.
We'll see how the usual suspects react to the new, post S.13 regime. It is probably far more unpleasant to have the police on your case than some bureaucrat from the CHRC. I suspect that Arthur Topham, for example, doesn't much like the new way of things. Although perhaps he is glorying in his new-found martyrdom.
I'm surprised you say its "not surprising". Havent you been saying for years that it was never going to happen and no party would want to touch it with a ten foot pole?
At this point in the process it was not surprising. But you're right, even with their majority I didn't think the Tories would go through with it. Note though that they snuck it past as a private Member's bill. Every party that has tried to RUN on an anti-HRC platform (Hudak, for example) has backed away from it in the end.
So if you have money, your right to SLAPP anyone you dislike is not infringed?
This is a case of the HRC's bringing it upon themselves. They have no one to blame but themselves. The lib-left failed to reign them in. Instead they handed the Richard Warman's awards.
Post a Comment