|
Media Centre

News
Flash
The Canadian Press
September 27, 2006
Alexander Panetta
Tories defend
end to law program benefitting seniors, women, gays, minorities
OTTAWA (CP) _ The Conservatives
are under fire for killing a legal-aid program that has assisted
Canadian minority groups in a series of historic court victories
over the last three decades.
The cancellation of the Court
Challenges Program has been slammed by the country's largest
legal organization, opposition parties, a prominent Muslim group
and at least one Tory provincial government.
The Trudeau-era program has
helped fund successful court challenges that broadened the
rights of Canadian seniors, women, homosexuals, religious groups
and minority-language groups.
The federal Tories announced
this week that cutting the program would save taxpayers $5.6
million over two years.
Newfoundland Premier Danny
Williams _ a provincial Tory and a lawyer _ called the cuts
worrisome and distanced himself from the ``right-wing'' federal
Conservatives.
The opposition Liberals noted
the irony of the cuts coming just months after a famous
pre-election quip by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
``He said, `Don't worry, if you
elect me as a prime minister, the courts will hold me in
check','' Liberal MP Omar Alghabra told a news conference.
``(Then) what does he do? He
cancels the Court Challenges Program, which is supposed to hold
him in check.''
The challenges program helped
fund court battles that gave seniors employment-insurance
benefits, gave women pay equity, and simplified the necessary
arguments for sexual-assault convictions.
It funded cases that opened new
schools for French-Canadians, guaranteed English-language rights
in Quebec, and affirmed religious freedoms, such as Sikh
children's right to carry a kirpan. A Muslim group, the Council
on American-Islamic Relations - Canada, said it helped them
fight racial profiling.
It also helped homosexuals win
equality protection under the Charter of Rights in the 1990s,
which then led to new benefits and paved the way to same-sex
marriage.
But the program has long drawn
the ire of the Tories, who already killed it once in 1992, the
last time they were in office.
The Liberals revived it in 1994
after they returned to power, and its continued existence has
long been a sore spot to conservatives.
Social conservatives have long
denounced the program, saying it is biased in favour of liberal
causes.
Harper's right-hand man wrote
his doctoral dissertation and several other papers about the
program in his previous career as an academic.
Now chief of staff to the prime
minister, Ian Brodie published one paper titled ``Do the `Haves'
Still Come Out Ahead in Canada?''
``Three interests _ official
language minority groups, feminists, and homosexual rights
groups _ have been particularly successful at pursuing their
objectives through the courts,'' Brodie wrote when he was a
professor at the University of Western Ontario.
``All three of these interests
consider themselves traditionally `disadvantaged' groups in
Canadian society, and so their success is puzzling.''
The paper, which he co-authored
in 2003 just before joining Harper's staff, suggests ``a
solution to this puzzle.''
The paper concludes that the
so-called ``haves'' really do come out ahead in our legal system
_ and that's because the Court Challenges Program has simply
helped reverse the definition.
``In other words, these
self-described `disadvantaged' groups win because under the new
conditions they are now among the `haves','' Brodie writes in
the paper, co-authored with the University of Calgary's Ted
Morton.
``Being among the `haves' has
given them the resources required to become repeat players and
succeed in judicial politics.''
One Conservative government
official was far more blunt when asked about the program
Wednesday.
Speaking on condition of
anonymity, he said that because the Charter of Rights is now a
quarter-century old, legal rights for feminists, homosexuals,
and minorities are well-entrenched in our justice system.
If there are any future
injustices, he said, offended groups can simply use the news
media or the political process to pressure government. Or they
can launch lawsuits with their own money.
``From a small-c conservative
standpoint, (people wonder) why are we paying people to sue the
government?'' he said. ``They can raise their own money.''
He said the program exposes a
key philosophical difference between Liberals and Conservatives.
``(Liberals feel) citizens are
clients of the state, and (they feel), `We better keep those
clients, so we'd better stand up for them'.''
Liberals certainly did denounce
the government move, as did other opposition parties. But
Newfoundland's premier also weighed in, as did the Canadian Bar
Association.
Williams distanced his
Progressive Conservative government from the federal
Conservatives.
``In my opinion, it shows the
difference between Conservatives: true right-wing Conservatives
and Progressive Conservatives,'' Williams said in St. John's.
``You know, when you start
taking away funding from minority groups just because they're
going to sue government, that means you're saying, `We're not
going to give you any money if we've done something wrong to
allow you to sue us.'
``So then (do) you take away
legal aid at some point down the road so people who commit
criminal offences don't have the right to have legal counsel?''
The Canadian Bar Association _
which has 36,000 members _ said the government has been
dishonest in characterizing the program.
``They're making it sound like
these fringe groups were the only ones accessing it,'' said Guy
Joubert, a vice-president at the association.
``That's definitely not the
case. . . . What this move has done is silence the voices of
marginalized Canadians.''
|