Court stops Doug Ford from changing council size!

[oldjones]

I doubt this changes anything as Doug is the type of guy that will press on regardless if things are proper or not.

Pressing on with an immediate appeal, to get a couple more judges to say this one was wrong.

And just to make sure no one misses that he doesn't really care whether the judge was wrong or not: He's also recalling the Legislature, to have them re-pass his Dismember Toronto Council law with a new Notwithstanding Clause saying that it doesn't matter what rights we have, or what we want, he's gonna force his law on us.

Now that's what I call dysfunctional!

 

[jcpro]

Roflmao!! Doug took a sledgehammer to the Council.

 

[Charlemagne]

This was nothing but a failed attempt at gerrymandering.

 

[Charlemagne]

Ford to invoke notwithstanding clause

DH Toronto Staff
Sep 10, 2018 11:31 am

Ontario Premier Doug Ford said he will invoke the Constitution’s notwithstanding clause to override today’s court decision on Toronto City Council.

At a press conference, Ford said while he respects the court’s decision, he wants to make the government more efficient.

He said 18 councillors wanted to reduce the number of City Council.

“I was elected,” he said firmly, “the judge was appointed.”

He said he still wants 25 councillors to run in the next election.

In a release, the Ontario PCs said they will call back the Legislature and invoke Section 33 of the Constitution to ensure the Better Local Government Act remains in effect as passed by Ontario’s democratically elected Legislature

Ford said he will take immediate action to ensure Bill 5 remains in effect.

“Canada’s Constitution makes it clear. The province has exclusive responsibility over municipalities,” said Ford in announcing his government’s action.

“The Better Local Government Act will reduce the size and cost of government while reducing dysfunction at City Hall. The people who are most vocal and fighting this move are a small group of left-wing councillors looking to continue their free ride on the taxpayers’ dollar and a network of activist groups who have entrenched their power under the status quo.”

Ford announced that his government will immediately recall Ontario’s Legislature and introduce legislation that, if passed, will invoke Section 33 of the Constitution and ensure the Better Local Government Act is preserved in time for the October 22 Municipal Election.

Ford also announced that his government will immediately appeal Judge Belobaba’s decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal.

“I believe this decision is deeply concerning and wrong and the result is unacceptable to the people of Ontario,” said Ford.”If you want to make new laws in Ontario – or in Canada – you first must seek a mandate from the people.”

Earlier today, an Ontario judge ruled against Ford’s planned cuts to Toronto city council. Justice Edward Belobaba found Bill 5 to be a breach of the Charter and not justified.

“You can’t change the rules in the middle of a game. That’s not fair to anyone, and this isn’t a game,” said Tory in a press conference.

In the court documents, Judge Belobaba said Ford’s plans would be “radically redrawing” the city’s electoral districts, in the middle of the election.

“The province has clearly crossed the line,” said Belobaba.

The judge found that the bill “substantially interfered with both the candidate’s and the voter’s right to freedom of expression.”

He ruled that the October 22 election shall proceed as scheduled but on the basis of 47 wards, not 25.

http://dailyhive.com/toronto/doug-ford-reaction-toronto-city-council-decision

 

[essguy_]

Do you think having more politicians on our dime is better than having less?

How many would you like to see?

Some people a brainwashed to believe that we NEED many politicians to do a good job. Where is the proof?

The point is, Ford is going about it in a rush. For example - candidates had already declared and organized based upon the existing number of City councillors. IF this had been done on a more timely manner (or for the NEXT election) then the entire process would be under the same rules. What Ford is trying to do IS undemocratic because he's trying to jam it through HALFWAY through the process. There is more than just the day of voting to any election. Ford knows this - so can't see how he can justify what he's doing. It's petty and demeans the entire municipal election.

 

[Frankfooter]

Do you think having more politicians on our dime is better than having less?

How many would you like to see?

Some people a brainwashed to believe that we NEED many politicians to do a good job. Where is the proof?

On the municipal level, yes, more representation is better.
I've dealt with my city councillor a few times, and she's good but overworked and response is slow. Doubling the number of people calling her means less chance you get through or get anything done.

There are deadweight councillors, true, and we could use a wave of new people in but Ford's move is a petty attack on Toronto that would not save the city enough money to justify the loss of representation.

Invoking the notwithstanding clause is a big risk for Ford. He screwed up and wasn't prepared for the city to fight back or for the courts to not support him. Now he has to go full on attack or look like a weak idiot who had no idea what he's doing, other then a spite filled petty grievance with those who wouldn't vote for him. Now he has to hope he can pass the notwithstanding, though that's going to be a circus event. He said in the presser that he'd also appeal, and if that's the case then he'd likely be stuck with an appeal that won't happen until after the election and a move to the withstanding that needs to wait until the appeal.

He's just not very bright, certainly he's in way over his head with this politicking.

 

[JohnLarue]

Toronto taxpayers, which are a separate demographic from Ontario taxpayers.
Sorry to have to 'provoke' you by pointing out your errors yet again.

Once again you show your ignorance
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/blogs/beware-of-ontario-municipalities-asking-for-revenue-tools

At present, Ontario’s municipalities fund their expenditures via a combination of property tax revenues, federal and provincial transfers, and user fees. About 42 per cent of Ontario municipal revenues come from property taxation with federal and provincial government transfers accounting for another 21 per cent

What was that about Toronto taxpayers separate from Ontario taxpayers?

Why do you go to such lengths to mislead others?

 

[JohnLarue]

Even if he did (without calling you a name like stupid), so what? You can make your point without calling somebody stupid. Or does the insult make your point more effective?

FrankFooter has insulted me many a time
He is capable of speaking for himself
if you are so offended, put me on ignore

 

[Frankfooter]

FrankFooter has insulted me many a time
He is capable of speaking for himself
if you are so offended, put me on ignore

larue, would you like to go through your last dozen posts and we'll confirm who is the one who uses the most insults?
Should we find that you use more insults then me, would you be willing to apologize for behaviour you now claim to be offensive?
Is that fair?

 

[essguy_]

Here is the still active link to Doug Ford's "Plan for the people" which was released during the campaign. Unless I'm missing it, there is nothing there about asking for a mandate to reduce the size of Toronto City Council, or any other Ontario City for that matter.

So why is Ford going around saying that he is justified in invoking the Notwithstanding clause to ignore the ruling and cut Toronto City Council in the middle of an election? This is clearly unacceptable for a number of reasons - chief being: IT FUCKS UP THE ELECTION. The election nomination process was for 47 candidates. IF this is to be 25, then some of the candidates from the eliminated wards could legitimately have contended for nomination under the new Ward structure. There is NOT enough time for this. What Ford is doing is wrong. Period. Anti-democratic.

Ford is allowing his personal vendetta against Toronto Council cloud his governance and that is NOT a good sign for the future.

https://www.ontariopc.ca/plan_for_the_people

 

[mandrill]

The reasoning of the decision is unconvincing, particularly the argument that reducing access to politicians is a violation of freedom of expression by voters. Really? What does that say about the Federal ridings where voters have exactly that amount of access - that such ridings violate the Charter? Is access to municipal politicians somehow more necessary than access to Federal politicians on a Charter analysis? Why? Such Charter analysis might be triggered by change, but must be assessed based an analysis of what minimum rights are guaranteed by the Charter. I would have thought that the design of the Federal ridings was strong evidence of the amount of access to politicians required in a democratic society. The decision appears to proceed on the idea that change itself must be justified under s. 1, rather than only change that results in failure to provide minimally required constitutional protections.

Be that as it may, an appeal seems impractical. Even hearing an appeal on an expedited basis, you would have to expect that it would take a month for the Court of Appeal to hear and decide the matter. That would place campaigning as well as election planning into complete chaos for that period. Simply waiting until the next election cycle isn't the answer if the government is serious about the changes meaning real savings as well as real improvements in the functional governance of the City.

If there ever was a case to take the political heat over invoking the notwithstanding clause, this may be it.

Justice Belobaba is an extremely well respected judge, a former dean of Osgoode Hall Law School and an acknowledged national expert in public and administrative law. He's about as close to God as you can get on these topics.

But of course you know better than the judge. Because you're smarter.

Cure the 3 pages of time-wasting Bud arguments.

And no - this is NOT the case for the "notwithstanding" clause. It's a petty political squabble that was launched for no apparent reason on reasoning which is unclear or non existent. If Ford uses the "nothwithstanding" clause about this petty chickenshit, it pisses all over our constitution.

 

[omegaphallic]

Not elected by Toronto.

What business is it of an MPP from Rainy River or Renfrew how many Councillors we have in our town? Let them change the number of MPPs at Queen's Park if they think government's too big and dysfunctional. Most of them were elected by smaller populations than they proposed to force on us. With each of them representing 100,000+ constituents, we could lose thirty or so of them and save way more in paycheques, travel expenses and office costs than DoFo's pissant few million here in Hogtown.

That is what they were elected to do, govern the Province, not Toronto.

Yeah, it'd be like if MPs in Ottawa decided to cut the amount of MPPs by three quarters. It's direct interference in an on going election for partisan reasons. It's straight up authoritianism.

 

[apoptygma]

How is it a great day for democracy??? One unelected judge overturned a legislation passed by the elected body. This has an appeal written all over it.

An appointed judge, that was appointed by an elected body.
You're welcome.

 

[apoptygma]

Totally unprovoked insults.

And you do that a lot. Get some class, will you.

Yeah, he tried that with me a few times and got his posts edited by mods and I imagine his butt spanked.
The triangle icon with ! in it is your friend when it comes to trolls!

 

[SaturnFan]

An appointed judge, that was appointed by an elected body.
You're welcome.

The buck-a-beer Premier says he was democratically elected by 2.3 million people in this year’s election. What he’s choosing to ignore is that 3.3 million people voted for someone else. Premier Dougie is not the voice of a majority of Ontarians. Not even close.

 

[Frankfooter]

Justice Belobaba is an extremely well respected judge, a former dean of Osgoode Hall Law School and an acknowledged national expert in public and administrative law. He's about as close to God as you can get on these topics.

But of course you know better than the judge. Because you're smarter.

Cure the 3 pages of time-wasting Bud arguments.

And no - this is NOT the case for the "notwithstanding" clause. It's a petty political squabble that was launched for no apparent reason on reasoning which is unclear or non existent. If Ford uses the "nothwithstanding" clause about this petty chickenshit, it pisses all over our constitution.

I'm curious where this will lead.
Its almost guaranteed that Toronto won't have an election on schedule now.
It gives the opposition an opportunity to raise a big and justified stink at Queen's Park, not to mention a series of court cases that will stall the election even further.
Ford may succeed with the nowithstanding clause, but could that then be challenged in court as well, as it should be?

If I were Trudeau I'd be thinking about threatening to use the nothwithstanding clause on Ford and the standing of cities in provinces, were that possible.

 

[Bud Plug]

Justice Belobaba is an extremely well respected judge, a former dean of Osgoode Hall Law School and an acknowledged national expert in public and administrative law. He's about as close to God as you can get on these topics.

But of course you know better than the judge. Because you're smarter.

Cure the 3 pages of time-wasting Bud arguments.

And no - this is NOT the case for the "notwithstanding" clause. It's a petty political squabble that was launched for no apparent reason on reasoning which is unclear or non existent. If Ford uses the "nothwithstanding" clause about this petty chickenshit, it pisses all over our constitution.

And here you are, showing just how much you don't want to engage with me again. LOL!

I thought you were a lawyer. Why didn't you just set out why you thought my criticism of his decision was wrong?

Thanks for telling me things about Belobaba that I already knew. I find your reference to him, or to any other judge, as "godlike" to be disturbing, especially coming from a lawyer. As qualified as Belobaba is to be on the bench: 1) lots of "smart" judges have inappropriately interventionist tendencies to use the Charter to create or thwart public policy from the bench, and 2) there's a reason we have appeal courts (notwithstanding the impressive experience and expertise of judges in the courts below).

The notwithstanding clause can be used by any government at at time it meets these sorts of objections from the courts (or even before legislation is challenged). Governments usually resist doing so because they stand to take a lot of political heat for "not respecting rights" and/or "not respecting the judicial process" by pursuing their rights of appeal. This is a case where appeal is incapable of addressing the issue in a timely way. I think its an instance where at minimum those who voted for the PCs will support the government politically if they were to use it. Unlike another poster who suggested they might defer the municipal election in order to address the decision, my bet is that the same parties would be before the courts making the same objections if they did so.

 

[mandrill]

And here you are, showing just how much you don't want to engage with me again. LOL!

I thought you were a lawyer. Why didn't you just set out why you thought my criticism of his decision was wrong?

Thanks for telling me things about Belobaba that I already knew. I find your reference to him, or to any other judge, as "godlike" to be disturbing, especially coming from a lawyer. As qualified as Belobaba is to be on the bench: 1) lots of "smart" judges have inappropriately interventionist tendencies to use the Charter to create or thwart public policy from the bench, and 2) there's a reason we have appeal courts (notwithstanding the impressive experience and expertise of judges in the courts below).

The notwithstanding clause can be used by any government at at time it meets these sorts of objections from the courts (or even before legislation is challenged). Governments usually resist doing so because they stand to take a lot of political heat for "not respecting rights" and/or "not respecting the judicial process" by pursuing their rights of appeal. This is a case where appeal is incapable of addressing the issue in a timely way. I think its an instance where at minimum those who voted for the PCs will support the government politically if they were to use it. Unlike another poster who suggested they might defer the municipal election in order to address the decision, my bet is that the same parties would be before the courts making the same objections if they did so.

You know so little that it is a waste of my time engaging with you.

I'm going to play with the adults now. Continue to post as if I were still present. You will anyway.

 

[oldjones]

The buck-a-beer Premier says he was democratically elected by 2.3 million people in this year’s election. What he’s choosing to ignore is that 3.3 million people voted for someone else. Premier Dougie is not the voice of a majority of Ontarians. Not even close.

If we restrict consideration to the folks entitled to decide how Toronto should be governed — the people who live here — his numbers look even worse. Only a third of local voters supported him and his cronies, NDP and Liberals got 2/3 of the 25 seats. If we take him and his lying supporters at their word, that 'reducing government' was a clear promise to hobble Toronto Council, then he abjectly failed to earn any sort of electoral mandate for it at all.

If we wind up with his 25 Councillors, expect them to be mostly progressives, and to simply steamroller the dysfunctional PC rump. Hope that pleases the voters in White Lake and Windsor who stuck us with DoFo's latest embarrassing brain-fart.

 

[bver_hunter]

The PC Election platform stipulated that they would lower the minimum price that beer can be sold for to $1 (plus deposit) per bottle, the level it was at prior to 2008. This election promise really made zero sense but no one really cared about it. Why on Earth was this Dumb DOFO dude so sneaky not to mention that he would reduce the size of the Toronto Local Council to 25 seats from 47 seats. This would have been a hugely controversial decision, then and then debated until Dumb DOFO explained and tried to justify his cause!! No doubt this was done by impulse and had no pragmatic reasons behind it, especially after he mentioned that NO JOBS WILL BE LOST IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR. There he contradicted that statement of his. Dumb and Dumber DOFO - Justice has been served!!