Wednesday, April 18, 2007

The bitter truth about the Charter

The Charter Is Undemocratic-Under this document, Parliament and the provincial Legislatures are essentially powerless in any attempt to represent their constituents if a court rules against a piece of legislation or a current law. What exactly makes a judge, and in particular the nine ones that walk around dressed like Santa Claus, so special, so important, so superior to the rest of us that they are capable of deciding the difference between right and wrong. Charterists freak out at the suggestion that judges should be accountable to the public, implying that the general Canadian public is either too stupid to know this fundamental difference or too morally imperfect to be trusted with such a decision. Might I point out as a rebuke that every Canadian justice as a)human and, in most cases, b)trained as a lawyer! Now who would you rather trust to know right and wrong: a farmer or a lawyer?
Here's some bitter truth about the Charter. The leftists worship this document because it helps them to push forward their agenda and force their views on society. But what are the benefits to average Canadians? To those who must work extra hours to offset higher taxes, when the courts award special interest groups millions in compensation for "hurt feelings"? To those who face longer wait times at the hospitals because governments, threatened by "charter challenges" direct healthcare money to fund abortions and sex change? To those who often have to cede job opportunities and promotions because the same Charter that outlaws discrimination against minorities, permits so called "affirmative actions" which discriminate against average Canadians?

Talking about protection - so far an average Canadian could only see the lack of thereof. When it comes to the so called "charter challenges", rights of a convicted criminal or an Islamic extremist trained in Al-Kaeda camp have precedence over the safety and well being of others. Apparently those same Charter zealots who believe in rights don't believe in responsibilities. Finally, it was the same charter that stripped the unborn Canadians of their right to life. Some 250,000 Canadians live with none of their rights protected. About 300 of them are slaughtered every day - because our Charter-scared lawmakers, schools and healthcare workers aren't allowed to tell women that their unborn child is a person. Because the Charter doesn't consider the unborn as such.

The article I quoted above mentions 5 things that are wrong with the Charter. I'd add another one:
6) The Charter hasn't been signed by one of Canada's founding provinces. That's right, Quebec didn't sign the 1982 Canadian Constitution, therefore the charter (which is a part of the Constitution Act) lacks Quebec signature as well. Mario Dumont, Quebec's new opposition leader has recently announced that Quebec may consider signing the Constitution if Ottawa is ready to reopen the debate on spending power. That would be a great step forward to strengthen the ties between Quebec and the rest of Canada. A just spending formula would benefit all the provinces, not just Quebec. Separatism and alienation would decline not just in Quebec but in other regions as well.

But reopening the debate on spending power won't go far enough without reopening the debate on the Charter itself. The rights should be equally balanced with responsibilities. Discrimination against the silent majority should end and the right to life as well as property rights should be included in the Charter. Trudeau viewed backbench MPs as "nobodies"; the Charter he drafted gave unelected judges the power to change and repeal the laws as they please. Their power should be abrogated to restore the Parliament as the sole lawmaking authority. Only then we can be sure that the Charter is there to represent all Canadians, not just special interest groups.

1 comment:

David Wozney said...

The “United Kingdom”, referred to in the present draft of the “Canada Act, 1982, including the Constitution Act, 1982”, refers to the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”, not the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland”.

According to the British North America Act, 1867, the provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick expressed their desire to be federally united into one Dominion under the Crown of the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland”, not the Crown of the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”.