Roundup: A notice of appeal before a pause

Posted on by

It’s not wholly unexpected that the federal government filed the notice of appeal on the Federal Court decision around the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal order around First Nations children. No sooner did all of the television news rush to get Cindy Blackstock on camera when another notice went out by the government – that they had reached an agreement to pause said litigation while they sit down with stakeholders in this court case, as well as with two other related class-action lawsuits, and hammer out a deal by December 1st.

There are a few thought around this. The first is that this should have been expected because the real crux of the issue if the Tribunal’s order rather than the compensation itself. The government has committed to spending the money – and there are billions of dollars at stake – but any tribunal that exceeds its statutory authority is something that any government, no matter the stripe, will want to challenge because they don’t want to set a precedent where the Tribunal continues to exceed its authority, and in this case, turns itself into some kind of roving commission of inquiry. (I wrote all about this issue previously here). The notice of appeal spells this out pretty clearly, and while one judge at the Federal Court may have disagreed, he’s certainly not the court of last instance (and frankly, I would rather hear from some of the judges on the Federal Court of Appeal when it comes to matters of administrative law – as with this Tribunal – than I would this particular judge). And while a number of self-righteous reporters demanded to know why the government couldn’t just pay the amount and sort out the issues later, I’m pretty sure that litigation doesn’t work that way.

My other thought is that it looks a lot like the notice of appeal was more out of a need for the government to keep their options open as the negotiations continue, particularly given that it was filed as late as it was, followed immediately by the press conference to explain what was taking place. Frankly I don’t buy the “they filed it at 4:30 on a Friday to bury it” because it wasn’t exactly buried when it dominated the politics shows and is the top story on every news site in the country. That’s not burying something, especially when they have a captive audience. This being said, I’m still don’t think that this government has communicated the issues very effectively (particularly the issue around the Tribunal exceeding its authority), and that’s compounded by the fact that the media writ-large has shown itself to be fairly incapable of writing a legal story with any nuance or complexity, and rely on both-sidesing it with a clear bias toward taking Blackstock’s word as the authority, and by conflating a number of different issues and completely blurring the timeline of the different orders from the Tribunal. This isn’t a black-and-white issue of taking kids to court – but you wouldn’t know it if you only paid attention to what gets reported.

Good reads:

  • Justin Trudeau addressed parliamentarians in the Netherlands, and spoke about the dangers of populism, conspiracy theories, and growing intolerance.
  • NACI has expanded their guidance on groups who should get a booster shot.
  • The rules around vaccination for travellers going by plane or train go into effect today, and the government offered a bit more clarity about what that entails.
  • Steven Guilbeault says he is “cautiously optimistic” about the upcoming COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, while expecting difficult negotiations.
  • Here is a good look at the challenge the government is going to have when they table their online harms bill now that the consultations are completed.
  • The RCMP say they are ready to deploy reservists if necessary as their vaccine mandate goes into effect, but no word on how many will be put on leave.
  • Here is a look at what is and is not working for pandemic mitigation, and why governments are stuck holding onto measures that don’t work effectively.
  • The Royal Canadian Legion says their plan is to raise the flag at the War Memorial to full mast on Remembrance Day, and immediately lower it again.
  • The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a comedian making jokes about a disabled boy who became famous in Quebec did not contravene the province’s rights charter.
  • Jim Carr wants you to know he’s not bitter about being dropped from Cabinet.
  • A report cites that it would cost Alberta $366 million and take five years to establish their own provincial police force (which they should do).
  • Chantal Hébert takes three key messages from the Cabinet shuffle.
  • Heather Scoffield likens Trudeau’s Netherlands visit to someone re-learning to socialise with friends after emerging from the 18-month pandemic.
  • Colby Cosh reads through the dissent on the Supreme Court ruling, and worries what those four judges were thinking in the context of the jokes being told.
  • My weekend column looks at Jason Kenney’s attempts to take on the federal government with no leverage behind him, because his only tool is anger.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

One thought on “Roundup: A notice of appeal before a pause”

  1. > the media writ-large has shown itself to be fairly incapable of writing a legal story with any nuance or complexity, and rely on both-sidesing it with a clear bias … This isn’t a black-and-white issue … but you wouldn’t know it if you only paid attention to what gets reported.

    It is, however, a black-or-white issue of why the #CdnMediaFailed every single day. And why that hashtag is 100% correct and not just a rallying cry from “TruAnons” or “Liberal psychos” or whatever the feckless muckrakers want to call their critics, when they circle the wagons claiming to be above reproach.

    I seem to recall the last time a “legal issue” involving a camera-ready grifter of FN identity was taken at face value by the media, and all the damage that caused. All we’re asking for is honesty and a commitment to informing the public, rather than torquing or slanting or outright lying through omission, and then funnelling that half-story through influential “pundit panels” and how that coverage affects the horse race.

    Instead all we get is tunnel vision on fake “scandals” like WeGhazi, Tofinogate, and the latest buffoon balloon from Barrett, and a stubborn determination to report an angle on any story that makes this government, indeed this PM in particular, look bad, regardless of mitigating circumstances or facts. I get that Liberal comms sucks, but it’s kind of hard for the government to shout above the noise. They face a hostile inquisition from the media, who then lob softball questions to the government’s rivals who either have an agenda of their own or just outright hate their guts.

Comments are closed.