In 2006, Stephen Harper said that even if his Conservatives won a majority government, he would not have "absolute power" because the senators, civil servants and judges appointed by the Liberals would hold him in check.
Now that he has his majority, it looks like not even the courts are going to deter Harper from pushing ahead with Bill C-18, the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, which will eliminate the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly on western wheat and barley sales next August.
Despite the federal court ruling Wednesday that said Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz broke the law by failing to consult with the CWB's board of directors and conduct a vote among wheat and barley producers before making changes to the CWB's single desk, Harper promised Bill C-18 would be passed by the Senate next week.
"Nothing in the ruling contradicts the government's fundamental right to change the law,'' Harper told the House of Commons. Well, at least he's half right.
Justice Douglas Campbell's ruling does not question the validity of Bill C-18 or the government's right to pass legislation. The ruling does say, however, that the government is subject to the laws of the land, specifically Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, which requires a producer plebiscite if changes are made to the board's monopoly powers.
In fact, Campbell's ruling said Ritz's conduct was not only a violation of the law, it was "an affront to the rule of law."
By the judge's definition, "the rule of law'' means that the law applies to everyone, including the government. "When government does not comply with the law, this is not merely non-compliance with a particular law, it is an affront to the rule of law itself,'' the judge said.
Harper obviously missed that part of the ruling, and also the part that said the government could have avoided the legal action taken by the CWB and the Friends of the CWB, if only it had taken the time to consult with and listen to farmers on this issue.
"Had a meaningful consultative process been engaged to find a solution which meets the concerns of the majority, the present legal action might not have been necessary," Campbell said in his ruling.
Nor are Ritz and Harper listening to the legal experts who say that the government is opening itself to a possible court injunction by proceeding with legislation that violates existing law and the federal court ruling.
"That ruling of the court stands, it's the law," said Ned Franks, professor emeritus of political studies at Queen's University. "As long as that appeal process is underway, the government cannot implement the provisions of the law."
Nevertheless, the Conservative government, which filed its appeal of the court's ruling on Friday, said it was going ahead with the legislation to end the Wheat Board's 68-year-old monopoly on marketing western wheat and barley for milling or export.
In other words, the Harper government believes it is above the law.
The Conservatives believe that laws, like the Canadian Wheat Board Act, don't apply to them and that they are free to flout the law - presumably any law passed by previous Parliaments they don't like.
The message in the federal court judgment is that a majority in the House of Commons (especially one opposed by 60 per cent of voters) does not confer absolute power on the PM or his government.
The Tories may sincerely believe they are doing the right thing by giving "marketing freedom" to farmers. At some point in time, they may be able to do so.
In the meantime, they must abide by the law and put the legislation on hold until the final appeal is heard.
Then, they should hold a plebiscite of wheat and barley producers, as required by the act, to see whether the majority of farmers support their position.
Then, and only then, should they proceed to implement the legislation.
This is an important test of the Harper government.
Will it govern by the "rule of law" or the "tyranny of the majority" as it attempts to impose its neo-conservative agenda on the Canadian people?
Origin
Source: leader post
Now that he has his majority, it looks like not even the courts are going to deter Harper from pushing ahead with Bill C-18, the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act, which will eliminate the Canadian Wheat Board's monopoly on western wheat and barley sales next August.
Despite the federal court ruling Wednesday that said Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz broke the law by failing to consult with the CWB's board of directors and conduct a vote among wheat and barley producers before making changes to the CWB's single desk, Harper promised Bill C-18 would be passed by the Senate next week.
"Nothing in the ruling contradicts the government's fundamental right to change the law,'' Harper told the House of Commons. Well, at least he's half right.
Justice Douglas Campbell's ruling does not question the validity of Bill C-18 or the government's right to pass legislation. The ruling does say, however, that the government is subject to the laws of the land, specifically Section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, which requires a producer plebiscite if changes are made to the board's monopoly powers.
In fact, Campbell's ruling said Ritz's conduct was not only a violation of the law, it was "an affront to the rule of law."
By the judge's definition, "the rule of law'' means that the law applies to everyone, including the government. "When government does not comply with the law, this is not merely non-compliance with a particular law, it is an affront to the rule of law itself,'' the judge said.
Harper obviously missed that part of the ruling, and also the part that said the government could have avoided the legal action taken by the CWB and the Friends of the CWB, if only it had taken the time to consult with and listen to farmers on this issue.
"Had a meaningful consultative process been engaged to find a solution which meets the concerns of the majority, the present legal action might not have been necessary," Campbell said in his ruling.
Nor are Ritz and Harper listening to the legal experts who say that the government is opening itself to a possible court injunction by proceeding with legislation that violates existing law and the federal court ruling.
"That ruling of the court stands, it's the law," said Ned Franks, professor emeritus of political studies at Queen's University. "As long as that appeal process is underway, the government cannot implement the provisions of the law."
Nevertheless, the Conservative government, which filed its appeal of the court's ruling on Friday, said it was going ahead with the legislation to end the Wheat Board's 68-year-old monopoly on marketing western wheat and barley for milling or export.
In other words, the Harper government believes it is above the law.
The Conservatives believe that laws, like the Canadian Wheat Board Act, don't apply to them and that they are free to flout the law - presumably any law passed by previous Parliaments they don't like.
The message in the federal court judgment is that a majority in the House of Commons (especially one opposed by 60 per cent of voters) does not confer absolute power on the PM or his government.
The Tories may sincerely believe they are doing the right thing by giving "marketing freedom" to farmers. At some point in time, they may be able to do so.
In the meantime, they must abide by the law and put the legislation on hold until the final appeal is heard.
Then, they should hold a plebiscite of wheat and barley producers, as required by the act, to see whether the majority of farmers support their position.
Then, and only then, should they proceed to implement the legislation.
This is an important test of the Harper government.
Will it govern by the "rule of law" or the "tyranny of the majority" as it attempts to impose its neo-conservative agenda on the Canadian people?
Origin
Source: leader post
No comments:
Post a Comment