G20 class-action lawsuit seeks $115M
Two people who were jailed during June's G20 summit in Toronto have launched a $115-million class-action lawsuit against the Toronto Police Services Board, federal Attorney General Rob Nicholson and the Peel Police Services Board.
Mike Barber and Miranda McQuade, both of Toronto, are acting as representative plaintiffs for the approximately 1,150 people who were detained, arrested and incarcerated at a temporary detention centre in Toronto's east end after police clamped down on demonstrators during the summit.
The suit was filed Thursday at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Toronto and also includes business owners whose property was vandalized.
The plaintiffs said in a statement of claim that they launched the suit to have the court declare that their constitutional and civil rights were violated, and denounce the conduct of the authorities during the G20 summit.
They also want to, among other things:
•Ensure that democratic rights and fundamental freedoms in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms can be exercised by everyone without fear of detention, arrest, harassment.
•Deter the defendants and any other public authority from acting in a manner that arbitrarily limits people's democratic and constitutional rights.
•Bring the practices of public authorities into line with the charter and common law.
McQuade was arrested on June 26 during a peaceful demonstration at Queen's Park. She was strip-searched and detained for 18 hours at the makeshift detention centre on Eastern Avenue before being released, the claim stated. Barber took part in another demonstration the same day and was arrested, detained and released without being charged after 18.5 hours.
The class-action lawsuit is the second one in less than a month.
In a separate lawsuit that's seeking $45 million, Sherry Good is acting as the representative plaintiff for more than 800 people who claim they were wrongfully arrested during the G20 summit. That one filed Aug. 6 is against the Toronto Police Services Board and the federal attorney general.
The $115-million action has yet to be certified and none of the allegations contained in the statement of claim has been tested or proven.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/09/02/g20-class-action-lawsuit.html#socialcomments#ixzz0yR7Qpxzb
Friday, September 3, 2010
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Credit Valley Hospital (CVH). hires lobbyists, cuts service.
Mississauga hospital hires firm to push expansion funding
A deficit-plagued Mississauga hospital is spending up to $50,000 on lobbyists in a bid to convince the provincial government to bankroll its expansion plans.
David MacNaughton, Premier Dalton McGuinty’s former principal secretary, and Andrew Steele, a former senior advisor to the premier, are among five StrategyCorp Inc. lobbyists retained to make the pitch on behalf of Credit Valley Hospital (CVH).
Contacted by QMI Agency, Ontario Health Minister Deb Matthews said she intends to take a close look at the hospital’s expenditure.
“A hospital CEO does not need a lobbyist to get in contact with me, my staff or my officials,” Matthews said Monday. “I don’t think they need them.”
The hospital is almost completely funded through tax dollars and those funds should be used on patient care, she said.
Hospital spokesperson Wendy Johnson said the lobbyists were hired to help “develop and implement a plan for The Credit Valley Hospital’s Phase III capital project that will support the growing needs of patients and families in Mississauga.”
Johnson said the hospital had also agreed to pay the same firm an undisclosed sum to do “community engagement” work on a 2010-2015 Strategic Plan approved by the board of directors last fall.
The company was helping the hospital reach out to patients, hospital staff, physicians and other community groups on the strategic plan.
Although that job was completed in June, Johnson said the hospital has not received the bill yet and she could provide no information on the cost of the contract.
In April, five members of StrategyCorp registered with the Ontario Lobby Registry to approach the premier’s office, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure regarding capital funding for the hospital.
John Matheson, a principal at StrategyCorp, confirmed the information on the registry but said that the company does not publicly discuss client matters.
The Ontario Lobbyists Registry reveals that Credit Valley Hospital already receives substantial public funding.
The Ontario government, through its Mississauga Halton Local Health Integration Network (LHIN), provides $239.5 million in funding, the provincial Ministry of Health directly injects $37.1 million and publicly-funded Cancer Care Ontario gives $10.5 million.
But the hospital’s strategic plan document says that economic pressures, increasing health care demands, technology costs and “exhausted efficiency measures” all contributed to a $7 million deficit.
“The greatest challenge that CVH faces is to provide excellent patient care to its community while exercising fiscal responsibility,” the plan says. “To date, increasing demand by our growing population meant CVH attempted to provide everything to everyone; however, in order to balance its budget and continue to meet increasing patient demands, significant strategic changes must be made.”
It’s not the first time a hospital has used lobbyists to approach the government.
Former Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman, now a candidate in the Toronto mayor’s race, once criticized the use of private consultants to lobby for more funding.
“I’ve got to figure if you’ve got money to pay lobbyists, you haven’t done all of the work necessary to show me what the real pressure is,” Smitherman said in 2004.
A deficit-plagued Mississauga hospital is spending up to $50,000 on lobbyists in a bid to convince the provincial government to bankroll its expansion plans.
David MacNaughton, Premier Dalton McGuinty’s former principal secretary, and Andrew Steele, a former senior advisor to the premier, are among five StrategyCorp Inc. lobbyists retained to make the pitch on behalf of Credit Valley Hospital (CVH).
Contacted by QMI Agency, Ontario Health Minister Deb Matthews said she intends to take a close look at the hospital’s expenditure.
“A hospital CEO does not need a lobbyist to get in contact with me, my staff or my officials,” Matthews said Monday. “I don’t think they need them.”
The hospital is almost completely funded through tax dollars and those funds should be used on patient care, she said.
Hospital spokesperson Wendy Johnson said the lobbyists were hired to help “develop and implement a plan for The Credit Valley Hospital’s Phase III capital project that will support the growing needs of patients and families in Mississauga.”
Johnson said the hospital had also agreed to pay the same firm an undisclosed sum to do “community engagement” work on a 2010-2015 Strategic Plan approved by the board of directors last fall.
The company was helping the hospital reach out to patients, hospital staff, physicians and other community groups on the strategic plan.
Although that job was completed in June, Johnson said the hospital has not received the bill yet and she could provide no information on the cost of the contract.
In April, five members of StrategyCorp registered with the Ontario Lobby Registry to approach the premier’s office, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure regarding capital funding for the hospital.
John Matheson, a principal at StrategyCorp, confirmed the information on the registry but said that the company does not publicly discuss client matters.
The Ontario Lobbyists Registry reveals that Credit Valley Hospital already receives substantial public funding.
The Ontario government, through its Mississauga Halton Local Health Integration Network (LHIN), provides $239.5 million in funding, the provincial Ministry of Health directly injects $37.1 million and publicly-funded Cancer Care Ontario gives $10.5 million.
But the hospital’s strategic plan document says that economic pressures, increasing health care demands, technology costs and “exhausted efficiency measures” all contributed to a $7 million deficit.
“The greatest challenge that CVH faces is to provide excellent patient care to its community while exercising fiscal responsibility,” the plan says. “To date, increasing demand by our growing population meant CVH attempted to provide everything to everyone; however, in order to balance its budget and continue to meet increasing patient demands, significant strategic changes must be made.”
It’s not the first time a hospital has used lobbyists to approach the government.
Former Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman, now a candidate in the Toronto mayor’s race, once criticized the use of private consultants to lobby for more funding.
“I’ve got to figure if you’ve got money to pay lobbyists, you haven’t done all of the work necessary to show me what the real pressure is,” Smitherman said in 2004.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Veterans feel betrayed Harper is Not behind our troops and veterans.!
"There's a huge outcry and sense of betrayal by the soldiers because a huge part of the population that elected the Conservatives were veterans and soldiers hoping for a little bit more respect for the sacrifice that they endure," said Sean Bruyea, a retired Armed Forces intelligence officer and advocate for veterans. "When you include families, we're talking over one million Canadians that are involved in this sense of betrayal. [The Conservatives] can use the soldiers at their own convenience, but there's no doubt there's going to be a long term political price."
Since coming to power in 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper's (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) Conservative government has taken steps to elevate the place of the Armed Forces in the national mythology, such as updating the citizenship guide for new immigrants to include more about Canada's military history. Many Tory MPs have "Support Our Troops" bumper stickers, and "Red Fridays," whereby people wear red to show support for the military, are in effect in many Conservative MPs' offices.
But Mr. Bruyea said the fact that many wounded veterans still have to fight to get adequate benefits from the government, as outgoing Veterans' Ombudsman Pat Strogan recently drew attention to in an explosive press conference on Aug. 17, has left soldiers feeling used by the Tories. Of particular concern to Col. (Redt'd) Strogan is the government's plan to replace the lifetime monthly pension for disabled veterans with a one-time lump-sum payment of a maximum of $276,089.
"It is beyond my comprehension how the system could knowingly deny so many of our veterans the services and benefits that the people and the government of Canada recognized a long, long time ago as being their obligation to provide," said Col. Strogan, who is himself a veteran and like Mr. Bruyea suffers from post traumatic stress disorder.
Mr. Bruyea said the government has a "profound lack of understanding" when it comes to dealing with veterans suffering psychological injuries. He questioned whether Veterans Affairs Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn (Jonquière-Alma, Que.) was really in control of the file, and also whether civil servants in the department were using Col. Strogan's condition to discredit his criticisms of the benefits system for veterans.
"I see a lot of the same messages coming out of the bureaucracy being mimicked by the political side, and I wonder if the politicians aren't irrelevant in this whole issue," he said. "The bureaucracy has an issue that they somehow think that veterans with psychological injuries view points are somehow less credible than people without physical injuries."
The government has been measured in its response to Col. Strogan's criticisms, although both Mr. Blackburn and Prime Minister Harper alluded that perhaps the ombudsman's anger was partly fueled by the fact that he was not being reappointed to the position.
"There are no positions for life," said Mr. Harper. "If the ombudsman has concerns, has suggestions, the government is open always to incorporate these suggestions in our future programs and I encourage him to work with us."
The Prime Minister said a review of the system is currently underway.
Liberal veterans affairs critic Rob Oliphant (Don Valley West, Ont.) said in his dealings with veterans groups and individual veterans he hasn't come across a detractor of Col. Strogan, and mused that perhaps the government decided that strategically it was better to not reappoint him than to endure his criticism. He said unlike other political appointees whose credibility the Harper government has attacked, such as diplomat Richard Colvin, and former nuclear watchdog Linda Keen, the Conservatives seem less certain of how to handle Col. Strogan.
"Normally they're calculating and they're good at spinning, this one I don't even think they have the nerve to do it. I don't know who made the decision to fire Pat Strogan, but I think it was the wrong decision and some people must know that they've really dropped the ball," he said.
Mr. Oliphant said despite the Tory rhetoric on supporting the troops, in reality the commitment isn't there.
"When I stand up and ask questions on veterans, they hate it," he said. "I look at them and viscerally they get very upset because they have wrapped themselves in that flag, but I think the emperor has no clothes."
Pollster Nik Nanos said the Conservatives definitely have to tread carefully on this issue, but said although Col. Strogan's press conference generated headlines it's not enough on its own to undermine the party brand.
"For the Conservatives, anything that undermines their ability to say that they are 110 per cent behind our troops and veterans is a bit problematic. That being said, one issue does not really define the Conservatives; if there was the perception of a pattern of behaviour then there would be a disconnect in a way that undermines them, but at this point in time it would be fair to say that people would generally think that the Conservatives are very supportive of our troops and veterans and one incident would not necessarily significantly change that attitude."
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
charges of Charter violations.
While it now appears that Toronto police had no special powers to interrogate, arrest and detain people within a five-metre perimeter outside the recent G20 summit in the megacity’s downtown core, the very law that featured that temporary regulation is itself unconstitutional, argues constitutional law scholar Errol Mendes.
He explains that in Committee for the Commonwealth of Canada v. Canada, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 139, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) held that federal regulations and airport officials that prohibited the distribution of political pamphlets at Montreal’s Dorval airport (now known as Montréal-Trudeau) infringed on the freedom of expression of the two respondents (François Lépine and Christiane Deland).
The court was unanimous in its decision that s. 2 (b) of the Charter conferred a right to use public property for purposes of free expression, and the federal government did not possess the absolute power of a private owner to control access to and use of public property — in this case an airport, says Mendes, a professor of law at the University of Ottawa’s common law section and the editor-in-chief of The National Journal of Constitutional Law. A year later, in R.W.D.S.U., Local 558 v. Pepsi-Cola Canada Beverages (West) Ltd., [2002] 1 S.C.R. 156, the court again cited s. 2 (b) in upholding the right the union had to picket at secondary locations, such as retail outlets that carried the appellant’s products.
By extension, the right to picket equally applies to political demonstrations, and therefore Ontario’s Public Works Protection Act (PWPA), which gives guards or police officers the power to ask anyone approaching a public work to identify him or herself, and its controversial Ontario Regulation 233/10, are unconstitutional, says Mendes.
He explains that the regulation’s provision of designating an area “within five metres of a line drawn” in an area surrounding the Toronto G20 summit is particularly troubling, since it has since been revealed that the zone was within the secured site and not, as previously thought, outside of it. “If the police knew that in advance and went ahead and arrested people, they violated a whole bunch of Charter rights.”
In its “A Breach of the Peace” preliminary report following the G20 summit, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), which had five of its 50 monitors arrested and detained during the two-day event, believes that police conduct “was, at times, disproportionate, arbitrary and excessive,” and that policing and security efforts “failed to demonstrate commitment to Canada’s constitutional values.”
Even before the summit, the CCLA warned that cordoning off large areas of downtown Toronto could violate several sections of the Charter: s. 7, which guarantees individual liberty, including freedom of movement; and s. 2 (b), (c) and (d) that guarantee freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association.
During the summit, the invocation of the 71-year-old PWPA to give police the power to “search, without warrant, any person entering or attempting to enter” the security perimeter could constitute a breach of the s. 8 search-and-seizure protection in the Charter, according to Nathalie Des Rosiers, general counsel of the CCLA. She says the mass arrest of 1,105 people — the largest in Canadian history, which resulted in 263 charges being laid, many of them involving conspiracy to commit a criminal act — not only displayed the “overreach” of police, but violated s. 9 of the Charter (the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned).
“We’re worried that the way in which the breach-of-the-peace provisions of the Criminal Code were used by police may be unconstitutional,” says Des Rosiers, who is on leave as a professor in the University of Ottawa’s civil law section. “They’re not supposed to be used by police just to arrest people because they’re fed up with them protesting. Police have a duty to protect the right of peaceful assembly.”
The CCLA has called on federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson to strike a committee to modernize the “old-fashioned and antiquated” Criminal Code provisions dealing with unlawful assemblies and riots. The association also wants an independent public inquiry into the actions of the police during the G20 summit, and has called on the Ontario government to either amend or repeal the PWPA that gave police broad powers that are “inconsistent with current Charter requirements.”
In force for a week leading up to and including the G20 meeting, Ontario Regulation 233/10 was only printed in The Ontario Gazette after the summit, on July 3, and has been dubbed the “secret” law that was only known to police and government officials.
Dave Vasey, a 31-year-old York University student believed to be the only person charged with breaching the five-metre regulation under the PWPA, showed up at Toronto’s Old City Hall in late July only to discover his name was not on the docket and the court did not have information on his case. Vasey, who says he was just standing with a friend outside the security perimeter two days before the G20 summit, was surrounded at one point by as many as 10 Toronto police officers. When asked for identification, he declined to show any and was promptly arrested and searched.
But the PWPA only allows police to conduct a search if a person is entering or attempting to enter a public work, which didn’t apply to Vasey, says Howard Morton, a Toronto criminal defence lawyer who, as a member of the Law Union of Ontario, agreed to act pro bono on G20-related cases, including Vasey’s.
Morton is part of a chorus, which includes the CCLA, critical of the Ontario government for secretly introducing the PWPA regulation and not widely informing the public about it in advance of the G20 meeting.
“If you want people to obey a law, the first thing you do is tell them it exists and explain to them what they’re required to do or what they’re not allowed to do. Whenever additional powers are conferred on the police, issues involving the Charter of Rights are automatically raised,” says Morton.
Vasey plans to commence civil proceedings against the Ontario government and Toronto police. As well, two class actions have been launched by G20 summit protesters, including a suit against the Toronto Police Services Board and the Attorney General of Canada.
Those cases could benefit from the recent SCC decision in Vancouver (City) v. Ward, [2010] S.C.J. No. 27, according to Mendes. “Until that decision, the lower courts gave the impression that as long as there was no malice on the part of the police when they were performing their duties — even if they ended up potentially violating Charter rights — there was no right to damages. What the Ward decision seems to imply is that even without malice, an individual is entitled to compensation.”
In a unanimous ruling, the SCC upheld a trial decision that awarded Vancouver lawyer Cameron Ward $5,000 for a strip search that violated his s. 8 Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.
Ward, who had previously represented clients in civil rights cases against Vancouver police, including student complainants following the infamous pepper-spraying incident during the APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) meeting of Asia-Pacific leaders in Vancouver in November 1997, was partially strip searched and spent four-and-a-half hours in “squalid conditions” in a provincial jail on Aug. 1, 2002 after police acted on a tip and mistakenly accused him of planning to throw a pie at an event then-prime minister Jean Chrétien was attending in the city.
When he was finally released after the public ceremony, police refused to apologize and Ward went to B.C.’s Supreme Court to seek compensation from the City of Vancouver, which employs the police, and the province, which operated the jail at the time he was detained.
Now, he has the precedent-setting SCC decision to refer to when representing clients who find themselves wrongly arrested and detained. “For the first time in 28 years since the Charter was enacted, the Supreme Court of Canada was asked whether damages are an appropriate remedy for a violation of a Charter right, and the justices said quite clearly and unequivocally, yes they are,” says Ward, who has appeared before both the Commission for Complaints Against the RCMP and B.C.’s Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner.
“In my view, fundamental civil rights and liberties cannot be suspended simply because some important people are coming to town. It’s very important that the police and other security agents fully respect citizens’ constitutional rights and that there ought to be consequences if they willfully violate those rights.”
With allegations that women detainees during the G20 summit were strip searched and sexually assaulted by male police officers — as outlined in a July 26 letter to federal Public Safety Minister Vic Toews from Claire Tremblay, national coordinator for the Ad Hoc Coalition for Women’s Equality and Human Rights — Mendes would like the SCC to render an opinion not only on the conduct of police during the G20 summit, but on the PWPA they, in hindsight, wrongly relied on to wield their authority.
“Political expression is the core of our democracy, and this was one of the most serious attempts to undermine that most important aspect of freedom of expression,” he explains.
He explains that in Committee for the Commonwealth of Canada v. Canada, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 139, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) held that federal regulations and airport officials that prohibited the distribution of political pamphlets at Montreal’s Dorval airport (now known as Montréal-Trudeau) infringed on the freedom of expression of the two respondents (François Lépine and Christiane Deland).
The court was unanimous in its decision that s. 2 (b) of the Charter conferred a right to use public property for purposes of free expression, and the federal government did not possess the absolute power of a private owner to control access to and use of public property — in this case an airport, says Mendes, a professor of law at the University of Ottawa’s common law section and the editor-in-chief of The National Journal of Constitutional Law. A year later, in R.W.D.S.U., Local 558 v. Pepsi-Cola Canada Beverages (West) Ltd., [2002] 1 S.C.R. 156, the court again cited s. 2 (b) in upholding the right the union had to picket at secondary locations, such as retail outlets that carried the appellant’s products.
By extension, the right to picket equally applies to political demonstrations, and therefore Ontario’s Public Works Protection Act (PWPA), which gives guards or police officers the power to ask anyone approaching a public work to identify him or herself, and its controversial Ontario Regulation 233/10, are unconstitutional, says Mendes.
He explains that the regulation’s provision of designating an area “within five metres of a line drawn” in an area surrounding the Toronto G20 summit is particularly troubling, since it has since been revealed that the zone was within the secured site and not, as previously thought, outside of it. “If the police knew that in advance and went ahead and arrested people, they violated a whole bunch of Charter rights.”
In its “A Breach of the Peace” preliminary report following the G20 summit, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), which had five of its 50 monitors arrested and detained during the two-day event, believes that police conduct “was, at times, disproportionate, arbitrary and excessive,” and that policing and security efforts “failed to demonstrate commitment to Canada’s constitutional values.”
Even before the summit, the CCLA warned that cordoning off large areas of downtown Toronto could violate several sections of the Charter: s. 7, which guarantees individual liberty, including freedom of movement; and s. 2 (b), (c) and (d) that guarantee freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association.
During the summit, the invocation of the 71-year-old PWPA to give police the power to “search, without warrant, any person entering or attempting to enter” the security perimeter could constitute a breach of the s. 8 search-and-seizure protection in the Charter, according to Nathalie Des Rosiers, general counsel of the CCLA. She says the mass arrest of 1,105 people — the largest in Canadian history, which resulted in 263 charges being laid, many of them involving conspiracy to commit a criminal act — not only displayed the “overreach” of police, but violated s. 9 of the Charter (the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned).
“We’re worried that the way in which the breach-of-the-peace provisions of the Criminal Code were used by police may be unconstitutional,” says Des Rosiers, who is on leave as a professor in the University of Ottawa’s civil law section. “They’re not supposed to be used by police just to arrest people because they’re fed up with them protesting. Police have a duty to protect the right of peaceful assembly.”
The CCLA has called on federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson to strike a committee to modernize the “old-fashioned and antiquated” Criminal Code provisions dealing with unlawful assemblies and riots. The association also wants an independent public inquiry into the actions of the police during the G20 summit, and has called on the Ontario government to either amend or repeal the PWPA that gave police broad powers that are “inconsistent with current Charter requirements.”
In force for a week leading up to and including the G20 meeting, Ontario Regulation 233/10 was only printed in The Ontario Gazette after the summit, on July 3, and has been dubbed the “secret” law that was only known to police and government officials.
Dave Vasey, a 31-year-old York University student believed to be the only person charged with breaching the five-metre regulation under the PWPA, showed up at Toronto’s Old City Hall in late July only to discover his name was not on the docket and the court did not have information on his case. Vasey, who says he was just standing with a friend outside the security perimeter two days before the G20 summit, was surrounded at one point by as many as 10 Toronto police officers. When asked for identification, he declined to show any and was promptly arrested and searched.
But the PWPA only allows police to conduct a search if a person is entering or attempting to enter a public work, which didn’t apply to Vasey, says Howard Morton, a Toronto criminal defence lawyer who, as a member of the Law Union of Ontario, agreed to act pro bono on G20-related cases, including Vasey’s.
Morton is part of a chorus, which includes the CCLA, critical of the Ontario government for secretly introducing the PWPA regulation and not widely informing the public about it in advance of the G20 meeting.
“If you want people to obey a law, the first thing you do is tell them it exists and explain to them what they’re required to do or what they’re not allowed to do. Whenever additional powers are conferred on the police, issues involving the Charter of Rights are automatically raised,” says Morton.
Vasey plans to commence civil proceedings against the Ontario government and Toronto police. As well, two class actions have been launched by G20 summit protesters, including a suit against the Toronto Police Services Board and the Attorney General of Canada.
Those cases could benefit from the recent SCC decision in Vancouver (City) v. Ward, [2010] S.C.J. No. 27, according to Mendes. “Until that decision, the lower courts gave the impression that as long as there was no malice on the part of the police when they were performing their duties — even if they ended up potentially violating Charter rights — there was no right to damages. What the Ward decision seems to imply is that even without malice, an individual is entitled to compensation.”
In a unanimous ruling, the SCC upheld a trial decision that awarded Vancouver lawyer Cameron Ward $5,000 for a strip search that violated his s. 8 Charter right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.
Ward, who had previously represented clients in civil rights cases against Vancouver police, including student complainants following the infamous pepper-spraying incident during the APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) meeting of Asia-Pacific leaders in Vancouver in November 1997, was partially strip searched and spent four-and-a-half hours in “squalid conditions” in a provincial jail on Aug. 1, 2002 after police acted on a tip and mistakenly accused him of planning to throw a pie at an event then-prime minister Jean Chrétien was attending in the city.
When he was finally released after the public ceremony, police refused to apologize and Ward went to B.C.’s Supreme Court to seek compensation from the City of Vancouver, which employs the police, and the province, which operated the jail at the time he was detained.
Now, he has the precedent-setting SCC decision to refer to when representing clients who find themselves wrongly arrested and detained. “For the first time in 28 years since the Charter was enacted, the Supreme Court of Canada was asked whether damages are an appropriate remedy for a violation of a Charter right, and the justices said quite clearly and unequivocally, yes they are,” says Ward, who has appeared before both the Commission for Complaints Against the RCMP and B.C.’s Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner.
“In my view, fundamental civil rights and liberties cannot be suspended simply because some important people are coming to town. It’s very important that the police and other security agents fully respect citizens’ constitutional rights and that there ought to be consequences if they willfully violate those rights.”
With allegations that women detainees during the G20 summit were strip searched and sexually assaulted by male police officers — as outlined in a July 26 letter to federal Public Safety Minister Vic Toews from Claire Tremblay, national coordinator for the Ad Hoc Coalition for Women’s Equality and Human Rights — Mendes would like the SCC to render an opinion not only on the conduct of police during the G20 summit, but on the PWPA they, in hindsight, wrongly relied on to wield their authority.
“Political expression is the core of our democracy, and this was one of the most serious attempts to undermine that most important aspect of freedom of expression,” he explains.
Monday, August 30, 2010
CCLA Round-up: 2 Months After the G20 - Accountability Inside the Courts
Anthony Navaneelan gives an overview of the ongoing criminal and civil court cases related to the G20.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Swedish hearts have the edge.
The findings were published in the Tuesday issue of Circulation: Heart Failure, an American Heart Association journal.
The nine-year study, conducted among 31,823 middle-aged and elderly Swedish women, looked at the relationship between the amount of high-quality chocolate the women ate and compared their risk for heart failure.
The quality of chocolate consumed by the women has a higher density of cocoa content comparable to dark chocolate by American standards, it was observed.
Researchers found that women who ate an average of one to two servings of the high-quality chocolate per week had a 32 percent lower risk of developing heart failure.
Those who had one to three servings per month had a 26 percent lower risk, while those who consumed at least one serving daily or more did not appear to benefit from a protective effect against heart failure.
The lack of a protective effect among women eating chocolate every day is probably due to the additional calories gained from eating chocolate instead of more nutritious foods, said Dr. Murray Mittleman, lead researcher of the study.
"Chocolate is a relatively calorie-dense food and large amounts of habitual consumption is going to raise your risks for weight gain," said Dr. Mittleman, director of the cardiovascular epidemiology research unit at Harvard Medical School's Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
"But if you're going to have a treat, dark chocolate is probably a good choice, as long as it's in moderation," he added.
High concentration of compounds called "flavonoids" in chocolate may lower blood pressure, among other benefits, according to mostly short-term studies. This is the first study to show long-term outcomes related specifically to heart failure.
Although 90 percent of all chocolate eaten across Sweden during the study period was milk chocolate, it contains about 30 percent cocoa solids. US standards only require 15 percent cocoa solids to qualify as dark chocolate.
The average serving size for Swedish women in the study ranged from 19 grammes among those 62 and older, to 30 grammes among those 61 and younger. The standard American portion size is 20 grammes.
The nine-year study, conducted among 31,823 middle-aged and elderly Swedish women, looked at the relationship between the amount of high-quality chocolate the women ate and compared their risk for heart failure.
The quality of chocolate consumed by the women has a higher density of cocoa content comparable to dark chocolate by American standards, it was observed.
Researchers found that women who ate an average of one to two servings of the high-quality chocolate per week had a 32 percent lower risk of developing heart failure.
Those who had one to three servings per month had a 26 percent lower risk, while those who consumed at least one serving daily or more did not appear to benefit from a protective effect against heart failure.
The lack of a protective effect among women eating chocolate every day is probably due to the additional calories gained from eating chocolate instead of more nutritious foods, said Dr. Murray Mittleman, lead researcher of the study.
"Chocolate is a relatively calorie-dense food and large amounts of habitual consumption is going to raise your risks for weight gain," said Dr. Mittleman, director of the cardiovascular epidemiology research unit at Harvard Medical School's Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
"But if you're going to have a treat, dark chocolate is probably a good choice, as long as it's in moderation," he added.
High concentration of compounds called "flavonoids" in chocolate may lower blood pressure, among other benefits, according to mostly short-term studies. This is the first study to show long-term outcomes related specifically to heart failure.
Although 90 percent of all chocolate eaten across Sweden during the study period was milk chocolate, it contains about 30 percent cocoa solids. US standards only require 15 percent cocoa solids to qualify as dark chocolate.
The average serving size for Swedish women in the study ranged from 19 grammes among those 62 and older, to 30 grammes among those 61 and younger. The standard American portion size is 20 grammes.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Transport Canada is issuing an Air-worthiness Directive on Bombardier-built Q400 turboprops relating to the potential for cracks or corrosion near the landing gear.
By Caroline Van Hasselt and Kaveri Niththyananthan Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES TORONTO (Dow Jones)--Canada's civil-aviation safety regulators told Dow Jones Monday that it is in the process of issuing an air-worthiness bulletin on Bombardier-built Q400 turboprops relating to the potential for cracks or corrosion near the landing gear.
"Transport Canada is aware of concerns relating to the turboprop aircraft landing gear, and the department is in the process of issuing an Air-worthiness Directive on this subject," says Transport Canada spokeswoman Maryse Durette. Such a directive would require all operators to correct the specific problem.
Australia's Qantas Airlines Ltd. (QAN.AU) on the weekend temporarily grounded five of its 21 Q400 turboprops after conducting inspections related to recent Bombardier service bulletins that were issued after U.K. carrier Flybe Ltd. (FBE.YY) raised concerns about the undercarriage fittings on its Q400 fleet. This latest issue is not related to the landing-gear problems that grounded Scandinavia-based SAS Group's Q400 fleet in 2007, says a Bombardier Inc. (BBD.B.T) spokesman.
Montreal-based Bombardier is "communicating with all owners of Q400 to provide them with the next steps, and Transport Canada is monitoring" the company's "proactive response," Transport Canada said. Bombardier issued the service bulletins in July and April related to the fittings in the turboprop's nacelle area near the landing gear. The nacelle area is a streamlined enclosure that's not part of the fuselage.
Of the 300 Q400 fleet worldwide, 222 planes need to be inspected, says John Arnone, a Bombardier spokesman. The inspections are meant to catch any corrosion, fatigue or stress before it becomes an issue. To date, 60% of the 222 planes have been inspected, and 4% of the inspected planes were found to have potential problems and have been either fixed or awaiting parts, he says.
This latest issue with the Q400, a popular quiet short-haul turboprop, comes just months after Canadian and U.S. regulators ordered the company to fix certain angle-of-attack, or AOA, components on the Q400 that warn of aerodynamic stalls. Bombardier first alerted Transport Canada to potential AOA problems last fall after one of its suppliers informed it of a stalling incident due to icing on a non-Bombardier aircraft. French parts-maker Thales SA (HO.FR) is Bombardier's supplier.
Sydney-based Qantas said in a statement, dated Aug. 21, that it grounded the five short-haul planes after "inspection of a main landing-gear component." The airline began inspecting its fleet after discussions with Bombardier and after Flybe, a major operator of the aircraft, detected a cracked fitting during a regular maintenance check.
A spokesman for the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority confirmed it was aware of the issue. "Flybe were performing normal maintenance checks and informed the manufacturer," the spokesman said, adding that the regulator isn't aware of any further issues.
A Flybe spokesperson told Dow Jones that "procedures, such as the checks carried out on the Q400 fleet, are standard practice throughout the industry," adding that its Q400 fleet is operating its normal schedule, with no delays or cancellations.
U.K. airlines must notify the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority of safety critical issues within 96 hours of an incident. Foreign airlines are regulated by their home authorities.
Qantas said it expects the component fix to take around seven days for each aircraft. As a result, QantasLink cancelled some of its Sydney-Canberra Q400 services, is operating supplementary jet flights and using larger aircraft where possible.
"The issue is not an immediate flight safety concern, but does need to be rectified before each aircraft can return to service," said Alan Joyce, Qantas' chief executive.
In 2007, SAS pulled all 27 of its Q400 fleet out of service after landing-gear-related problems led to three crash landings within seven weeks. Charlotte, N.C.-based Goodrich Corp. (GR) supplied the landing gear. A year later, Bombardier agreed to pay SAS Scandinavian compensation of around $164 million in cash and credit for future aircraft purchases. As part of the agreement, SAS agreed to order 27 aircraft, with an option for 24 more.
In Toronto Monday, Bombardier B shares are down 9 Canadian cents, or 2%, to C$4.47 on about 1.9 million shares. In Sydney, Qantas closed slightly lower at A$2.59 on 23.4 million shares.
"Transport Canada is aware of concerns relating to the turboprop aircraft landing gear, and the department is in the process of issuing an Air-worthiness Directive on this subject," says Transport Canada spokeswoman Maryse Durette. Such a directive would require all operators to correct the specific problem.
Australia's Qantas Airlines Ltd. (QAN.AU) on the weekend temporarily grounded five of its 21 Q400 turboprops after conducting inspections related to recent Bombardier service bulletins that were issued after U.K. carrier Flybe Ltd. (FBE.YY) raised concerns about the undercarriage fittings on its Q400 fleet. This latest issue is not related to the landing-gear problems that grounded Scandinavia-based SAS Group's Q400 fleet in 2007, says a Bombardier Inc. (BBD.B.T) spokesman.
Montreal-based Bombardier is "communicating with all owners of Q400 to provide them with the next steps, and Transport Canada is monitoring" the company's "proactive response," Transport Canada said. Bombardier issued the service bulletins in July and April related to the fittings in the turboprop's nacelle area near the landing gear. The nacelle area is a streamlined enclosure that's not part of the fuselage.
Of the 300 Q400 fleet worldwide, 222 planes need to be inspected, says John Arnone, a Bombardier spokesman. The inspections are meant to catch any corrosion, fatigue or stress before it becomes an issue. To date, 60% of the 222 planes have been inspected, and 4% of the inspected planes were found to have potential problems and have been either fixed or awaiting parts, he says.
This latest issue with the Q400, a popular quiet short-haul turboprop, comes just months after Canadian and U.S. regulators ordered the company to fix certain angle-of-attack, or AOA, components on the Q400 that warn of aerodynamic stalls. Bombardier first alerted Transport Canada to potential AOA problems last fall after one of its suppliers informed it of a stalling incident due to icing on a non-Bombardier aircraft. French parts-maker Thales SA (HO.FR) is Bombardier's supplier.
Sydney-based Qantas said in a statement, dated Aug. 21, that it grounded the five short-haul planes after "inspection of a main landing-gear component." The airline began inspecting its fleet after discussions with Bombardier and after Flybe, a major operator of the aircraft, detected a cracked fitting during a regular maintenance check.
A spokesman for the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority confirmed it was aware of the issue. "Flybe were performing normal maintenance checks and informed the manufacturer," the spokesman said, adding that the regulator isn't aware of any further issues.
A Flybe spokesperson told Dow Jones that "procedures, such as the checks carried out on the Q400 fleet, are standard practice throughout the industry," adding that its Q400 fleet is operating its normal schedule, with no delays or cancellations.
U.K. airlines must notify the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority of safety critical issues within 96 hours of an incident. Foreign airlines are regulated by their home authorities.
Qantas said it expects the component fix to take around seven days for each aircraft. As a result, QantasLink cancelled some of its Sydney-Canberra Q400 services, is operating supplementary jet flights and using larger aircraft where possible.
"The issue is not an immediate flight safety concern, but does need to be rectified before each aircraft can return to service," said Alan Joyce, Qantas' chief executive.
In 2007, SAS pulled all 27 of its Q400 fleet out of service after landing-gear-related problems led to three crash landings within seven weeks. Charlotte, N.C.-based Goodrich Corp. (GR) supplied the landing gear. A year later, Bombardier agreed to pay SAS Scandinavian compensation of around $164 million in cash and credit for future aircraft purchases. As part of the agreement, SAS agreed to order 27 aircraft, with an option for 24 more.
In Toronto Monday, Bombardier B shares are down 9 Canadian cents, or 2%, to C$4.47 on about 1.9 million shares. In Sydney, Qantas closed slightly lower at A$2.59 on 23.4 million shares.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)