Let's
Think Big: New Directions for the End of
2014
January
2015
Click square for index
How does one begin to think about policies
for Canada at the end of 2014? From
my reading and from some of the Canadian
media activity I come to a three-point
plan. It doesn’t sound exciting – but
read!
Renew rights - a process for
updating Charter Rights and the
Constitution
Have an energy policy and tax
carbon use
Put a tax on extreme wealth
The Charter of Rights does not address all
rights promised to those living in Canada
by the treaties that almost all
legislatures in Canada agreed to when the
treaties were ratified. The Supreme Court
is not and does not act as a
Constitutional Court that ensures rights
promised to those coming before it. It
shapes the law in a political fashion and
acts with deference to the federal
parliament that appoints it.
A 2000 Report by the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights supported by
the UN High Commissioner for Refugees
urged Canada to provide an appeal on the
merits for persons in the refugee status
determination procedure. The courts were
largely silent. In 2012 the Federal
government finally legislated a limited
appeal on the merits. The Act defined
groups of refugees that are not to get the
appeal. In its May 2014 Harkat judgment
the Supreme Court tolerated the “security
certificates” criticized by the UN
Committee against Torture in 2012. These
allow indefinite incarceration of a
non-citizen if the Minister has reasonable
grounds to believe a threat to national
security exists based on secret evidence.
No trial. No conviction. A court only
reviews that the Minister has reasonable
grounds to believe. Groups of refugees
seeking status in Canada were denied
normal refugee medical care and, when the
Federal Court restored the previous normal
care, the government appealed and
introduced new legislation to deny social
assistance. Behind these issues are civil
rights and economic social and cultural
rights which Canadian courts have no
particular obligation to ensure that the
individuals before them can enjoy.
The right to protection from cruel
treatment is also at issue in the wide use
of solitary confinement in jails. Saturday
December 6th the Globe reported the story
of Eddie Snowshoe, a prison inmate who
suffered from mental-health issues who
hanged himself after spending 162
consecutive days in solitary confinement.
And policing has had its share of
problems. I recall the G20 in Toronto, the
roundups and detention of bystanders under
degrading conditions. These are human
rights at issue. Then the remarkable Globe
editorials on the Harper government’s
originally proposed election reform laws
actually had some impact on the
legislation – although not enough. This
relates to a political right under the
treaty UN Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.
Also in December 2014, media weighed in on
a judge’s decision to grant a mother’s
aboriginal minority rights to decide on
the treatment for her daughter’s cancer
over the children’s’ aid society view that
the treatment should be chemotherapy. On a
related aboriginal matter - and
other than the deaths in solitary
confinement - it was intriguing to find
the Globe’s Jeffrey Simpson drawing on the
Constitution to attack the Mohawk use of
bloodline to limit reservation residence.
The reference is important because it
points to the fact that the Canadian
Constitution did not come into being with
the concurrence of aboriginal peoples nor
with the agreement of Quebec.
There has been no shortage of reading
about the global warming and the use of
fossil fuels. There was renewed media
comment when the US joined China in making
a pledge towards reducing the use of
fossil fuels. But then Canada did not join
the US when the US moved. The Globe
editorial December 13 criticized the
government for doing nothing, and then
moved from its earlier stance and spoke
positively on the BC Carbon Tax. It is
reassuring that the Globe could say this
in the midst of its other reports about an
oil glut, the fall in the price of
gasoline to 3-year lows, the demise of the
electric car in the “wheels” section - and
the like. The fact is that fossil fuels
remain a limited resource, getting more
costly and risky to find and extract, and
linked to atmospheric warming. In a
pre-Christmas interview the Prime Minister
appeared open to some form of carbon tax.
Behind this, the right to the environment
is highly relevant. But that right goes
beyond civil rights.
From reading I am aware of other problems
and their potential solutions in the
so-called “economy.” I recall the economic
debacle of 2009, the bail-outs of banks
and GM that didn’t help retired workers’
pension plans, and produced inter alia the
consequent Occupy Toronto protests. Large
bonuses to departing executives seemed to
add insult to the use of large amounts of
public funds. During 2014 an amazing book
appeared in English: Capital in the 21st
Century by Thomas Piketty. It offers an
analysis of the basics of Western
economies and suggests things to do, most
importantly to reduce inequalities.
So there are varied accumulated policy
problems: an expanding correctional
services staff with high levels of
solitary confinement, election laws not
aligned to advice from Elections Canada,
restrictions on health and now possibly
welfare for refugees seeking the status in
Canada, no national energy policy and no
action on UN climate change, no secure
open process for judicial appointments –
and on … The response to the current
predicament could be bits and pieces of
legislation and policy moves in response.
But I prefer beginning with the
foundations and engaging Canadians right
there – yes it’s a novelty – it’s called
democracy. Now I bring back my three parts
with details:
1. A Process to Grant Rights Promised
and Update the Constitution
A regular process should be put in place
to keep tweaking the Constitution so that
Canadians get to enjoy all the rights that
Canada has signed onto with the agreement
of the provinces. It has already been
possible to make small Constitutional
changes even during the scaredy cat years
of “don’t touch the Constitution.”
I would begin on the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms and find ways to bring the
Charter into line with international
rights promised by treaties already
ratified by Canada with the OK of all the
provinces. And I would explore bringing
the Supreme Court and a shared process for
nominations of its judges into the
Constitution. It might be a fitting
partial response to the reconciliation
process begun by the aboriginal peoples to
attempt to include them in a shared
Constitution again as was attempted in the
Charlottetown Accord. The Senate may well
be another element of the Constitution
worth an early review. I suspect a
“phase-in and test-along-the-way” approach
might get things going.
2. A national climate/energy policy and
tax on fossil fuels towards a right to
the environment
There needs to be a national energy policy
with a tax on fossil fuel use to ensure
Canada has kicked the habit on the UN
schedule. My reading puts the priority on
getting off use of fossil fuels (I would
personally include uranium).
Living in Ontario I am heartened by the
growing number of roof top solar panels on
city roofs (especially larger buildings)
and on barns and on the ground in the
countryside. Growing interest in hybrid
and electric cars is also heartening.
Power storage needs to be high on the
research agenda. The possibility of
cooperation between Ontario and Quebec
around energy is particularly exciting. 3. Review Income and Capital Taxes
and put some Tax on Extreme Wealth
In his book on capital mentioned above,
Piketty clearly thinks its time to review
taxes. But I don’t just want to change
income tax and add a carbon tax for fossil
fuel use. From my reading of Piketty, a
capital tax is important. Capitalism
cannot be left alone or it may kill
itself. The alternative has been
totalitarianism - something I greatly
fear. I take Piketty’s recommendation of
seeking, regionally or globally, a small
progressive annual tax on capital to save
capitalism from itself as well as to
protect the democratic society I value. It
needs to be small to preserve legitimate
incentives.
Piketty does not suggest such a tax solely
at the national level but I don’t see why
not – if it serves as a way of documenting
wealth – a documentation that he seeks. An
annual progressive tax on absolute wealth
(not just on income from wealth) would be
an appropriate beginning response to the
concerns of the ‘Occupy Toronto’ movement.
So there you have it – a new direction:
renew rights; act on climate/energy; and
put a tax on extreme wealth.
