Premier Doug Ford's Ontario

[WislaHD]

Now it's appealing to populism. But populism doesn't work unless the people feel angry, excluded, neglected, ignored or powerless.

I blame Wynne for this current situation. Had she stepped down and let new blood run, we'd likely have Liberal gov't now. IDK why the Libs had to run down all their political, public and economic capital to the point where they were destroyed. Why not play the long game, and leave some reserves for the future fight?

They probably did not fear 4 years of Patrick Brown that much.

 

[AlbertHWagstaff]

It's all about resurrecting the Family Compact as the Ford Family Compact (and I don't mean the Focus). This is petty revenge on John Tory and the council that pushed him and his incompetent crack-smoking brother aside. He's clearly obsessed with this and has shown he doesn't care about constitutional government.

John Tory needs to stand up and speak up more passionately against this. The regular rules are out with this gang. At least Jennifer Keesmat seems more fired up and could be a perennial thorn in Thug's ass.

 

[King of Kensington]

Exactly. Ford's developer friends would have an easier time getting their way with a smaller council:

https://twitter.com/Peter_Tabuns/status/1040279968008335361

 

[King of Kensington]

Keith Leslie‏Verified account@CPnewsboy


NDP will challenge the bill slashing size of Toronto council under Standing Order 52, which does not allow introducing substantially the same bill twice in one session of legislature. Bill 31 is virtually identical to Bill 5, struck down by the Superior Court. #onpoli #topoli

12:49 PM - 13 Sep 2018

 

[sixrings]

 

[PinkLucy]

Keith Leslie‏Verified account@CPnewsboy


NDP will challenge the bill slashing size of Toronto council under Standing Order 52, which does not allow introducing substantially the same bill twice in one session of legislature. Bill 31 is virtually identical to Bill 5, struck down by the Superior Court. #onpoli #topoli

12:49 PM - 13 Sep 2018

Doug don't need no stinking rules.

 

[King of Kensington]

A lot of the tools the opposition had in terms of delaying the passing of bills etc. were gutted already during the Harris years.

 

[King of Kensington]

From Nathalie Des Rosiers, who knows a thing or two about constitutional law:

http://nathaliedesrosiers.onmpp.ca/News/15596?rc=l&l=EN

 

[King of Kensington]

https://twitter.com/BissonGilles/status/1040333573688098816

 

[steveintoronto]

https://twitter.com/BissonGilles/status/1040333573688098816

This!

I don't think Caroline has a clue as to what she's doing, as the above appears to be an absolute calamity for the Ford Dynasty.

Marie Heinen nailed it in today's Globe ("Ouch"):
Doug Ford, no power grab is worth undermining Canada’s solid foundation

There now appear to be a number of angles suffice to take back before the courts, but nothing as 'slam dunk' as this one.

Not fair for me to say, but a Justice like Belobaba could rule on this one in a couple of hours. In fact any Superior Justice could/would.

Addendum: It might even be possible to present this at the Ford application for staying Belobaba's ruling. There might be a few legal technicalities on how to proceed with this, but even that works against Ford et al. In lieu of ongoing legal applications, a Justice might just rule for the Status Quo to stand until it's all sorted. And Status Quo is 47 wards.

This also plays into the L-G withholding Assent until her Administrator can report that all legalities have been met...or not.

Under section 67 of the Constitution Act, 1867, if the Lieutenant Governor is absent from the province, is ill, or otherwise unable to perform his constitutional responsibilities, the Administrator of the Government executes his office and functions. The Governor General-in-Council appoints the Administrator. The Chief Justice of Ontario, by tradition, holds a standing appointment as the Administrator, assisted from time to time by the Chief and Associate Chief Justices of the Ontario Court
[...]
Powers vested in Lieutenant Governor 1. In matters within the jurisdiction of the Legislature, all powers, authorities and functions that, in respect of like matters, were vested in or exercisable by the governors or lieutenant governors of the several provinces now forming part of Canada or any of the provinces, under commissions, instructions or otherwise, at or before the passing of the Constitution Act, 1867, are, so far as the Legislature has power thus to enact, vested in and exercisable by the Lieutenant Governor or Administrator for the time being of the Province of Ontario, in the name of Her Majesty or otherwise as the case requires, subject always to the Royal Prerogative as heretofore. R.S.O. 1990, c. L.13, s. 1.
[...]

http://www.gov.on.ca/mgs/en/General/248011.html (4 of 6)15/07/2008 2:40:31 PM RBP - Office of the Lieutenant Governor

http://www.ontla.on.ca/library/repository/ser/278596/2008-2009.pdf

 

[SunriseChampion]

From Nathalie Des Rosiers, who knows a thing or two about constitutional law:

http://nathaliedesrosiers.onmpp.ca/News/15596?rc=l&l=EN

From the above:

There are very few cases dealing with the Notwithstanding Clause since that it has not been used often. However, in a 1988 Supreme Court of Canada case, the Court was clear that the Notwithstanding clause cannot be used retroactively. Bill 5 is a retroactive legislation because it changes nomination dates that have already passed. Using the Notwithstanding Clause today as is planned by the Premier has a retroactive effect: it validates the extension of times that have already expired.

If this is true then......

.....yo, is Mulroney even a real lawyer?

 

[steveintoronto]

It's all about resurrecting the Family Compact as the Ford Family Compact

Almost split my kidneys laffin' on that one!

yo, is Mulroney even a real lawyer?

Yes, but not a legal attorney. She is not a member of the Ontario Bar.

And at this rate, thank God for that...

Btw:

Bill 5 is a retroactive legislation because it changes nomination dates that have already passed.

Reading that link provided by another poster earlier was my first realization of what the catch is with that.

"Retroactively"...but we all knew that as it pertains to Section 30....except that *context* was never explained. This is akin to "You didn't say 'Simon Says' so it doesn't count" but in legal terms.

That is one of many legal aspects now coming to light, any of which can sink Ford in an action, but all put together, has a much better chance of winning. And winning big, at least for this battle. The war may be lost, but the next regime may already be peaceful, so the point is moot.

I feel as sure as I did that Belobaba's ruling was right first time around, and even more delicious reheated with added spice.

 

[King of Kensington]

I wonder what Caroline Mulroney's father-in-law, the esteemed progressive journalist Lewis Lapham, thinks about his daughter-in-law serving as an enabler of the Canadian version of Donald Trump.

 

[SunriseChampion]

I wonder what Caroline Mulroney's father-in-law, the esteemed progressive journalist Lewis Lapham, thinks about his daughter-in-law serving as an enabler of the Canadian version of Donald Trump.

Probably the same thing her actual father thinks of it.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Yes, but not a legal attorney. She is not a member of the Ontario Bar.

And at this rate, thank God for that...

Well, God's taking the piss having her as AG.