News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 582     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 555     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 688     2 

Premier Doug Ford's Ontario

Watchdog calls on attorney general to commit to Ontario Human Rights Commission’s independence in wake of controversial appointments

From link.

In the wake of controversial appointments to the Ontario Human Rights Commission, the province’s chief human rights commissioner is calling on Attorney General Doug Downey to sign an agreement reaffirming the commission’s independence.

In addition, Renu Mandhane notes in a Feb. 7 letter that Downey “failed to consult” with her in advance of the January appointments of two part-time commissioners and has, “despite multiple requests,” not met with her since becoming attorney general in June 2019.

Mandhane wrote she is “concerned” that Downey’s failure to affirm an existing agreement signed by Caroline Mulroney, his predecessor, may compromise the commission’s “autonomy and independence from government and could result in Ontario failing to meet established international standards for human rights institutions.”

Reached by the Star, Mandhane said the letter, posted to the commission’s web site, speaks for itself.

The Star sent a list of questions to Downey Wednesday morning and did not receive a response.

Last month, Premier Doug Ford quietly appointed a Toronto police officer and a professor with Progressive Conservative links to sit on the commission.

Neither Const. Randall Arsenault nor Violetta Igneski, a McMaster University associate professor in philosophy, were among a list of 330 applications submitted to Mandhane for vetting.

The part-time appointments come amidst the commission’s ongoing inquiry into allegations of racial profiling and discrimination against the Toronto Police Service, raising questions around conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

Mandhane told the Star last month she had come up with a shortlist of about 30 candidates late last year under a process she believed had been agreed to by the Ministry of the Attorney General.

When the picks were made public by the Star, Downey’s office said in a statement that Arsenault and Igneski were named “to support and advance the commission’s mandate to provide leadership for the promotion, protection and advancement of human rights, and builds partnerships across the human rights system.

“The appointments were made in accordance with the Ontario Human Rights Code,” the statement said.

Since coming into power, the Ford government had allowed all of the part-time commissioner positions to lapse, leaving only Mandhane in place as full-time chief commissioner. Her five-year term expires in the fall.

The two appointments were immediately criticized, including by Toronto-based Black Legal Action Centre, a provincially-funded legal aid clinic. In an open letter, the clinic said the appointment process and the premier’s handpicked candidates raise questions about the commission’s integrity and ability to combat racism.
Click to expand...

“Indeed, this seems to be one more step in Ford’s gutting of the human rights system in Ontario,” the clinic said in the letter.

In her letter to Downey, Mandhane points out that under the province’s Agencies and Appointments Directive a change in minister requires the new minister to sign a letter of affirmation, which is then attached to an existing memorandum of understanding between the commission and the government.

The memorandum, wrote Mandhane, is “an important assurance of the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s (OHRC) ‘capacity to function independently and impartially.’
Click to expand...

“Because the OHRC’s autonomy from government and independence are not explicitly guaranteed by the Ontario Human Rights Code, the government must take other concrete steps to guarantee the independence and autonomy” of the commission, she wrote.

Both of the recent commissioner appointments have Progressive Conservative ties. In September 2018, Arsenault posted a picture on Instagram of himself and his partner in uniform with the premier at that year’s Ford Fest in Vaughan.
Click to expand...
 
Jasmine18 said:
Well what ever the reason having something forced for people to buy becoming expensive to people who can least afford it is regressive.
Click to expand...

Well, maybe people need to sort themselves out better. If you can't afford to drive then don't.

Those same people wouldn't be better off without being forced to have insurance. They'd be like the fools you see on telly after their home has burnt down moaning about having nowhere to go because the place wasn't insured. I don't even feel bad for you at this point....like, what...make no effort to ensure your own welfare and then we're supposed to care?
 
W. K. Lis said:
If Doug Ford wasn't wasting our time by continuing to degrade our education system, maybe they'll be actually helping our students.




Only the large school bus driver is required to have a seat belt. Same as in Ontario.

From link.



Would Doug spend money to install and use seat belts on school buses? No, it cost money, so we can't. Saving money is more important than children or safety, for Doug.
Click to expand...
Did Ford take out all the seat belts and sell them for scrap, or are there seatbelts such a new invention that they only came out 18 months ago?
 
SunriseChampion said:
Well, maybe people need to sort themselves out better. If you can't afford to drive then don't.

Those same people wouldn't be better off without being forced to have insurance. They'd be like the fools you see on telly after their home has burnt down moaning about having nowhere to go because the place wasn't insured. I don't even feel bad for you at this point....like, what...make no effort to ensure your own welfare and then we're supposed to care?
Click to expand...
Issue is if a clean driver has to pay 3500 dollars a year for insurance

That is a ridiculous cost to drive considering there are no viable transit options for suburb commuting.

There is no reason why car insurance is so expensive in ontario.
 
Jasmine18 said:
Issue is if a clean driver has to pay 3500 dollars a year for insurance
Click to expand...

Who and where is this?

That's around what I was paying after a series of speeding tickets on highways. Yes, highways. No red lights. No accidents. No careless. Just driving at an appropriate speed. That was insurance for my work truck. For a 15 year old Golf that I bought for 500$ the cheapest insurance I could get was 630$/mth.
Don't have to tell me about insurance costs.

What "clean" driver is paying that?

There is no reason why car insurance is so expensive in ontario.
Click to expand...

Yes there is....we've just gone over it: the fact that it's mandatory.

Although, I might add that a large part of the cost is due to the very poor skills of Ontario drivers. Licensing is much too easy and focuses not on confidence and skill but on being a paranoid and afraid driver.

Do you drive?

I drive for work every day (unfortunately; trust me, it's shit in this town) and I can damn well see why insurance rates might be so high. That's how insurance works: when the risks are high, it costs more. Let me tell ya something.....with these idiots on the roads, the risks are high.
 
My insurance decreased significantly when I moved out of downtown, despite the fact that I barely used the car when living there.
 
I was quoted as an early 20s driver 3500 dollars a year with no tickets in brampton lol....

i dont buy that driving in Toronto is many times riskier than urban major urban areas in the country.

My point being is that insurance costs are highest in areas of new Canadians and lower-income people.

Yes driving is not a right but due to our system, it is pretty much a requirement to get around living in Canada.

So that is why I think its time for the government to step in because I dont think people need to be paying 2000-3000 dollars a year to drive their car around if they have no record.
 
Jasmine18 said:
I was quoted as an early 20s driver 3500 dollars a year with no tickets in brampton lol....

i dont buy that driving in Toronto is many times riskier than urban major urban areas in the country.

My point being is that insurance costs are highest in areas of new Canadians and lower-income people.

Yes driving is not a right but due to our system, it is pretty much a requirement to get around living in Canada.

So that is why I think its time for the government to step in because I don't think people need to be paying 2000-3000 dollars a year to drive their car around if they have no record.
Click to expand...

As someone who worked in insurance..............(in another lifetime)

The actuarial valuations vary....but I guarantee you, skin colour/ethnicity is a non-factor.

What is done is a straight calculation, driver x (vehicle x claim size/frequency,) x postal code

In the case of drivers, virtually no company, when I did it, looked at the individual.

It was, roughly, sex (M/F), x years experience, x years accident-free) Being accident-free with zero years experience nets you zero reduction.

Its being accident free for 'x' years that gets you a reduction (varies by company).

Postal code is a proxy for the likelihood of an accident.

I have no idea what it looks like today; but some years back, Brampton was the worst for claims-frequency and size.

Accordingly, all drivers in Brampton got dinged for extra premium.

After all, its not up to you alone whether you're in an accident, but also up to those with whom you share the road.

The frequency and size of claims for someone's exact vehicle were also factored.

There are other factors (commercial use, whether you have driver-training etc. )

FWIW, I happen to favour removing sex and postal code as factors.

We all pay for crappy drivers, because of Ontario's policy of 'facility' insurance in which we all keep premiums affordable for bad drivers.

I confess the logic of that escapes me. I take it, it was based on the idea that we didn't want anyone driving without insurance.

But...still.
 
Last edited:
but maybe we should insurance out the bad drivers for all our sakes instead of making innocent drivers pay 100s of dollars extra a year which they rather can use to have an easier life.


Like I think 10% of Drivers in brampton need their liscence taken back as they clearly bribed someone to pass.
 
Last edited:
Postal code is definitely a factor, east or west of Bathurst St made a difference a few years back with City Place addresses having higher premiums.
 
Jasmine18 said:
but maybe we should insurance out the bad drivers for all our sakes instead of making innocent drivers pay 100s of dollars extra a year which they rather can use to have an easier life.


Like I think 10% of Drivers in brampton need their liscence taken back as they clearly bribed someone to pass.
Click to expand...

10% is probably low; in every postal code in this province!
 
BurlOak said:
Did Ford take out all the seat belts and sell them for scrap, or are there seatbelts such a new invention that they only came out 18 months ago?
Click to expand...
The Feds passed a law (after Ford took office) to make seatbelts mandatory on medium and large highway busses by 2020.


A school bus clearly fits within the weight guidelines of a "medium to large" bus, and are frequently used on highways.

So, for someone whose government claims to be on the side of students, it's a pretty simple choice.

Can Doug Ford, whose government regulates school buses, justify why a bus carrying teen hockey players a couple of times a month requires more safety features than a bus that carries teens every single day to school?
 
Last edited:
zang said:
The Feds passed a law (after Ford took office) to make seatbelts mandatory on medium and large highway busses by 2020.


A school bus clearly fits within the weight guidelines of a "medium to large" bus, and are frequently used on highways.

So, for someone whose government claims to be on the side of students, it's a pretty simple choice.

Can Doug Ford, whose government regulates school buses, justify why a bus carrying teen hockey players a couple of times a month requires more safety features than a bus that carries teens every single day to school?
Click to expand...

The regulation is for vehicles built after a certain date, so it will take some time for widespread seat belts to appear across the industry. Highway coaches can be in service for years. There are particular certification standards for school buses that pretty much preclude any bus built before 2013 without costly retrofitting. In the case of seatbelts, I'm not sure if retrofitting would be appropriate since the anchor points and probably other factors would have to be engineer certified, which may or may not be easy.
 
zang said:
The Feds passed a law (after Ford took office) to make seatbelts mandatory on medium and large highway busses by 2020.


A school bus clearly fits within the weight guidelines of a "medium to large" bus, and are frequently used on highways.

So, for someone whose government claims to be on the side of students, it's a pretty simple choice.

Can Doug Ford, whose government regulates school buses, justify why a bus carrying teen hockey players a couple of times a month requires more safety features than a bus that carries teens every single day to school?
Click to expand...
That was nice of the Federal government. How much money did they transfer to Provinces to help them cope with the unexpected expense.?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top