The Senate has shown it will not voluntarily respect the Charter of Rights and the rule of law. However, the Supreme Court of Canada can do what the Senate refuses to do. It can use the Duffy case to define and limit both the scope and abuse of parliamentary privilege.
Senator Mike Duffy, 74, pictured in 2014 at his trial in Ottawa, will be retiring from the Senate in May when he turns 75. Sen. Duffy was charged in 2014 by the RCMP with 31 offences over allegedly improperly claiming primary residence outside of Ottawa for living expenses, but he was acquitted of all charges in 2016. He filed a civil lawsuit against the Senate and the RCMP in 2017, which the Ontario Superior Court dismissed in 2018. He filed an unsuccessful appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 2019 and in October 2020, he filed an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Hill Times file photograph by Jake Wright
TORONTO—Canada’s Supreme Court only accepts a fraction of the thousands of applications it’s asked to consider every year. To be heard, the case must be novel and of overriding public interest.
People. Policy. Politics. This is an exclusive subscriber-only story.
The partisan finger-pointing that has defined the debate around Bill C-10 over the past two weeks is rooted in an attempt by the government, and a few MPs, to make sure that influential streaming companies that rely on uploaded content, such as YouTube, are bound by rules designed to promote Canadian cultural content, and protect Canadian broadcasters.
The establishment of an administrative tribunal could ‘encourage’ companies to pursue that as an avenue of redress, instead of first trying to comply with the privacy commissioner’s findings, the watchdog says.
Public-private partnerships require significant design and engineering work, community engagement, environmental assessment and planning, as well as contracting with the person who’s going to build it during the actual construction period and ramp up into operation, says CIB CEO Ehren Cory.