jacee

We have Indigenous Law, French Civil Code, British Common Law. We also have some different laws in each province. Your desire for sameness and simplicity is not reasonable, not reality. You've mentioned one criterion that the courts apply. There are many. Law is complex.That's why we leave it to the courts to apply. Your opinion may not be consistent with the law. That's just the way it is and will be. Love it or leave it!

Everyone in Canada is subject to the laws of Canada.

Gay-STRAIGHT Alliance Club. Some kids join to support their gay friends. Should teachers out kids to parents because they have gay friends?

Reporting what? That your kid has gay friends?

Everyone shares Canadian freedoms within the law.

Harper had us bombing Syrian homes. So they're here.

Canada has Indigenous law. Aboriginal Title. Aboriginal Rights. Treaty Rights. The Honour of the Queen, and thus the Queen's treaties, must be upheld by law enforcement and the military and the Justice system. Those are Section 35 Constitutional rights. Every police officer and soldier every time.

Every police officer and every soldier is responsible for upholding the Constitutional rights of every person in Canada. To only obey "lawful orders", not orders that violate any person's Constitutional rights. That's on you, every officer, every soldier, every person's rights, everytime. Constitutional rights take precedence. All else in unlawful. Following orders is not your duty. "Lawful" orders, must respect Constitutional rights. That's on you, on the ground, every incident, every officer, every soldier, to every person in Canada, everytime. The courts will hold each of you accountable to every single one of us.

It depends which of Canada's legal traditions you are subject to. It's a complexity that escapes some minds, but that's Canada.

Canada has 3 legal traditions - Indigenous Law, French Civil Code, British Common Law. There are differences, and always will be. Complexity is just part of life.

No it won't.

Yes, a say in development and a share in revenues.

Starting with minority government ...

Interesting that none of his PC MPP's are pushing back at him on this issue: No PC MPP's who are LGBTQ or are parents of LGBTQ people? That seems very odd, and unrepresentative of the population of Ontario.

It is only a matter of law. If you are so concerned about the legality of your property in Caledonia, research the title history and consult with Six Nations BEFORE proposing or investing in property development.It's not rocket science. It's just smart business. Impact-Benefit Agreements (IBA's) are signed all the time between Indigenous Nations and companies wishing to do business on their traditional territories where they still have Aboriginal rights to a say in development and a share in revenues. With good intentions and ethical business practices, all kinds of agreements are being created - e.g., including jobs or housing for the Indigenous community, etc. It only takes knowledge of the law, respect and good will. If you don't have those, you will fail. Your choice. I would suggest that referring to legal Aboriginal rights as "extortion" is not likely to be a successful business plan ... in this century. Banks should not be funding projects if due diligence has not been done in creating a viable business plan.

Agreed! The best way to bust up the cozy and corrupt connections of government with business and industry is NOT to elect Liberal or Conservative governments. It does look like the Liberals claim of concern about people's jobs is insincere, a political ploy (not governance), opportunistic and unfounded. The federal infrastructure projects will still exist so the Canadian workers' jobs will still exist, just perhaps with different companies. https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/criminal-prosecution-of-snc-lavalin-does-not-jeopardize-9-000-jobs-analyst-1.4328995 A criminal conviction in the SNC-Lavalin case could potentially mean a 10-year ban for the Montreal-based giant on bidding on federal infrastructure projects. But Macklin said there is a skills shortage in the construction and infrastructure industry, so SNC-Lavalin’s workers would be in high demand. “Without question those 9,000 jobs are needed right here on Canadian soil,” Macklin said. Macklin explained that ReNew ranks the 100 biggest public infrastructure projects each year and that there are 15 to 18 companies that are similarly large players to SNC-Lavalin. They each work on 20 or more top-100 projects at any given time.

Some people don't get their values in life from religion. Some just practice respect for all people out of common decency. And common decency would suggest not judging people because they are born different than 'the norm'. Gay-straight alliances can help kids figure out how and when to talk to parents about their sexual orientation, and support them through it when parents have difficulty supporting their own child. IMO religions that discriminate against people of different sexual orientations are religions where man-made rules are revered above God's creations.That could also be called heresy. Churches were formed by men to control the minds of the masses and pick money from their pockets. Thus, their "rules" are highly suspect.

Sometimes settlers did pay for the land, but the government embezzled the money from Indigenous Trust Funds. So who committed the illegal acts? The government has fiduciary duty to account for and replace those funds. Extortion? The only power Indigenous people hold over our governments is our own laws. You don't respect the law?

You have much to learn about Canadian law, but let's just start with this: If you did know the laws of Canada, would you respect the laws? Does that matter to you at all? Canada made treaties. Canada broke treaties. Compensation is legally warranted. That's the law, whether you "disagree" or not. If you have a written agreement to sell land to someone, then they occupy the land without paying the agreed-upon amount ... who owns the land?

It's time.

Of course Lametti will (try to) overturn the decision. That's why he was made AG. And then we'll have politicians running the courts however they choose.

There are laws to be observed, and if we evade our own laws, violate their legal rights, as we did in Khadr's case, there will be more successful lawsuits. The law is our best route, and we have laws under which they can be arrested, charged and tried. The children had no choices and did no wrong.

Argus, of course they fight it, because it isn't just about 1 vet: It's about all the others they will also have to compensate if he wins.

Because he's unhinged and hateful.

It's up to you to prove your assertions. I've provided evidence to the contrary that you've ignored, and you've continued with your false assertions, so I question whether you are genuinely interested in truth. I certainly won't accept your assertions as truth. Lol Nor do I claim to know the whole truth or have expertise, but I have informed myself of some Supreme Court precedents - ie, relevant Canadian law - and I don't dismiss the possibilities as you do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanfan_Treaty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dish_With_One_Spoon Some hunting grounds were shared among Indigenous Nations. Distinctions are made by the courts between Aboriginal Title (right of ownership) and Aboriginal Rights (right of use). Establishing Aboriginal Title via the courts is a long, complex and expensive process, as you say, entirely dependent on occupation and use at the time of European contact and since. However, Aboriginal Rights still exist on all of Canada, as all of Canada was Aboriginal Territory at contact, and some rights continue despite 'ceding' territory to the Crown. Those continuing rights include the right to sustain themselves from the land. The courts have interpreted this as Aboriginal rights to a say in development and a share in revenues from development, and the Crown's Duty to consult and to accommodate those rights. Again, there are some legal and evidentiary complexities in establishing the nature and extent of those residual Aboriginal rights, but, for one example, Haudenosaunee Six Nations people have now negotiated hunting rights in conservation areas within city limits. Some of the questions you've asked above will only be answered by the courts via the criteria they have established, and some already have been. You can investigate those yourself. You ignore the fact that Indigenous Nations managed themselves here for thousands of years, including communities, laws, treaties, governance, trade routes and agreements etc etc, before their civilizations were disrupted by European occupation and genocide. It's been a very slow process of settling our debts to Indigenous Peoples, due to government foot-dragging and lack of political will, and the financial inaccessibility of the courts. However, the debts just get bigger every year as interest accrues. We'd be wise to settle sooner than later, so Indigenous communities can once again achieve independence.