Senior Tory Minister to be named judge?

[jdobbin]

I certainly hope so, if only to restore some balance.

Please do if only to prove the hypocrisy even more of the Conservative Party of Canada.

[Bryan]

So you no problem going from politician to judge with no transition?

Each case is different. From career back-bencher to the judicial bench? NO. But if you have a guy of Toews' experience who is willing to do the job, you snap him up right away. From provincial and then federal justice minister straight to the bench? GO FOR IT! You'd be crazy NOT to put pressure on him to take the job, and suspend any and all waiting periods to do it.

I certainly hope so, if only to restore some balance.

Same here. In this case, clearly the end justifies the means. The current judges are largely out of touch with reality, and a rational balance needs to be entrenched BEFORE any patronages are cut off for good. Fix the problem, THEN impose the binding policies that will ensure it doesn't get broken again.

Edited May 24, 2008 by Bryan

[Kitchener]

The current judges are largely out of touch with reality

Good to see that no amount of debunking or requests for actual evidence can shame the dittoheads into rationality. Just jump on in with your LIBRUL BLEADING HART JUDGES!!! theory. No evidence or coherent reasoning required.

[August1991]

The more the process of appointing Toews looks like a purely political solution to the problem of where to warehouse a powerful ally who's been holed below the electoral waterline, the more corrosive it is of public confidence in the reliability of the process and the government.

I haven't followed this closely but I wonder how much of this is a way to get rid of Toews/give him a parachute.

They got rid of Idi Amin by offering him a chateau in Saudi Arabia and Baby Doc Duvalier got one in the south of France. Trudeau created generous MP pensions so that they wouldn't be afraid to leave. How much of this is to offer Toews a place where he can hang his hat?

[Kitchener]

How much of this is to offer Toews a place where he can hang his hat?

Good question and well-asked.

That's the problem. Because this is somewhere between a wide open question and plausibly answerable with "Most of it is to parachute him," it's not a move that inspires confidence in the process. Of course politics has long been part of such appointments; but rules and traditions like the 2-year wait helped ensure that political considerations were at most necessary conditions, and not sufficient conditions, for judicial appointments.

None of which is to deny that Toews could turn out to be a fine judge. Yet the same might be true of any Canadian whose name we drew out of a hat; indeed, a randomly selected Canadian wouldn't likely have a track record of, let's face it, political bombast in describing current justices and the legal system as a whole. Whatever his real virtues are, they will look more like reasons for appointing him in a few years than they look right now.

[Bryan]

Good to see that no amount of debunking or requests for actual evidence can shame the dittoheads into rationality. Just jump on in with your LIBRUL BLEADING HART JUDGES!!! theory. No evidence or coherent reasoning required.

The preponderance of the thread you linked to refutes what you're saying. Lots of actual cases listed.

Our current justice system is far too lenient. Toews was working hard to correct that as justice minister. The only legitimate criticism I've ever heard from anyone against anything he proposed was that we might not be able to afford some of the reforms under the current system. No rational person was actually opposed to the changes themselves.

[jdobbin]

Each case is different. From career back-bencher to the judicial bench? NO. But if you have a guy of Toews' experience who is willing to do the job, you snap him up right away. From provincial and then federal justice minister straight to the bench? GO FOR IT! You'd be crazy NOT to put pressure on him to take the job, and suspend any and all waiting periods to do it.

I don't think each case if different and at one time neither did Toews. He was adamantly against appointing politicians to the bench even if they had a wealth of experience. He believed it made people cynical about the judiciary and that it led to political judges.

I guess what he meant to say was that he didn't believe anyone except Tory politicians should be appointed otherwise we could say that Toews is lying, opportunistic coward who is looking for a parachute so that he won't have to be embarrassed going door to door in the most religious riding in the country.

[jdobbin]

How much of this is to offer Toews a place where he can hang his hat?

Two powerful Tories in Manitoba are angling for his seat.

There is a lot of anger in the riding at Toews. Not as the politician but as the person.

It is the most religious riding in Canada according to some. It is the riding where Jake Epp, a decent man, was kicked out of the church he founded because he was a Health minister who wouldn't stop abortions. In short, he was shunned.

There is likely a special kind of pain for Toews if he runs again.

[Kitchener]

The preponderance of the thread you linked to refutes what you're saying.

Ah, well. As Dorothy Parker reputedly said, you can lead a horticulture, but you can't make her think.

Mutatis mutandis.

[Bryan]

Two powerful Tories in Manitoba are angling for his seat.

There is a lot of anger in the riding at Toews. Not as the politician but as the person.

People in the riding are mostly supportive of Toews. They want him to run again, but they also want him to take the judicial seat if he is offered it. If anything, they're a little dismayed that he has NOT come right out and said he would take the seat. The ONLY thing he's said is that he intends to run in the next election.

Toews in judge's robes gets nod in Steinbach

[Kitchener]

Toews in judge's robes gets nod in Steinbach

That's the feeling of many Steinbach residents who've been following media reports he's a candidate for a federal appointment to the Court of Queen's Bench.

"It's perfect. It's excellent," Elaine Boyde said just outside Toews' Main Street constituency office. "The thing is, is he going to be a strict one, one who's tough on kids who steal cars?"

Sigh.

Do you suppose she means "...unless that's inconsistent with the Young Offenders Act, of course. We wouldn't want him to be a judicial activist, after all!"

[jdobbin]

People in the riding are mostly supportive of Toews. They want him to run again, but they also want him to take the judicial seat if he is offered it. If anything, they're a little dismayed that he has NOT come right out and said he would take the seat. The ONLY thing he's said is that he intends to run in the next election.

The anger is about his personal life not his job in politics. The story in Ottawa from some Tory sources in the National Post was that Harper was displeased with what his pending divorce case is likely to being up. Some high profile Tories are jockeying for the seat including the well liked national president of the party.

As I said, it isn't the politician they are starting to get angry about, it is the man. So far the information on his personal life has been coming out in dribs and drabs. However, this riding is very socially conservative. If they are prepared to punish a decent man like Jake Epp, you can be sure that Toews is not immune and in an election, it will get messy.

Anywhere else that a divorce happened might not be a big deal but in Provencher, it is a big deal.

Edited May 24, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

That's the feeling of many Steinbach residents who've been following media reports he's a candidate for a federal appointment to the Court of Queen's Bench.

"It's perfect. It's excellent," Elaine Boyde said just outside Toews' Main Street constituency office. "The thing is, is he going to be a strict one, one who's tough on kids who steal cars?"

Sigh.

Do you suppose she means "...unless that's inconsistent with the Young Offenders Act, of course. We wouldn't want him to be a judicial activist, after all!"

Steinbach is a law and order community. They are also very socially conservative. The local paper has not revealed any news on the divorce case until it becomes public record. For a community that believes marriage is sacrosanct, the details behind the divorce are going to make people angry.

[Shakeyhands]

Steinbach is a law and order community. They are also very socially conservative. The local paper has not revealed any news on the divorce case until it becomes public record. For a community that believes marriage is sacrosanct, the details behind the divorce are going to make people angry.

Ohh.. I hope there is some toe tapping involved!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Bryan]

Do you suppose she means "...unless that's inconsistent with the Young Offenders Act, of course. We wouldn't want him to be a judicial activist, after all!"

No, I think she probably means "Scrap the Young Offenders Act. These punks are getting away with murder, we need judges who aren't afraid to punish criminals for their crimes."

[Kitchener]

No, I think she probably means "Scrap the Young Offenders Act. These punks are getting away with murder, we need judges who aren't afraid to punish criminals for their crimes."

No. Please pay attention to the specific point at issue.

The YOA is the law of the land. Doesn't it sound like she's hoping for judges to deliver particular outcomes, irrespective of the law?

Or put it this way, if it will help: tell me what sort of evidence you would accept as suggesting that "judicial activism" is essentially used as code for "insufficiently socially conservative rulings" rather than "rulings that construct rather than following the law of the land"? Then we can keep an eye out, you and me, for evidence of that sort...

[Wild Bill]

No. Please pay attention to the specific point at issue.

The YOA is the law of the land. Doesn't it sound like she's hoping for judges to deliver particular outcomes, irrespective of the law?

Or put it this way, if it will help: tell me what sort of evidence you would accept as suggesting that "judicial activism" is essentially used as code for "insufficiently socially conservative rulings" rather than "rulings that construct rather than following the law of the land"? Then we can keep an eye out, you and me, for evidence of that sort...

Interesting. Unless I misunderstand you, you are implying that the judicial system should NOT reflect the popular will of the people, as expressed through some form of democratic process.

Popular will might be conservative or it might be liberal but at least it would be democratic. I fail to see how in any but the most tenuous stretch leaving it up to judges can be construed as democratic.

Of course, this only bothers democrats.

If I've misunderstood you please correct me.

[Kitchener]

Interesting. Unless I misunderstand you, you are implying that the judicial system should NOT reflect the popular will of the people, as expressed through some form of democratic process.

You misunderstand me, and it's hard to understand why. Clearly the YOA was democratically enacted by elected representatives.

I fail to see how in any but the most tenuous stretch leaving it up to judges can be construed as democratic.

Indeed. Which is why I don't take very seriously a report of a single person venting spleen and wanting a judge to go git them no-good modern teenagers and their car-stealin' ways. That's a demand for "judicial activism". (Except it isn't, of course, because we all know that only lib'ruls can be judicial activists.)

If she wants tougher sentences for teens, she should look to the democratic process to revise the YOA -- not moon over (who she hopes is) a hanging judge.

[Wild Bill]

You misunderstand me, and it's hard to understand why. Clearly the YOA was democratically enacted by elected representatives.

Indeed. Which is why I don't take very seriously a report of a single person venting spleen and wanting a judge to go git them no-good modern teenagers and their car-stealin' ways. That's a demand for "judicial activism". (Except it isn't, of course, because we all know that only lib'ruls can be judicial activists.)

If she wants tougher sentences for teens, she should look to the democratic process to revise the YOA -- not moon over (who she hopes is) a hanging judge.

Ah, now I see your argument. At first glance, I can agree with much of it.

Where it seems to me to break down is where you say "she should look to the democratic process to revise the YOA ". That only works if you have a responsive demographic process. Here in Canada we don't elect our judges at any level and our MP's represent their party before the wishes of their constituents. She could take her concerns to her MP but it would be a waste of time if the idea was not part of the party platform.

Come the next election it's likely that NONE of the parties will be offering her issue as part of their platform! Or, if offered, she will have to take the entire platform to get support for her one issue. The choice will be to abandon one party where she agrees with most everything in favour of another, where she agrees with only a few things.

Forgive me, but your advice strikes me as rather glib! In effect, you tell her to quit her bitching in favour of a particular action. Only your suggested action can never work!

I'm beginning to wonder if at some time in the past you may have stood for public office...

[Kitchener]

Ah, now I see your argument. At first glance, I can agree with much of it.

As you should, given the principles of democratic action that you were proclaiming exactly one post back.

Where it seems to me to break down is where you say "she should look to the democratic process to revise the YOA ". That only works if you have a responsive demographic process.

...and that's how long it took those principles to disappear.

Bottom line: if she wants judges who will ignore the YOA, you want activist judges. So she shouldn't want Toews, who has thundered against judicial activism for years now. He'd either hew strictly to the law, and leave it to elected legislators to decide what that law should be, or he'd "legislate from the bench" and be both a hypocrite and the activist judge that contemporary Conservatives profess to find unacceptable.

[Wild Bill]

As you should, given the principles of democratic action that you were proclaiming exactly one post back.

...and that's how long it took those principles to disappear.

Bottom line: if she wants judges who will ignore the YOA, you want activist judges. So she shouldn't want Toews, who has thundered against judicial activism for years now. He'd either hew strictly to the law, and leave it to elected legislators to decide what that law should be, or he'd "legislate from the bench" and be both a hypocrite and the activist judge that contemporary Conservatives profess to find unacceptable.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm simply pointing out inconsistencies.

Myself, I favour electing judges. That being said, I would NOT vote for Toews! In my mind he still stands for the social conservative wing of the old Reform Party. That was the part that held us back!

I would be happier in a system where we elected judges, especially to the Supreme Court. Not as appointments but as regular elected positions, subject to re-election every 4 years or whatever's considered practical. Also, despite how weakly citizen power filters through our Parliament I would rather see Charter issues decided in Parliament and not from a judge's bench.

So I'd want a judge to follow the law but I'd like to feel that as a citizen I have at least some influence on that law. I guess that also makes me unsupportive of a Charter of Rights in the first place. I had far more respect for the old system of British Common Law.

But hey, I'm an old guy with archaic ideas, I guess!

As long as disco stays dead...

[jdobbin]

It seems more and more newspapers are starting to say what they think is Toews' main problem now in regards to being appointed judge. It is that it looks like he is being bailed out because of his personal life.

The Winnipeg Sun is no friend of the Liberals and this is what they say today.

http://winnipegsun.com/News/Columnists/Eng...661041-sun.html

As we learned this week, though, Toews' public persona has been masking some personal turmoil. His three-decade-old marriage is kaput and, according to the National Post, a love child was sired last fall by the 55-year-old with a much younger woman in Joy Smith's office. Eep.

None of this would be newsworthy if most any other person did this. Some marriages end and old dudes will occasionally knock up women out of wedlock.

For better or worse, that's life these days.

But Toews is the second most powerful politician in Manitoba and is the MP for a good chunk of the Bible Belt. The optics of an MP involved in such shenanigans is less than wonderful for a Tory government which counts on "family values" peeps for their support.

As a result, Toews has been forced to defer answers during question period to his deputy, watch quietly as the Liberals mockingly call him the "minister of family values", deny persistent rumours of his impending political retirement, and probably listen to a few constituents who are less than thrilled with him.

All this signals your credibility is in question, Vic.

I have tried to limit my comments on his personal life but it now all anyone can talk about in Manitoba when it comes to Toews in the last days. It will only get worse as his divorce proceedings go public. It promises to be very messy.

[eyeball]

His three-decade-old marriage is kaput and, according to the National Post, a love child was sired last fall by the 55-year-old with a much younger woman in Joy Smith's office.

Perhops this love child will make a better judge someday, especially in cases that involve the YOA. By the way has Vic Towes ever tried marijuana?

Edited May 25, 2008 by eyeball

[sharkman]

It seems more and more newspapers are starting to say what they think is Toews' main problem now in regards to being appointed judge. It is that it looks like he is being bailed out because of his personal life.

The Winnipeg Sun is no friend of the Liberals and this is what they say today.

http://winnipegsun.com/News/Columnists/Eng...661041-sun.html

I have tried to limit my comments on his personal life but it now all anyone can talk about in Manitoba when it comes to Toews in the last days. It will only get worse as his divorce proceedings go public. It promises to be very messy.

What's the big deal? The Liberal party appointed countless judges, senators and such when they were in power, the government of the day appoints people as positions are needed. Tough noogies to liberals whining about it now.

[eyeball]

We're talking about Liberals not liberals.

The deal is it seems Liberals are whining about the same thing conservatives are, hypocrisy. That's not to say Liberals aren't hypocrits, conservatives on the other hand, like liberals, are only human, so its no wonder both are holding their noses at the moment.

Edited May 25, 2008 by eyeball