Underneath the Golden Boy - Robson Hall Faculty of Law
Underneath the Golden Boy - Robson Hall Faculty of Law Underneath the Golden Boy - Robson Hall Faculty of Law
80 Underneath the Golden Boy constitutional right such as freedom of expression, it should take all reasonable steps to ensure that it is not unnecessarily or inappropriately applied. I must reiterate that I do not believe that freedom of expression is absolute and that I respect and appreciate the powerful arguments favouring prohibitions against “hate speech”. However, it seems that the current legislative and jurisprudential scheme in Canadian federal (and much provincial) law goes unnecessarily far in attempting to deal with the problem. In some circumstances it may be counterproductive to its legitimate goals. I have attempted to identify from Canadian legislation and cases, comparative and international jurisprudence, literature, and indeed general knowledge, some of the circumstances which seem to require some sort of legislative response. It is my wish to develop legislation that would cover these circumstances without having the far-reaching effect on expression described earlier. I do not know if I have even come close to achieving an appropriate balance, but I hope that this attempt at least encourages further thought in this area that might lead to that goal.
Effective Foreign Credential Recognition Legislation: Give It Some Teeth BRYAN SCHWARTZ AND NATASHA DHILLON-PENNER I. INTRODUCTION I n recent history, when recruiting abroad, Canada’s immigration policies have focused on highly educated and financially established populations. 1 Applicants assume that because their education almost guarantees them Canadian entry, the job market needs their skills, and therefore, their credentials, earned outside Canada, will be recognized. Sadly, there is a disconnect between the federal government’s recruitment criteria, the labour needs of the different provinces and territories, and the standards set by the selfregulated professions. In the last few years the federal government has been working with provincial governments to successfully target and recruit immigrants to fill provincial labour gaps. 2 Unfortunately, even though the various levels of government are working in concert for the common good, the bodies that set the criterion for entry into professional fields can unilaterally block governmental initiatives. The issue of foreign credential recognition has been a hot topic in political circles for the last few years. In their 2006 election platform, Harper’s Conservatives promised to ease and expedite process for the recognition of immigrants’ foreign credentials. 3 Ontario introduced legislation meant to 1 See Canada, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Skilled workers and professionals: Who can apply, online: Citizenship and Immigration Canada . 2 See Canada, Human Resources and Social Development Canada, Temporary Foreign Worker Program, online: Human Resources and Social Development Canada . 3 See Stephen Harper pledges action on immigrant credentials, online: Stand Up for Canada: Conservative Party of Canada 2006 Election Campaign . See
- Page 39 and 40: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 41 and 42: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 43 and 44: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 45 and 46: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 47 and 48: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 49 and 50: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 51 and 52: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 53 and 54: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 55 and 56: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 57 and 58: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 59 and 60: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 61 and 62: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 63 and 64: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 65 and 66: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 67 and 68: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 69 and 70: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 71 and 72: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 73 and 74: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 75 and 76: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 77 and 78: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 79 and 80: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 81 and 82: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 83 and 84: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 85 and 86: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 87 and 88: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 89: Hate Communication Restriction and
- Page 93 and 94: Effective Foreign Credential Recogn
- Page 95 and 96: Effective Foreign Credential Recogn
- Page 97 and 98: Effective Foreign Credential Recogn
- Page 99 and 100: Effective Foreign Credential Recogn
- Page 101 and 102: Effective Foreign Credential Recogn
- Page 103 and 104: Effective Foreign Credential Recogn
- Page 105 and 106: Effective Foreign Credential Recogn
- Page 107 and 108: Effective Foreign Credential Recogn
- Page 109 and 110: Electronic Employee Monitoring: Pot
- Page 111 and 112: Electronic Employee Monitoring 101
- Page 113 and 114: Electronic Employee Monitoring 103
- Page 115 and 116: Electronic Employee Monitoring 105
- Page 117 and 118: Electronic Employee Monitoring 107
- Page 119 and 120: Electronic Employee Monitoring 109
- Page 121 and 122: Electronic Employee Monitoring 111
- Page 123 and 124: Electronic Employee Monitoring 113
- Page 125 and 126: Electronic Employee Monitoring 115
- Page 127 and 128: The Good Samaritan Protection Act:
- Page 129 and 130: The Good Samaritan Protection Act 1
- Page 131 and 132: The Good Samaritan Protection Act 1
- Page 133 and 134: The Good Samaritan Protection Act 1
- Page 135 and 136: The Good Samaritan Protection Act 1
- Page 137 and 138: The Good Samaritan Protection Act 1
- Page 139 and 140: The Good Samaritan Protection Act 1
80 <strong>Underneath</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Golden</strong> <strong>Boy</strong><br />
constitutional right such as freedom <strong>of</strong> expression, it should take all reasonable<br />
steps to ensure that it is not unnecessarily or inappropriately applied.<br />
I must reiterate that I do not believe that freedom <strong>of</strong> expression is absolute<br />
and that I respect and appreciate <strong>the</strong> powerful arguments favouring prohibitions<br />
against “hate speech”. However, it seems that <strong>the</strong> current legislative and<br />
jurisprudential scheme in Canadian federal (and much provincial) law goes<br />
unnecessarily far in attempting to deal with <strong>the</strong> problem. In some circumstances<br />
it may be counterproductive to its legitimate goals. I have attempted to identify<br />
from Canadian legislation and cases, comparative and international<br />
jurisprudence, literature, and indeed general knowledge, some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
circumstances which seem to require some sort <strong>of</strong> legislative response. It is my<br />
wish to develop legislation that would cover <strong>the</strong>se circumstances without having<br />
<strong>the</strong> far-reaching effect on expression described earlier. I do not know if I have<br />
even come close to achieving an appropriate balance, but I hope that this<br />
attempt at least encourages fur<strong>the</strong>r thought in this area that might lead to that<br />
goal.
Change language