November 2, 2010
"We are the people formerly
known as the audience."
Jay Rosen
Internet & U.S.
Mid-Term
Election
Source for image: Anthony Calabrese, October 25, 2010 in Media Shift
URL: http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2010/10/gop-beating-democrats-with-social-media-formidterm-elections298.html
• Are Americans more likely to be influenced by a candidate using social media
than previously?
• three out of five Americans who consider themselves “somewhat politically
active” are members of a social network, and 70% of them expect to vote on
Nov. 2, according to a recent study from the E-Voter Institute
• a report from the non-partisan HeadCount.org shows Republicans appear to be
more engaged online than Democrats in this election cycle.
– Out of the current crop of Senate candidates, the Republicans have more than 1.4
million friends on Facebook and over 500,000 followers on Twitter.
– By contrast, the Democratic Senate candidates have roughly 300,000 friends on
Facebook and around 90,000 followers on Twitter as of September 21, 2010
• The biggest single event for Internet viewings before the World Cup was Barack
Obama’s inauguration in 2008.
• The U.S. midterm elections today may rival Internet traffic records for video
viewings set during the soccer World Cup, according to Web service company
Akamai Technologies Inc.
"I didn't really start using Facebook and Twitter until I got
involved with the Tea Party movement," said Ana Puig, the 38year-old leader of Pennsylvania's Kitchen Table Patriots (KTP).
•
•
•
connected local groups to the national conversation.
two prominent, well-financed, national conservative
organizations-- FreedomWorks and American Majority-provide local Tea Party groups with the new media
training and focus group-tested political messaging
needed to get results.
Showing the digital ropes:
– FreedomWorks also offers more sophisticated digital
resources to its network of 650,000 online conservative
activists.
– investing in creating new digital activism tools.
– American Majority, one of a few national umbrella groups,
essential role in the Tea Party's digital success
– "We become digital activists," he said. "We identify the
medium, we learn the medium, we manipulate the
medium. It was printing presses then, it's the Internet
now."
– Source:
•
•
Corbin Hiar is the DC-based associate editor at MediaShift and
climate blogger for UN Dispatch and the Huffington Post.
URL: http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2010/10/how-the-teaparty-utilized-digital-media-to-gain-power301.html
Will you be my friend?
•
•
According to a recent poll by the Zogby group, one in five iPhone users are
likely to be influenced by the right-wing Tea Party's ideology -- double the
numbers of those damn liberals with their Androids and Blackberries.
The same poll found that iPhone subscribers are twice as likely to believe that
Palin "speaks for them," and more than 60 percent predict a Republican
takeover of Congress this year.
–
•
•
•
•
•
•
Source: http://www.ismashphone.com/2010/10/politics-makes-strange-phonefellows-the-iphonetea-party-connection.html
Although @BarackObama has more online friends and followers than any
American politician, several Democratic heavy-hitters are sitting on the
sidelines while Republicans are revving up their political base.
Vice President Joe Biden's Twitter account went silent shortly before he was
chosen by Obama as a running mate in August 2008.
And while Hillary Clinton does not appear to have a working Facebook or
Twitter account (outside of occasional quotes on the
"@StateDept":http://twitter.com/statedept Twitter feed), Sarah Palin tops 2
million fans on Facebook and @SarahPalinUSA has over 280,000 followers.
Mitt Romney, the former Governor of Massachusetts, has more Facebook
friends than Bill Clinton, the 42nd President of the United States. President
Clinton's Twitter account -- assuming it is not a fake -- is set to private and is
punching way below its weight.
Senator John McCain has two active Twitter accounts with a combined total
over 1.73 million followers. They are @TeamMcCain for his Senate re-election
campaign and @SenJohnMcCain.
Source: http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2010/10/gop-beating-democrats-with-social-media-for-midtermelections298.html
“Campaign strategists are quickly learning
that even the most carefully orchestrated
campaigns can encounter unexpected pitfalls
or boosts thanks to bloggers, Facebook fans
and other vocal social media followers.
Grassroots movements often begin and end
on social media, making it all the more
important that strategists analyze social
media metrics regularly.”
Social Media in the 2010 Election
By: Rebecca Nelson, PhD; Richard T. Hartman, PhD; Andrew B. Einhorn, M.S.
OhMyGov Inc. Research
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38002542/Social-Media-in-the-2010-Election-OhMyGov-Inc-Research
September 2010
What is Social Media?
• It’s participatory.
• It’s about connections.
• It’s mobile, too.
What is Civic Media:
any use of any technology for the purposes of increasing
civic engagement and public participation,
enabling the exchange of meaningful information,
fostering social connectivity,
constructing critical perspectives,
insuring transparency and accountability,
or strengthening citizen agency.
What’s changed, if anything??
• democracy as grounded in a
rationalist discourse
• democracy also has strong
cultural roots and is shaped by
what Raymond Williams would
call "a structure of feeling.“
• what citizens need to know in
order to make wise decisions
• Political efficacy
• what it feels like to be an
empowered citizen capable of
making a difference and sharing
common interests with others
• Rethinking the Informed
Citizen??
• The Civic Empowerment Gap??
Research Findings: Generational Declines
in Traditional Participation
Research Findings: Rise in Direct
Personal Action
Generational Citizen Identity Differences
Youth: Actualizing Citizen (AC)
Older: Dutiful Citizen (DC)
Weak duty to participate in
government
Strong duty to participate in
government
Focus on lifestyle politics: political
consumerism, volunteering, social
activism
Voting is the core democratic act
Mistrust of media and politicians -- Informed about issues and
do not follow politics in the news
government -- follow the news
Join loose networks for social
action – communicate through
digital media
Join social organizations and
parties -- communicate through
mass media
Contends that the “social web” –
epitomized by blogs, viral videos, and YouTube - creates new pathways for
truth to emerge and makes possible new tactics for media activism.
In an age of proliferating media and news sources, who has the power to
define reality? How is digital media changing democracy?
• Megan Boler is an Associate Professor, in the Department
of Theory & Policy Studies, at OISE, the Ontario Institute for Studies in
Education at the University of Toronto, and the editor of a number of books
including most recently, Digital Media and Democracy: Tactics in Hard Times
(2008).
•
She is also a poet, a writer of fiction, and is currently finishing a children’s
story. She co-authored the Web-Based Teaching Guide to accompany The
Corporation, a documentary directed by Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbott, in
2003.
•
Her research focuses on people’s creativity within digital media and is
centrally focused on progressive politics, social movements, and social
justice issues through the lens of digital political media.
•
She is currently completing a three-year funded research project,
“Rethinking Media, Citizenship and Democracy: Digital Dissent after 9/11,”
through interviews and surveys she examines the motivations of producers
of “digital dissent”--practices of digital media to counter mainstream media.
•
She teaches philosophy, cultural studies, feminist theory, media studies, and
social equity courses in the Teacher Education program, and media studies at
the Knowledge Media Design Institute at the University of Toronto.
Debate: does IT matter?
Recent New Yorker column, author
Malcolm Gladwell
• argues that social media is not
redefining activism.
• describes some powerful scenes
from the civil rights activism in
the Sixties where people literally
risked life and limb to stand up
for their beliefs
• asserts that contrary to this level
of risk and passion, the activism
associated with social media is
transient participation without
sustainable motivation or
potency because it’s based on
weak ties
• Is Gladwell’s position changephobic?
Dr. Pamela Routledge
•
passersby who are not on engaged in the ‘fever’ that Gladwell
describes of the sixties can still meaningfully contribute.
•
There are multiple paths to promoting social change: increasing
awareness, providing support, and taking action. All are
necessary.
•
4 ways that social media is redefining activism and advocacy
1.
changes public awareness
2.
getting information from someone in our network: it is
more persuasive because it has context and word of mouth
validation.
3.
have immediate impact that gives it urgency, makes it
personal and allows for immediate individual action
4.
changed the psychological impact of communications by
changing our expectations about participation and
individual agency
“Twitter does not create a revolution any more than the first small
group of protesters that show up in person do. It is the
people who join in that create energy and action.”
“It’s even possible that with social media, the civil rights movements
of the Sixties could have succeeded faster and avoided some
of the physical violence. A YouTube video of the threats
against those first black college students “sitting in” at the
coffee counter would have been extraordinarily powerful and
taken the cause to a national level much earlier.
Source: http://mprcenter.org/blog/2010/10/07/four-ways-social-media-is-redefining-activism/
Previously published on PsychologyToday.com in “Positively Media”
There's a tendency to collapse the strategy and the tool...
... To say, "This is what we want to accomplish, and, hey!
there's a tool that does that!" — and then equate the tool
with the strategy.
But they're still separate thought processes and separate
stages in developing a campaign.
Ivan Boothe
Legislatures and Executives
Outline
• Representative Democracy
• Presidential and Parliamentary Systems
–
–
–
–
Separation of Powers
Fusion of Powers
Head of State
Head of Government
• Legislative Assemblies
– Roles
– Structures
• Executives
– Roles
– Structures
– Decline of the Legislature
Three Fundamental Differences between
Parliamentary and
Presidential Systems
1. The fusion of political power versus the
separation of powers;
2. The existence versus absence of the
principle of responsible government;
3. Distinct versus combined heads of state and
government.
Legislative Branch
• The legislative branch shall:
– Represent the people and be
accountable to them through periodic
elections;
– Debate public issues and provide a
forum for competition between
political parties;
– Make laws.
Executive Branch
• Implement the laws;
• Ensure that the public’s business is carried out
efficiently, accountably, and in accordance
with the law;
• Be non-partisan at the bureaucratic level, such
that non-elected officials faithfully carry out
the policies of whatever party forms the
government of the day.
Westminster Model
• Political machinery
= Crown, cabinet, H of C, House of Lords
•
•
•
•
Parl: a bicameral institution
PM: primus inter pares
Private members = rank & file
H of Lords: originally 1000+ members
–
–
–
–
–
1998: reduced to 690
Hereditary peers reduced to 92
Most now: life peerage
About 150 active
Cannot veto; can only delay
Canada: Head of State
• Head of State: British monarch
• Formal exec authority is vested in the Queen and group of advisors
known as the Privy Council (Sec 11 & 14 of Constitution Act)
• PC: working part of PC is the Cabinet (not mentioned in 1867
Constitution Act); sworn in; members for life (app. 260); Mulroney
expanded to include diversity (Alex Colville, John Polanyi).
• Functions: national unity (Fr Cndns?);
• Queen, GG, LGs together represent the Crown in Canada
– Reign rather than rule; 5 yr; firsts (J. Sauvé: 1st w; R. LeBlanc, 1st Acadian; AC 1st
visible minority)
– Selecting/dismissing H of G
– Ceremonial functions
– Formally apptg J, other public officials
– Read Speech from the Throne
– Assenting to/proclaiming legislation
– Dissolving Parliament/Calling elections
“We have moral authority,
if I can say that.
We can encourage things…”
GG Romeo LeBlanc, 1999
Head of G: PM; Premiers
• Political executive: custom/convention
• Most visible symbol of leadership
• Sole link between formal and political
executive
• Party leader
• Supremacy over cabinet
– Dec. 1992, Premier of Alberta in constructing his
first cabinet after Tory leadership race, eliminated
all five of his cabinet colleagues who had
supported his leadership rival
– Paul Martin’s cabinet??
PM’s Powers
•
•
•
•
Who will be appointed to/removed from cabinet
When new election will be held
Administrative structure and d-mkg process of G
Selection to wide-array of appointments
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
DMs
Judges to f-p courts
Senators
Members of federal regulatory agencies
B o Ds of federal crown corporations
Ambassadors
…
Speaker of the House of Commons
• Now chosen by free election, without prime
ministerial nomination and party discipline
• Enforces House’s strict procedures and rules
PM & Cabinet
• Elevation from backbencher to federal cabinet
represents an increase in salary of app. $63,000
• Size: How big?
–
–
–
–
–
PET, 35
BM, 40
Chretien, 1993 – 2000. from 23 to 28
PROVINCIAL AND REGIONAL REPRESENTATION
MAJOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC INTERESTS OF CANADIAN
SOCIETY
Key committees of Cabinet
• Between 1968 and 1993: Priorities and Planning
Committee (P&P)
– Chaired by PM; included most influential members of
cabinet
– Abolished by PM Kim Campbell in 1993
• 5 permanent subcommittees established by
Chretien: Economic Union; Social Union; TB;
Government Communications; Special Committee of
Council
• Plus ad hoc committees
Accountability
• Individual cabinet ministers are separately
accountable to Parliament for the actions of
their departments
• Entire cabinet is collectively accountable for
government policy
• PM: personal accountability for the overall
performance of government and all major
policies
Representation is about Power
• PM and Cabinet wield considerable
power
• Agenda setting role of the PM and
cabinet
PM and Cabinet:
Defining the Policy Agenda
• Begins with the Speech from the Throne
• Required by the Constitution
• Statement explaining Government’s priorities
– Generalities
– Specific indications of the agenda
• Budgets
• Bills
Bills
• Proposed bill must go through 3 readings in both chambers
• First Reading: bill’s title is introduced
– Text of proposed legislation is printed and distributed to members
• After Second Reading, full debate on the bill
– Opposition and government backbenchers have specific time to address
different aspects of it
– May then go to a standing committee, or to special legislative committee of
the House, which may produce an amendment
– Then, Report Stage, House receives committee’s report and votes on any
proposed amendments
• Bill as amended is then received and voted on by the House in THIRD
READING
• Then introduced to the Senate,
• A Bill passed by Commons and Senate then goes to GG for ROYAL ASSENT
AND PROCLAMATION
• Private members’ bills may be numerous; seldom passed
“Cabinet has now joined Parliament as
an institution that is being bypassed.
Real political debate and decisionmaking are increasingly elsewhere. …The
Canadian prime minister has little in the
way of institutional check, at least inside
government, to inhibit his ability to have
his way.”
Donald Savoie,
Governing from the Centre
Responsible Government
Cabinet must enjoy continued
support of the popularly elected
house of the legislative assembly in
order to remain in office
In the U.S. the cabinet does not need
legislative support to remain in
power
U. S. Presidential System
Articles of Confederation of 1781
Constitution in 1789
“separated institutions sharing power”
Congress
•
•
•
•
•
•
Chief repository of legislative power
President cannot introduce a Bill into Congress
Neither President nor Cabinet Secretaries may hold a seat in Congress
Cabinet rarely meets
No vote of confidence = no principle of responsible government
All bills passed by Congress sent to President who may:
1. Sign it and it becomes law
2. Not sign it, after 10 days it becomes laws without the signature
3. Veto it, returns to Congress and if passed again with2/3 majority in each
house, veto overridden
• Bicameral legislature like Canadian Parliament
House of Reps: 435 members
–
–
2 year term
Dates of election fixed: Tuesday after 1st Monday in November
Senate: 100 members
–
–
–
6 year term
Upper house
More functions than H of R
Congressional committees
• Usually around 20 in each house
• Almost little legislatures in themselves
• After a bill is introduced in either house, it goes
immediately to a committee
• Powerful organizations
• Bill can easily be bottled up
• Great deal of Vote-trading, or logrolling, among
committee members
• Legislative committees in parliamentary systems are
much weaker because they’re controlled by
members of the majority party, which in turn, are
controlled by cabinet
Vice-President
•
•
Elected in conjunction with the president
2 main constitutionally defined roles:
1. In event of death or disability of a president, VP
becomes new president.
2. Serves as the President of the Senate.
–
–
–
Very little influence/power
Rare occasion when there is a tie vote on the Senate floor.
May 20, 1999: VP Al Gore cast the tie-breaking vote on a bill to
toughen restrictions on gun sales at gun shows and pawn shops.
–
–
Daily functions determined by President
“The Vice-President has only one serious thing to do: that is, to
wait around for the President to die.” Arthur M. Schlesigner,
1993
Other Components of the Executive
• Executive Office of the President
– Personal policy advisors
– Bodies such as the Council of Economic Advisors
– Personal aides
– Proximity to President matters
– Chief of Staff
– Cabinet has almost no influence or even an accepted group role in
policy-making
• App 20 individuals, including Pres and VP, heads of executive depts
(14 in 2001) and others (CIA Director, UN Ambassador)
• According to Constitution, a president isn’t even required to form
a cabinet or meet with it.
• Performs primarily administrative tasks
No collective responsibility in a system
based on separation of powers principle
Presidential system is founded on
different principles than the
parliamentary system
Strengths (Dickerson & Flanagan)
Prime Ministerial
• With a majority, the
government has the power
to govern
• The non-confidence vote
provides a check on
government
• The lines of responsibility
for passage or defeat of a
bill are clear
Presidential
• Separation of powers
discourages concentration
of power
• Checks and balances limit
the power of the branches
of government
• Without strict party
discipline, members can be
more constituency oriented
Weaknesses
• The system may be unstable
if a majority is not obtained
• The power of a government
with a large majority is
great—it is possibly
insensitive to public desires.
• Because party loyalty is
necessary, members may
have to vote contrary to
their constituents’ wishes
• Separation of power
fragments the system,
potentially rendering it
immobile
• Voters cannot pin
responsibility on any one
party
• Without a non-confidence
vote, the electorate must
wait for the next election to
unseat an unpopular
president or member of
Congress
Power and Politics
• Power
– A capacity that A has to influence the behaviour of
B so that B acts in accordance with A’s wishes.
• Dependency
– B’s relationship to A when A possesses something
that B needs.
Bases of Power
1.
Coercive Power
– The person can make things difficult for people, and you want
to avoid getting him or her angry.
•
2.
Power that is based on fear.
Reward Power
– The person is able to give special benefits or rewards to
people, and you find it advantageous to trade favours with
him or her.
3. Legitimate Power
– The person has the right, considering his or her position and
your job responsibilities, to expect you to comply with
legitimate requests.
(continued)
Measuring Bases of Power
4. Expert Power
–
The person has the experience and knowledge to earn
your respect and you defer to his or her judgment in
some matters.
5. Referent Power
–
You like the person and enjoy doing things for him or
her.
6. Information Power
–
The person has data or knowledge that you need.
Source: Adapted from G. Yuki and C. M. Falbe, “Importance of Different Power Sources in Downward and Lateral Relations,” Journal of Applied Psychology, June 1991, p.
417. With permission.
New parliamentary watchdogs
• Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
(2004/2007)
• Commissioner of Lobbying (2007)
• Public Sector Integrity Commissioner (2007)
• Parliamentary Budget Officer (2008)
Political Institutions -- The Structure of
Government
•
•
•
•
•
•
the Constitution
the judiciary
the legislature
the executive
federalism
mechanisms of popular representation
Themes of the Constitutional Orders
• American Constitution...
– life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
(Declaration of Independence)
– Bill of Rights
• Canadian Constitution...
– peace, order and good government (s.91
Constitution Act)
– parliamentary sovereignty
Constitutions
• Constitutional practices relate to classic as
well as contemporary legal, social, and
political issues
• PM Stephen Harper interested in reforming
certain aspects of the Canadian constitution
The Constitutional Order
• Comprises fundamental rules and practices
relating to the governance of a society
• Powers and relationships of state institutions
(branches and levels of government)
• Individual rights and responsibilities
– citizen to state
• Relations between collectivities
– group to group
Forms of constitutional change:
formality/rigidity to flexibility
• Entrenched: fundamental constitutional law
and judicial interpretations
• Enacted: statutory law, common law rules
• Emergent: constitutional conventions,
customary practices, and understandings
Formal constitution amendments
• 1999: Nunavut granted representation in
Parliament
• 2001: Nfld. Change of name to Nfld. AND
Labrador
Constitutional Rights
Rights and Freedoms
• A right is a legal, moral or social entitlement that
citizens can expect, mainly from the government.
(right to a fair trial)
• Freedom, although limited, means the right to
conduct one’s affairs without government
interference. (limited by the need for public safety
and the protection of other people’s rights)
• Inalienable Rights are guaranteed entitlements that
cannot be transferred from one person to another,
and cannot be taken away without due process of
law. (equality, liberty)
• Franchise, the right to vote (ie. women, Aboriginal
peoples), is an important inalienable right.
Brief Historical Overview
• Prior to the Bill of Rights (1867-1960)
• As a former colony of the British Empire, Canada inherited the principle of
legislative supremacy from the United Kingdom.
• This is explicit in the British North America Act, which states that Canada
would have a constitution “similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom.”
• At the turn of the 20th Century, human rights were at the mercy of laws
passed by the provincial and federal governments.
– opened the doors for discrimination.
– For instance, Chinese-Canadians gained the vote because it was a popular decision - not
necessarily a "right" one. They could have easily lost that right had public opinion turned
against them.
• World War II sewed the seeds for change. The horrors of war led to the
creation of the United Nations in 1945.
– Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.
– affirmed that human beings were entitled to fundamental human rights simply by virtue of
their humanity.
– The United Nations agreed that no law should ever usurp these rights.
Canadian Bill Of Rights
Canada's committment to these "human rights" was first
manifest in the passing of the Canadian Bill of Rights.
Passed in Parliament in 1960, it recognized…
1. The rights of individuals to life, liberty, personal security and enjoyment of property.
2. Freedom of religion, speech, assembly and association.
3. Freedom of the press.
4. The right to counsel and the right to a fair hearing.
As a Federal statue it only applied to federal matters, as
a statute it was the same as any other, leaving it open
to interpretation and finally, as a statute it could be
amended by the House of Commons.
Yet, despite its good intentions, the Bill of Rights was a
federal law that was difficult to enforce.
• The Bill of Rights (1960) was a small document (only one and a half
pages).
• Unlike the current Charter, the Bill of Rights was not entrenched in
the Canadian constitution, but was simply an Act of Parliament.
• Canadian courts construed the Bill of Rights narrowly to avoid the
appearance of interfering with the legislature’s supremacy. As an
ordinary statute, it did not take precedence over legislative
supremacy.
• Before the Constitution was “patriated”, the Constitution was simply
the British North America Act (1867), which was simply an Act of the
British Parliament. In order to change it, Canada had to get the British
Parliament to do it!
The Charter Becomes Law
With the provinces’ consent (except Quebec), the
federal Parliament requested the United Kingdom
Parliament to patriate the Canadian Constitution.
On April 17, 1982, the Queen signed the Canada Act, 1982.
The legislation added the Constitution
Act, 1982 to Canada’s constitution and changed
the name of the British North America Act to the
Constitution Act, 1867.
The Constitution Act, 1982 contained the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms and Vancouver Consensus formula for future
constitutional amendments.
Quebec never officially consented
to the new Canadian constitution
and the Charter.
However, both the Supreme Court of Canada and Quebec
Court of Appeal ruled that Quebec’s consent was not
mandatory and that the new Charter
and its amending formula applied
in law to that province.
Six Parts:
1. Fundamental Freedoms
(Section 2)
2. Democratic Rights
(Sections 3-5)
3. Mobility Rights
(Section 6)
4. Legal Rights
(Sections 7-14)
5. Equality Rights
(Section 15)
6. Language Rights
(Sections 16 -23)
American Civil Liberties -- What Are
They?
• TYPES OF CIVIL LIBERTIES
– FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS
• “Congress shall make no law...”
– freedom of conscience
– freedom of expression
– LEGAL RIGHTS
• DUE PROCESS
– against unreasonable search and seizure
– against self-incrimination
• vs. Civil Rights
– adhere to individuals (civil liberties) rather than groups (civil
rights)
– negative vs. positive freedom
• Freedom from vs. freedom to
Type of Right
Canada
United States
Fundamental
Freedoms
Yes
Yes
Democratic Rights
Yes
Yes
Legal Rights
Yes
Yes
Equality Rights
Yes
Yes
Language Rights
Yes
No
Mobility Rights
Yes
No
Bear Arms
No
Yes (disputed)
Property
No
Yes
25. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights
and freedoms shall not be construed so as to
abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty
or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the
aboriginal peoples of Canada including
– a) any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by
the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and
– b) any rights or freedoms that now exist by way of land
claims agreements or may be so acquired.
General
TRANSLATION
-Native peoples have special rights and the
Charter is not to take away from these rights,
but to add to them.
Limits on the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms
• Section 1: reasonable limits
– comparable limits on the American Bill of
Rights?
Limits on the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• Section 33: Notwithstanding Clause
– The federal Parliament or a provincial legislature may
declare a law or part of a law to apply temporarily
"notwithstanding" certain sections of the Charter
– may only be used in regard to the Charter and not
other parts of the Canadian Constitution
• can only be used against a limited number of Charter rights
and freedoms (Sections 2, 7-14, 15) and not for the
remaining Charter provisions
– usage
• very difficult to use politically
• “notwithstanding” raises caution flags
Sec 33
– On December 21, 1989 the Premier of the Province of Quebec employed the
"notwithstanding clause" to override freedom of expression (section 2b),
and freedom equality (section 15). This allowed the Province of Quebec to
continue the restriction against the posting of any commercial signs in
languages other than French.
– Saskatchewan (1986): Back-to-Work Legislation, introduced the legislation
based on the grounds it needed to protect the general public from the harm
associated with the disruption of government service caused by the strike,
made a Notwithstanding declaration to protect the back-to-work law from
any Charter scrutiny by the judiciary which turned out, it didn’t need (courts
later ruled, however, in the case Alberta Labour Reference, that the Charter
did not include the right to strike).
– Alberta (2000): Definition of Marriage, Alberta Legislature passed Bill 202 –
the Marriage Amendment Act, reasserting the definition of marriage as a
union between a man and a woman, excluding gay couples. Turned out to
be mainly symbolic, as the Supreme Court of Canada later ruled that the
ability to define the term marriage rested solely with the federal
government, and was outside provincial jurisdiction. A Notwithstanding
declaration cannot be made for policy areas that are outside a government's
jurisdiction.
Legalized Politics -- The Implications
• positive aspects of legalized politics
– offers access
– not based on popular opinion
• negative aspects of legalized politics
– style of politics
• adversarial
• not prone to compromise
– atomizing
• people define themselves as individuals rather than
members of community/society
NEXT WEEK:
HAVE WE
POLITICIZED
THE JUDICIARY
IN THE CHARTER ERA?