----- Original Message ----- From: C-FAR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 9:07 PM Subject: CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION IN CHAOS: CONFUSION IN THE RANKS OF THE CENSORS > > "It's not just the [Canadian human rights] commission's world view that's out > of touch [with the real world]. Over the years, Canada's Auditor-General > and various federal court judges have been sharply critical of its sloppy > procedures, long delays in turning over cases, its poor grasp of the law, > and its dual role as both prosecutor and judge." > > -Margaret Wente, Toronto Globe and Mail, May 17, 2001 > > 0=0=0=0 > > Toronto Globe and Mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | May 17, 2001 > > Little right with this commission > > By Margaret Wente <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Irony is in the air. According to its own staff, the Canadian Human Rights > Commission is a hotbed of discrimination and unfairness. Morale is in the > sewer. The men complain that the workplace is biased in favour of women, > and vice versa. People are leaving in droves. Chief commissioner Michelle > Falardeau-Ramsay isn't even on the scene. She's off in Indonesia at the > moment, advising on abuses in East Timor. > > One of the commission's senior lawyers says that Canada's premier rights > body has lost its "moral authority" and needs a complete overhaul. (He was > promptly suspended.) Meantime, John Hucker, the bureaucrat who runs the > place, says the problems have been overblown. He blames open-concept > offices for some of the grumpiness. > > It's not just the staff that should be grumpy. The CHRC was set up in 1978 > to provide victims of real discrimination with faster relief than they > could get in court. A great idea. But today, it is out of step with the > attitudes and beliefs of most Canadians. In the great scheme of government, > its budget is small change. But it has cost the public billions. > > The biggest price tag was the $3.5-billion settlement it engineered for > women in government jobs, based on the extremely fuzzy concept of equal pay > for "work of equal value." Many people applauded. But in the end, a quarter > of the beneficiaries were men. The biggest back-pay windfalls went to women > earning $70,000 or more. And, even before the settlement, women in these > jobs had significantly better pay, pensions and job security than women > with the same jobs in the private sector. > > Is there a problem here? The chief commissioner says there is. The problem > is that the CHRC lacks the power to quickly impose these deals on everyone > else. > > As the commission lobbies to increase its power, it is exploring new > frontiers in human rights. For example, it has ordered a tribunal to hear > the case of Synthia Kavanagh, a jailed transsexual who has lodged a > complaint against the prison system. (S)he argues that she should be sent > to a women's prison and provided with sex-change surgery. > > Another hearing is weighing a complaint against Statistics Canada for > failing to ask inclusive questions about gay, lesbian and bisexual people > in the 1996 census (a lapse it rectified in the current census). The > complainants say that Statscan wilfully "misrepresented the population of > heterosexual people, relationships, and families in Canada." > > The rights of the disabled are also important, as they should be. No one > can object to better access for people in wheelchairs, or better > accommodation for the blind or hard of hearing. But the human-rights > commission's definition of disabilities is remarkably expansive. For > example, it has ordered a hearing into the complaint of a man named Vernon > Crouse, whose employer, Canada Steamship Lines, fired him for being a > drunk. He claims the company discriminated against him on account of his > disability -- i.e. alcohol dependency. > > In another case, a civil servant who flunked her French exam complained, > and won, because she is dyslexic. Another tribunal is hearing the case of a > woman who alleges that her employer discriminated against her because it > wouldn't let her work from home. She suffers from an unspecified condition > "that is aggravated when she reports to the workplace." > > It's not hard to conclude that the people at the Human Rights Commission > are blissfully innocent of the world in which most people live and work. In > fact, all of the commissioners have spent their careers in the public > sector, as bureaucrats or labour lawyers or rights advocates. > > Ms. Falardeau-Ramsay has been in government service since 1975. She is the > scourge of the military brass, whom she regularly berates for not meeting > their gender hiring targets. There are even targets for women in combat > units, despite mounting evidence that women don't want to be in combat > units. Whenever she speaks, the generals apologize, and promise to do > better. > > Now the commission is lobbying for the rights of HIV-positive foreigners. > They should be allowed to immigrate to Canada (even though we already bar > people with other infectious diseases). HIV-positive applicants, it says, > "should not be excluded as a group based on stereotypical presumptions > about their possible health in five to 10 years." > > It's not just the commission's world view that's out of touch. Over the > years, Canada's Auditor-General and various federal court judges have been > sharply critical of its sloppy procedures, long delays in turning over > cases, its poor grasp of the law, and its dual role as both prosecutor and > judge. > > "It's an abuse and a waste of taxpayers' money," said Eddie Taylor, the > senior lawyer who spoke out of turn last week. He couldn't be more right. > <end> > > 0=0=0=0 > > Toronto Globe and Mail | May 16, 2001 > > Rights lawyer suspended after public comments > > By COLIN FREEZE and ANDREW MITROVICA > From Wednesday's Globe and Mail > > A senior lawyer with the Canadian Human Rights Commission has been > suspended, in part because he publicly complained that the agency has > become > a waste of taxpayers' money and is near collapse. > > Eddie Taylor was escorted Tuesday morning from the human-rights watchdog's > Ottawa headquarters, where he has spent 10 years as a lawyer. He has been > suspended with pay pending the results of an internal investigation. > > John Hucker, the commission's secretary-general, told Mr. Taylor in a terse > letter Tuesday that the probe would centre on "concerns related to your > conduct" in a discrimination case the lawyer is arguing before a tribunal. > > "The investigation will also cover matters relating to your press interview > which appeared in The Globe and Mail on Saturday, May 12, 2001," Mr. Hucker > wrote. > > In an interview last week, Mr. Taylor said the commission is in need of a > complete overhaul and had lost its moral authority. His scathing remarks > were echoed, in part, by an internal report that detailed a litany of > complaints by staff about the commission's direction and leadership. > > Mr. Taylor said Tuesday his suspension is anti-democratic: "I'm very > disappointed that, as a public servant, I'm disciplined for commenting on a > matter of public interest." > > Mr. Hucker said, however, that the suspension was not triggered by Mr. > Taylor's comments to The Globe, which he described as a "secondary" matter. > > "I think the timing is unfortunate, but it's not a case of retaliation," he > said. > > Neither man would elaborate on the conduct issue. Mr. Taylor is pursuing a > case against Canada's prison agency on behalf of a prison nurse who alleges > she has been discriminated against because she is black. > > The internal investigation of the lawyer is expected to last a few weeks, > Mr. Hucker said, adding that sanctions could range from a reprimand to > dismissal. > > In an interview the day before the suspension, Mr. Hucker said that Mr. > Taylor's comments to The Globe were "entirely off-base" and caused distress > "to the staff and to me personally." > > But Mr. Taylor is hardly the first lawyer to leave the agency - willingly > or otherwise. In the past year alone 10 have departed. > > Several of Mr. Taylor's former colleagues leaped to his defence Tuesday. > > "I witnessed in him a real commitment to the issues that we were working > on, as much if not more than anyone else I worked with at the commission," > said > Patricia Lawrence, who spent five years at the commission before moving to > the Justice Department. > > RoseMarie Morgan, who left the commission in December, said she was not > surprised by Mr. Taylor's swift suspension. > > A lawyer who spent a decade at the commission, Ms. Morgan said that federal > rules bar public servants from speaking out. Still, she slammed the > suspension. > > "Perhaps they [the commission] may have been advised to look at ways to > address concerns of the report and concerns that have been brought forward > by employees, rather than retaliating," she said. > > Ms. Morgan said the suspension would have a chilling effect on other > commission staff. "One of the primary issues in the report was fear of > retaliation for speaking out, and that is precisely what they have done. > It's unfortunate." > > Recently, several other federal civil servants have also run afoul of their > bosses by speaking out. > > Last year, a Federal Court judge ruled that two Health Canada scientists > were justified in blowing the whistle on safety concerns about a hormone > used in milk production in cattle. > > The ruling, however, protected the right of civil servants to speak out > only if public health and safety were involved. > > But just months after the judge upheld their right to speak out, Health > Canada reimposed a gag order in February on its scientists after two of > them questioned a decision to temporarily ban Brazilian beef from Canada. > <end> > > > --------- > Check out the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee > http://www.canadafirst.net > Free Speech? http://www.canadianfreespeech.com > C-FAR Online! http://www.populist.org > Paul Fromm's Personal Site: http://www.paulfromm.com > P.O. Box 332 Station 'B', Etobicoke, Ontario M9W 5L3 > Tel: (905) 897-7221 -- Fax: (905) 277-3914 > ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion. To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm For archives http://www.mail-archive.com/public-list@neither.org
