First: If Barbara Hall gets her way, incidents like the Fanshawe College riot will become commonplace. The OHRC is dead-set on stripping municipalities of their zoning powers by which they can control the concentration of particular types of housing. Yet it is clear from university and London city officials that the heavy concentration of students on Fleming Drive is partly to blame for the riot.
There have been talks already with the city about bylaws that could reduce the number of students and crack down on landlords.
Good luck with that. Barbara will defend to the hilt the students’ right to riot…
Second: A great read in the Calgary Herald on Alberta’s attempt to replace parents with the province’s human rights commission as the primary educator of children.
The crucial issue is that the act subordinates education to the soft totalitarianism of the Alberta Human Rights Commission.
Third: Bill Whatcott was arrested again, this time in Calgary. As he was distributing his graphic homemade flyers, he was arrested by Calgary police for “breach of the peace”. Yet Crown prosecutors immediately decided that the flyer was not hate speech, and he was released. Still, the police say they’ll continue to harass him:
“It is offensive and it’s offensive to many people, not just within the GLBT community, but elsewhere. We have received calls on it and we’re going to continue to deal with him on a case-by-case basis,” Denison said.
Xtra reports that Whatcott was confronted by a lesbian (good for her) who was trying to confirm that he is the hateful, violent, unstable psychpath that the media makes him out to be:
“I told her she could complain to anyone she wished and I wasn’t phobic of her at all, rather I just believe her lifestyle is harmful to her and displeasing to God, and her homosexual agenda is harmful to society,” Whatcott wrote.
Fourth: Here’s how a “settlement” in human-rights-land works: admit guilt, concede that all of the complaint’s allegations are proven, and pay through the nose. The complaint against Crescent Housing Society aims to have the landlords cease their discriminatory conduct – which is a comical statement because the truth is the reverse. The landlords were permitting smoking in some of the subsidized apartments, apparently under some confused understanding of human rights whereby people have the right to smoke. The housing society submitted a settlement offer, and asked the BCHRT to accept the offer as reasonable under the circumstances, thereby avoiding an expensive hearing.
The tribunal rejected the application, since the housing society didn’t fall on its own sword – no admission of liability, no compensation for “injury to feelings”. Assuming there is no argument over their warped definition of discrimination, the Tribunal has strayed far from its mandate of eliminating discrimination and is irreversibly intoxicated with punishment.
Fifth: If the Small Claims Courts of Ontario can handle human rights claims with respect to wrongful dismissals, why have a parallel complaint handling mechanism at the Tribunal? This is but one example of many to show that there are standing institutions that can handle human rights complaints, and a politically stacked tribunal is unnecessary.