Rights jurisprudence and the charter : evaluating the changing structure of Canadian federalism /

Abstract . Rights jiirisprudence in Canada dates back as far as Confederation in 1867. Between this date and 1982, the organizing principle of Confederation - federalism - has kept this jurisprudence solely within the supremacy of Parliament, subject to its confines and division of powers. After 1982, however, a new constitutional organizing principle was introduced, when Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau introduced the patriation initiative, touted as the "people's package". Individual rights and freedoms were now guaranteed by the Constitution. Citizens of Canada now had a direct link to the Constitution via the Charter and there were now two significantly different organizing principles within the constitutional order widch created an unstable coexistence. This instability has led to a clash between judicially enforced Charter rights and federalism. The Charter has since had both a nationalizing and centralizing effect on Canadian federalism. This thesis explores the relationship between rights and federalism in Canada fix)m Confederation to present day by comparing the jurisprudence of pre and post Charter Canada. An analysis of Supreme Court's (and its predecessor's, the JCPC) decisions shows the profound effect the Charter has had on Canadian federalism. The result has been an undermining of federalism in Canada, with Parliamentary Supremacy replaced by Constitutional supremacy, and ultimately. Judicial Supremacy. Moreover, rights discourse has largely replaced federalism discourse. Canadians have become very attached to their Charter, and are unwilling to allow any changes to the constitution that may affect their rights as political elites discovered the hard way after the collapse of the Meech and Charlottetown Accords. If federalism is to remain a relevant and viable organizing principle in the Constitution, then governments, especially at the provincial level, must find new and iimovative ways to assert their importance within the federation.

The Ontario Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Individual Privacy Act: an analysis of its application to school boards

In Canada freedom of information must be viewed in the context of governing -- how do you deal with an abundance of information while balancing a diversity of competing interests? How can you ensure people are informed enough to participate in crucial decision-making, yet willing enough to let some administrative matters be dealt with in camera without their involvement in every detail. In an age when taxpayers' coalition groups are on the rise, and the government is encouraging the establishment of Parent Council groups for schools, the issues and challenges presented by access to information and protection of privacy legislation are real ones. The province of Ontario's decision to extend freedom of information legislation to local governments does not ensure, or equate to, full public disclosure of all facts or necessarily guarantee complete public comprehension of an issue. The mere fact that local governments, like school boards, decide to collect, assemble or record some information and not to collect other information implies that a prior decision was made by "someone" on what was important to record or keep. That in itself means that not all the facts are going to be disclosed, regardless of the presence of legislation. The resulting lack of information can lead to public mistrust and lack of confidence in those who govern. This is completely contrary to the spirit of the legislation which was to provide interested members of the community with facts so that values like political accountability and trust could be ensured and meaningful criticism and input obtained on matters affecting the whole community. This thesis first reviews the historical reasons for adopting freedom of information legislation, reasons which are rooted in our parliamentary system of government. However, the same reasoning for enacting such legislation cannot be applied carte blanche to the municipal level of government in Ontario, or - ii - more specifially to the programs, policies or operations of a school board. The purpose of this thesis is to examine whether the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1989 (MFIPPA) was a neccessary step to ensure greater openness from school boards. Based on a review of the Orders made by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner/Ontario, it also assesses how successfully freedom of information legislation has been implemented at the municipal level of government. The Orders provide an opportunity to review what problems school boards have encountered, and what guidance the Commissioner has offered. Reference is made to a value framework as an administrative tool in critically analyzing the suitability of MFIPPA to school boards. The conclusion is drawn that MFIPPA appears to have inhibited rather than facilitated openness in local government. This may be attributed to several factors inclusive of the general uncertainty, confusion and discretion in interpreting various provisions and exemptions in the Act. Some of the uncertainty is due to the fact that an insufficient number of school board staff are familiar with the Act. The complexity of the Act and its legalistic procedures have over-formalized the processes of exchanging information. In addition there appears to be a concern among municipal officials that granting any access to information may be violating personal privacy rights of others. These concerns translate into indecision and extreme caution in responding to inquiries. The result is delay in responding to information requests and lack of uniformity in the responses given. However, the mandatory review of the legislation does afford an opportunity to address some of these problems and to make this complex Act more suitable for application to school boards. In order for the Act to function more efficiently and effectively legislative changes must be made to MFIPPA. It is important that the recommendations for improving the Act be adopted before the government extends this legislation to any other public entities.

Federal-provincial relations and the environment : attaining sustainable development through cooperation /

A study of intergovernmental relations in the area of the environment will determine whether the current Canadian federal structure represents a dangerous impediment to the promotion of sustainable development. This paper examines the interjurisdictional quagmire that has developed from the fact that authority over the environment is a functionally concurrent field for the two orders of government. A history of federal-provincial relations in the area of environmental protection is followed by an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages associated with competitive and cooperative federalism. For the purpose of this paper, cooperative federalism is characterized by the presence of a formal institutional system to facilitate interaction between politicians and bureaucrats from both orders of government. Competitive federalism is defined as a system that lacks a formal institutional structure to promote discussion and coordination between federal and provincial officials in a specific field of interest. Last, I examine thirty sustainable development issues following the structure established in Agenda 21 to determine the impact of the present federal system on the development of these objectives. This study concludes that Canadian federalism is not a dangerous impediment to the promotion of sustainable development. Cooperative federalism in a form that does not eliminate the ability of governments to revert to competition promotes the emergence of an institutional system that facilitates information-sharing and discussion between the two orders of government, thus leading to coordinated efforts in the field of the environment. Respect for the current division of powers in this area is also essential to the cohesiveness of Canadian society. Policy-makers and advocates for a sustainable society should focus on working within the present system.

Report of the Committee on Military Affairs, on the differences that exist, between the United States and some of the individual States, respecting the relative powers of the general and state governments over the militia.--

February 28, 1815. Printed by order of the Senate of the United States.

Report of the Committee on Military Affairs, on the differences that exist, between the United States and some of the individual States, respecting the relative powers of the general and state governments over the militia

February 28, 1815. Printed by order of the Senate of the United States. Printed be Roger C. Weightman

[British Parliamentary papers], Session 24 November, 1812 - 22 July, 1813. Vol. XIV, Correspondence and treaties with foreign powers.

Most of this volume consists of correspondence between high ranking U.S. and British statesmen. E.g., James Madison, James Monroe, The Marquess Wellesley (brother of Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington). The discussion centers around the War of 1812. Also includes facsimilies of treaties signed between Great Britain and Sweden, Russia and Sicily.