Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

[Colin Parkinson]

The majority of volunteering I see is by older retired folk. Partly as they have time and are still healthy enough to be functional and useful. Once the teenager hits adulthood, generally they are full time in building career, getting into a relationship, finding a place to live and have minimal time to volunteer. The middle age/middle class used to have time to volunteer and used to make up a significant amount of volunteering. Coaching, church, clubs, scouts, cadets, etc. Now they are both working and struggling to keep their heads above the fiscal water and may only volunteer for short while as their kids is involved, dropping out as their kid ages out.

Unions are part of the issue, along with management lack of risk taking when it comes to improving dual use of municipal property. It's less of an issue in small communities as everyone has a vested interest in making it work. In larger communities, it's less so and to be fair they might have dedicated community centres offering services fulltime, lessening the need.

 

[Kirkhill]

We can't. We have to play the hand we're dealt. And that means accepting today's (vastly more resource constrained) reality, instead of constantly fantasizing about a past that is not coming back.

Actually, constitutionally, we can. That is the effect of parliamentary supremacy and the convention that no parliament can bind another. A treaty or contract with a parliamentary government is only valid for the life of the parliament. If nobody complains then the treaty or contract carries over from one parliament to the next. But by convention any parliament is free to withdraw from, or renegotiate, any treaty or contract. That doesn't mean they will be excused any contractually associated penalties from breaking the contract.

 

[ytz]

Actually, constitutionally, we can. That is the effect of parliamentary supremacy and the convention that no parliament can bind another. A treaty or contract with a parliamentary government is only valid for the life of the parliament. If nobody complains then the treaty or contract carries over from one parliament to the next. But by convention any parliament is free to withdraw from, or renegotiate, any treaty or contract. That doesn't mean they will be excused any contractually associated penalties from breaking the contract.

Get Parliament to legislate your access to the local school after hours? Good luck with that.

 

[foresterab]

The majority of volunteering I see is by older retired folk. Partly as they have time and are still healthy enough to be functional and useful. Once the teenager hits adulthood, generally they are full time in building career, getting into a relationship, finding a place to live and have minimal time to volunteer. The middle age/middle class used to have time to volunteer and used to make up a significant amount of volunteering. Coaching, church, clubs, scouts, cadets, etc. Now they are both working and struggling to keep their heads above the fiscal water and may only volunteer for short while as their kids is involved, dropping out as their kid ages out.

One of the key turn offs for many now is the additional rules and barriers placed by many of the clubs/teams/organizations folks want to volunteer at. Buddy offered to help out minor hockey due to their coach being away for work for two weeks (and has family on the team)....after second practice isn't allowed to skate with kids anymore unless he completes the full coaching clinic and child safety courses which is two full weekends of time. He's not entering the rooms with kids, is there with 4 other parents on the ice...and probably will never return.

So many organizations have added policies and steps that are more about protecting the name then allowing the kids to do things it turns parents and others off. Certain organizations I was big into as a kid I would never put my own child into now due to the "protect the name, not the kid" attitude that chased off generations worth of volunteers. For example...a simple campfire for one youth group for kids to roast marshmellows requires paperwork filed a month in advance and evaluation of your skills to start a campfire - when almost every person has a campfire ring in their backyard here and the town offers free firewood in the town parks for visitors - because someone got burnt once and it needs to be safe.

Needs to be less internal red tape and frankly some acceptance that regardless of what you want to do some kids and adults will get hurt doing X exercise. Some simple gate keeper type checks sure (i.e criminal records check if working with kids) but things need to become simpler for volunteers too.

 

[KevinB]

One of the key turn offs for many now is the additional rules and barriers placed by many of the clubs/teams/organizations folks want to volunteer at. Buddy offered to help out minor hockey due to their coach being away for work for two weeks (and has family on the team)....after second practice isn't allowed to skate with kids anymore unless he completes the full coaching clinic and child safety courses which is two full weekends of time. He's not entering the rooms with kids, is there with 4 other parents on the ice...and probably will never return.

So I will offer a contrary view -- want to coach - sign up and do the courses.
The rules are in place to ensure everyone safety.
Personally if there are 4 others on the ice, the fifth isn't needed, you can only have so many cooks...
Also only 4 coaches are allowed on the bench for games.

So many organizations have added policies and steps that are more about protecting the name then allowing the kids to do things it turns parents and others off. Certain organizations I was big into as a kid I would never put my own child into now due to the "protect the name, not the kid" attitude that chased off generations worth of volunteers. For example...a simple campfire for one youth group for kids to roast marshmellows requires paperwork filed a month in advance and evaluation of your skills to start a campfire - when almost every person has a campfire ring in their backyard here and the town offers free firewood in the town parks for visitors - because someone got burnt once and it needs to be safe.

Needs to be less internal red tape and frankly some acceptance that regardless of what you want to do some kids and adults will get hurt doing X exercise. Some simple gate keeper type checks sure (i.e criminal records check if working with kids) but things need to become simpler for volunteers too.

While a lot of the rules appear to be designed to protect the entity (and there is an abundance of that) those same rules are also in place to protect the participants. They give tools for the participants and parents to go after individuals and organizations that do not follow the rules, or worse.

 

[daftandbarmy]

So I will offer a contrary view -- want to coach - sign up and do the courses.
The rules are in place to ensure everyone safety.
Personally if there are 4 others on the ice, the fifth isn't needed, you can only have so many cooks...
Also only 4 coaches are allowed on the bench for games.

While a lot of the rules appear to be designed to protect the entity (and there is an abundance of that) those same rules are also in place to protect the participants. They give tools for the participants and parents to go after individuals and organizations that do not follow the rules, or worse.

Then there's the whole pedophile risk management thing ...

Scouts Canada kept 'confidential list' of pedophiles​

Lawyer calls for full disclosure of 'confidential list' records​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/scouts-canada-kept-confidential-list-of-pedophiles-1.1010983

 

[Jarnhamar]

Forcing people to work without paying them, i.e making highschool kids do volunteer work to pass, isn't volunteering it's a form of slave labour.

Also, some organizations like big brothers & big sisters reject or discourage applications from people who are in programs like Police Foundations. They were finding when people got hired by the police they dropped the kids they were volunteering with. People were only doing it to get the volunteering check in the box.

 

[HavokFour]

Forcing people to work without paying them, i.e making highschool kids do volunteer work to pass, isn't volunteering it's a form of slave labour.

Also, some organizations like big brothers & big sisters reject or discourage applications from people who are in programs like Police Foundations. They were finding when people got hired by the police they dropped the kids they were volunteering with. People were only doing it to get the volunteering check in the box.

I think maybe only a handful of people from my high school year actually did the required voluntold hours, everyone in my immediate circle (including myself) just had an aunt/uncle or family friend sign the paperwork with our parent's blessing.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Cornwall, Ont. police seize 35 guns and over $2 million in drugs

Police say 20 people are facing more than 700 criminal charges following a multi-jurisdictional drug-trafficking investigation in and around the city of Cornwall.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[captloadie]

Forcing people to work without paying them, i.e making highschool kids do volunteer work to pass, isn't volunteering it's a form of slave labour.

Also, some organizations like big brothers & big sisters reject or discourage applications from people who are in programs like Police Foundations. They were finding when people got hired by the police they dropped the kids they were volunteering with. People were only doing it to get the volunteering check in the box.

So how did you instill the value of volunteerism in your children? Of my three children who have had to volunteer, two did it without fuss, and found they were actually being helpful within the community. The last one thinks its a waste of his time to do things for others without getting paid. I might make him do double the hours so he understands that giving back to a community that has made his life better has long term benefits.

 

[daftandbarmy]

So how did you instill the value of volunteerism in your children? Of my three children who have had to volunteer, two did it without fuss, and found they were actually being helpful within the community. The last one thinks its a waste of his time to do things for others without getting paid. I might make him do double the hours so he understands that giving back to a community that has made his life better has long term benefits.

The first two will likely wind up working for the third

 

[Rifleman62]

Unless things have changed, you also need a criminal records check to be an amateur coach. Spent 24 years as a Level 3 Certified Amateur coach.

 

[Remius]

Forcing people to work without paying them, i.e making highschool kids do volunteer work to pass, isn't volunteering it's a form of slave labour.

Not sure I would classify it as slave labour but it certainly is a form of unpaid labour and does very little on a CV. My niece did her volunteer hours helping at the hope volley ball tourney or blues fest (free access). Not sure that is what I classify as volunteer work.

I would see a lot of that on CVs. They’d include their 40 hours of voluntold work.

The worst thing I see is the city hazardous waste depot days. Lots of high schools sending kids there for their volunteer hours. Can’t imagine what those kids are being exposed to for no pay.

Also, some organizations like big brothers & big sisters reject or discourage applications from people who are in programs like Police Foundations. They were finding when people got hired by the police they dropped the kids they were volunteering with. People were only doing it to get the volunteering check in the box.

Saw a lot of that. Big Brothers was a notorious means to an end for some.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

So how did you instill the value of volunteerism in your children? Of my three children who have had to volunteer, two did it without fuss, and found they were actually being helpful within the community. The last one thinks its a waste of his time to do things for others without getting paid. I might make him do double the hours so he understands that giving back to a community that has made his life better has long term benefits.

I do security rounds at our local church, my daughter asked why I do it as I don't attend church. I listed all the stuff they had done/provided for her and her sister, like youth camps, choir, volunteer opportunities, paid staff stuff like summer camp counselors and now my youngest is employed there as a sound tech on Sunday services. I said this is my way of giving back and these things don't work unless you are willing to do your bit.

On a brighter note, I am seeing a slow but steady growing trend in our local Persian community to volunteer outside their own community.

 

[KevinB]

Unless things have changed, you also need a criminal records check to be an amateur coach. Spent 24 years as a Level 3 Certified Amateur coach.

I am obviously only familiar with USA Hockey, but in talking to Canadian coaches at tournaments, it seems the systems are pretty similar.

Down here:
All Over 18 personnel (be it players, coaches, managers, officials etc)
Background Screening: done every 2 years (this can be waived if you are a LEO or have an active clearance at TS or higher, honestly it is easier to pay the $10 to get the screening than try to link up the BackGround Check entity with your CLEO or FSO)
SafeSport: basically rules and regulations to protect youth athletes - annual recertification (it used to be every 2 years).

Coaches Specific: Current Coaching Certification (for the L1-L3 Coaches this is annual (either retaking the current level, or taking the next clinic - Clinics run from 8-16hrs depending on Level and how they are done - in person, or video
For L4 you need to be have been an active L3, and take the 12 hr L4 Course - for subsequent years you need 20 Continuing Education Credits every 4 years to remain current - or take the L5
For L5 you need to have been an active L4 Coach the previous season and take a 3 day On and Off Ice Seminar (run 1 time a year at one location, this years was in Cleveland OH). L5 Coaches need to take 25 CE credits within 5 years to remain current - depending on what you are doing L5 CE can be teaching some Clinics or CE seminars.

Official Specific: L1 was a 2 Day Off and On Ice (now it is apparently a 8hr Zoom Lesson), L2 requires a year of L1 and a 4 hr Zoom Instruction and an Online Test. L3 requires to be a previous L2, and then the Advanced Officiating "class" of a 3 hr Zoom Course, a 3hr Online Distance Learning Course with various Modules, and a 3 Hour Open Book test. L4 requires at least a year at L3, and the same "Advanced Officiating" class as the L3 - once you are a L4 for 4 years you can apply to be an tenured official (which basically means you can skip through 2 hrs of videos in the modules and just take the tests). There is zero requirement to move beyond any Level unless you want to officiate higher level games you need to be a L3/4 Official to skate 3 and 4 Official games as a Referee, depending on League you will need to be a L2-L4 Official to be a Linesman in a 3 or 4 Official game.

All in all I probably spend 80hrs a year re-certifying, I'm a L4 Coach and L3 Ref (I have zero interest in Ref'ing Junior or Higher games so I doubt I will ever go for L4 (USAHockey charges double to certify as a L4 annually than a L3, and if you aren't trying to Ref Youth AA or AAA Nationals or Junior and College Hockey it isn't worth it to me).
Volunteering isn't very easy -- but when you see the various sports lists of blacklisted personnel, you can see why the hoops do get jumped through, as no one wants Youth Sports to be an easy target for predators.

 

[brihard]

Actually, constitutionally, we can. That is the effect of parliamentary supremacy and the convention that no parliament can bind another. A treaty or contract with a parliamentary government is only valid for the life of the parliament. If nobody complains then the treaty or contract carries over from one parliament to the next. But by convention any parliament is free to withdraw from, or renegotiate, any treaty or contract. That doesn't mean they will be excused any contractually associated penalties from breaking the contract.

That’s not remotely true. A contract with ‘Canada’ the country is not a contract with the current legislature, but with the state as a whole. Such contracts or treaties are entered into by the executive, with some requirement in some instances (certainly not all or even most) for Parliamentary assent. But once Canada enters into a binding contract or treaty, Canada remains bound by the terms. Nobody would contract or treat with the Canadian government if such contracts became unilaterally voidable when Parliament dissolves.

 

[Kirkhill]

Parliament has retained the power to make or unmake any law.

Insofar as an international treaty is dependent on an act of a parliament a future parliament is free to act differently.

Hence Brexit. Hence the break with tradition represented by The Constitution... enacted by the parliaments of the day. And modifiable by today's parliaments.

Legislature - Parliamentary Sovereignty

 

[Kirkhill]

In response to my query "Does Canada recognize the supremacy of international law?" I received this response:


"No, Canada does not recognize the supremacy of international law, as its Constitution is the supreme law of the land and domestic law takes precedence over international law when they conflict. However, Canada follows principles that require courts to interpret domestic laws in a way that is consistent with international law whenever possible. International treaties must be implemented through domestic legislation to become part of Canadian law, with the exception of some customary international law.

Domestic law supremacy

• The Constitution is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with it is of no force or effect.
  
  
• In cases of conflict, domestic law, whether federal or provincial, prevails over international law.
  

Implementation of international treaties

• International treaties and conventions must be incorporated into Canadian law through domestic legislation to be enforceable in Canadian courts.
• The federal government can enter into treaties, but they must be implemented in a way that respects the division of powers between federal, provincial, and territorial governments.
• Once implemented, a treaty becomes part of Canadian law and can be interpreted by courts.
  

Interpretation of domestic law

• Canadian courts have a duty to interpret domestic statutes in a manner consistent with Canada's international obligations, where possible.
• This means that if a domestic law can be read in two ways, one consistent with a treaty and one not, the court will choose the interpretation that aligns with the international obligation.
• This "presumption of conformity" requires courts to interpret the law to be consistent with international law, but domestic law will still prevail if the two conflict and the law cannot be interpreted consistently.
  

Customary international law

• The status of customary international law in Canada is still a developing area of law, with courts often looking to precedent in other common law jurisdictions.
  
  
• For example, courts have stated that customary international law can be adopted into Canadian law through the "adoption" doctrine, but domestic legislation will prevail if there is a conflict.
  
  
• The Supreme Court has affirmed that Canada is not bound by customary international law in the domestic sphere to the extent that it contradicts domestic law, but it can influence domestic law and its interpretation. "
  

Policy on Tabling of Treaties in Parliament - Canada.ca

www.treaty-accord.gc.ca

 

[Kirkhill]

https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/41300/chapter-abstract/352051716?redirectedFrom=fulltext

The reason, in my opinion, that countries willingly enter into treaties with Canada is that they believe those treaties have broad support and that they will survive subsequent parliaments, at least for a useful period of time.

There is a reason why the Continent knew parliamentary UK as perfidious Albion.
And the US struggles with their ratfication procedures. Their President is charged with managing foreign relations and can sign all the traeties he or she wishes but nothing is effected ubtil their version of parliament ratifies the signature. And those same bodies can abrogate those treaties.

Much is made of the rule of law but laws are made by people and the are interpreted and judged by people and they are only valid fo so long as they are accepted by people.

Thus the value of parliament - the place where people get to choose their laws. Including their constitution.

 

[daftandbarmy]

In response to my query "Does Canada recognize the supremacy of international law?" I received this response:


"No, Canada does not recognize the supremacy of international law, as its Constitution is the supreme law of the land and domestic law takes precedence over international law when they conflict. However, Canada follows principles that require courts to interpret domestic laws in a way that is consistent with international law whenever possible. International treaties must be implemented through domestic legislation to become part of Canadian law, with the exception of some customary international law.

Domestic law supremacy

• The Constitution is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with it is of no force or effect.
  
  
• In cases of conflict, domestic law, whether federal or provincial, prevails over international law.

Implementation of international treaties

• International treaties and conventions must be incorporated into Canadian law through domestic legislation to be enforceable in Canadian courts.
• The federal government can enter into treaties, but they must be implemented in a way that respects the division of powers between federal, provincial, and territorial governments.
• Once implemented, a treaty becomes part of Canadian law and can be interpreted by courts.

Interpretation of domestic law

• Canadian courts have a duty to interpret domestic statutes in a manner consistent with Canada's international obligations, where possible.
• This means that if a domestic law can be read in two ways, one consistent with a treaty and one not, the court will choose the interpretation that aligns with the international obligation.
• This "presumption of conformity" requires courts to interpret the law to be consistent with international law, but domestic law will still prevail if the two conflict and the law cannot be interpreted consistently.

Customary international law

• The status of customary international law in Canada is still a developing area of law, with courts often looking to precedent in other common law jurisdictions.
  
  
• For example, courts have stated that customary international law can be adopted into Canadian law through the "adoption" doctrine, but domestic legislation will prevail if there is a conflict.
  
  
• The Supreme Court has affirmed that Canada is not bound by customary international law in the domestic sphere to the extent that it contradicts domestic law, but it can influence domestic law and its interpretation. "

Policy on Tabling of Treaties in Parliament - Canada.ca

www.treaty-accord.gc.ca

Except for UNDRIP, right?