Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

[brihard]

I understand that the Federal Court doesn’t simply overturn administrative decisions on the merits. The court’s ruling highlights a real issue. The IAD failed to properly consider critical evidence, including the Ontario Parole Board’s assessment that this guy poses a very low risk of reoffending and the best interests of his Canadian-born children. While it’s true the final outcome isn’t yet decided, this procedural back and forth has already dragged on for years, despite a clear criminal conviction and removal order. I can't imagine my kid being killed and the guy who caused it arguing he shouldn't be deported because it would be hard on his family.

Streamlining this could protect public safety without undermining the rights of those legitimately seeking humanitarian relief. It seems like we set ourselves up to het taken advantage of by people exactly like this.

Alternatively, administrative decision makers have absolutely no excuse for not knowing what courts will require to uphold an administrative decision. It’s a super basic point of competence for them to write decisions that check all the boxes brought up in a case. Weakening this system would weaken the system that protects your right to grieve a shoddily made CAF administrative decisions, or to seek judicial review of a poorly written decision on a VAC claim.

 

[Altair]

What's the usual places you speak of Altair?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Weakening this system would weaken the system that protects your right to grieve a shoddily made CAF administrative decisions,

I don't quite follow here.

 

[Jarnhamar]

You said it's making its way around the usual places. I'm just asking what those usual places are, since you made that comment.

 

[brihard]

I don't quite follow here.

You’re talking about the process in its entirety, which necessarily includes the courts. Judicial review is our check and balances as Canadians against arbitrary and unreasonable decisions by this empowered by law to make administrative decisions. No matter what you did to the immigration system, judicial review would remain as an option at the end of the administrative process, and you can’t really weaken judicial review for some without weakening it for all.

Basically there was no reason for IAD to screw this up, but they did anyway. It’s not abuse of the system for someone to request review. Sometimes the system just needs to suck less at its job.

 

[brihard]

You said it's making its way around the usual places. I'm just asking what those usual places are, since you made that comment.

r/Canada and some other smaller subreddits, Twitter and such are the obvious ones.

 

[IKnowNothing]

perhaps although that is questionable.

Nah. It literally has one of the NDP platform promises/ideas in the Youth Climate Corps

What is known and the question in response to the point about theatre was: when was the last time an opposition amendment to a finance bill was implemented.

Yes but the question about theatre misunderstands timeline, because the theatrical demand was made public BEFORE the budget was presented

Agreements made behind closed doors do not count in this context.

The exact thing I'm talking about doesnt count. Lol convenient.

 

[Jarnhamar]

r/Canada and some other smaller subreddits, Twitter and such are the obvious ones.

I too think that's exactly what Altair meant

The Canadian reddit channel has something like 4 million posters. I'm not surprised to see a story like this posted somewhere on there and discussed.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Basically there was no reason for IAD to screw this up, but they did anyway. It’s not abuse of the system for someone to request review. Sometimes the system just needs to suck less at its job.

That's fair and a good point.

The IAD should have been more thorough. I find the idea this guy could stay in Canada after these kind of offences because his kids best interest is ridiculous and a slap in the face to the victims and their family. But that's the system we created for ourselves. Whats stopping us from deporting him and leaving his family here? If they want to join him them get on a plane and go.

 

[daftandbarmy]

That's fair and a good point.

The IAD should have been more thorough. I find the idea this guy could stay in Canada after these kind of offences because his kids best interest is ridiculous and a slap in the face to the victims and their family. But that's the system we created for ourselves. Whats stopping us from deporting him and leaving his family here? If they want to join him them get on a plane and go.

Coincidentally, BC seems to be getting its act together on the deportation front. I'm happy, and amazed, all at the same time...

3 people deported in connection with B.C. extortion investigations​

3 people deported in connection with B.C. extortion investigations

Three people have been deported from Canada amid an ongoing task force targeting violent extortion threats in B.C.’s Lower Mainland.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[Jarnhamar]

I would comment further but I'm not wanting to risk a ban.

I apologize if this comes across as ad hominem for pointing it out but some of your posts come across like you're being unfairly targeted by moderators.

I just want to remind you once upon a time thought it was a good idea to enforce the rules better, and to a higher standard in the Politics forum (and it was a good call).

 

[MilEME09]

Feds and alberta are cooking something up

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-alberta-mou-reset-relationship-oil-and-gas-cap-9.6969996

 

[Altair]

I apologize

Apology accepted.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Feds and alberta are cooking something up

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-alberta-mou-reset-relationship-oil-and-gas-cap-9.6969996

BC be like...

 

[brihard]

Feds and alberta are cooking something up

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-alberta-mou-reset-relationship-oil-and-gas-cap-9.6969996

That’s cautiously encouraging.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Feds and alberta are cooking something up

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-alberta-mou-reset-relationship-oil-and-gas-cap-9.6969996

Have to wonder if the CPC is a bit nervous/concerned about this, no?

 

[brihard]

Have to wonder if the CPC is a bit nervous/concerned about this, no?

Tough to say yet.

Within Alberta? So few seats are in contention that probably not on that account.

However, based on public opinion polling that’s supportive of more federal support for our oil exports, and based on the core Alberta demand of receiving that support- any accord between the feds and Alberta is likely to include aspects that will pull some centrist support from CPC to LPC in other parts of the country, based on the perception of Canada moving towards more responsible and mature economic policy. CPC may have some worries based on that. Alberta’s votes are mostly locked, but a lot of us elsewhere in the country have an interest in improved economic sovereignty and will support the LPC in efforts towards that end. Same goes for stuff like critical minerals, ports, etc.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The court’s decision: https://canlii.ca/t/kg9mq

Do you mind a little sidebar?

I'm going through the decision.

The max penalty for dangerous driving causing death is 14 years in prison. For fleeing the scene of an accident causing death it's a 10 year maximum. A couple other causing bodily harm charges. All because he didn't like someone flashing high beams at him.

He ended up pleading guilty to 1 count of dangerous driving causing death and was given 6 months less a day.

My uneducated response is what the actual fuck. But is this a pretty typical sentence for something like this? Killing someone by accident because you were road raging? And not even a 3 year driving ban, so he might very well be out there driving around.

 

[RangerRay]

Yeah I knew this would get posted… It’s rage bait.

The court’s decision: https://canlii.ca/t/kg9mq

He was convicted. He was deemed inadmissible and he was ordered deported. Nine of those things are being argued.

He filed an appeal on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, a ‘hail Mary’ last step in the deportation process.

What happened here is that the Immigration Appeal Division - the administrative decision maker - reached a decision that’s within their authority but failed to show their work. Because their work was sloppy, the court has told them to do it again. The court has NOT reversed the final decision and ordered that he gets to stay in Canada no matter what immigration says.

When someone wants to challenge and administrative decision from a tribunal, once administrative appeals are exhausted they ask for “judicial review”. That’s the court taking a look at the situation. The court gives a lot of deference to the administrative decision maker. Courts don’t decide “what decision would we make?” but rather “is the decision be they could reasonably have made on the evidence?” There can be a wide range of reasonable decisions.

But, for the court to decide that, the decision maker has to show their work in the written decision and has to articulate their reasoning enough for the court to see why they reached the decision they did. This includes visibly engaging with all the relevant considerations. In this case the decision maker failed to do that. Because they couldn’t say “we considered the best interests of the children” and “we considered the parole board assessment”, and then explain their engagement with those two things, the court is unable to conclude the decision itself was reasonable- the receipts aren’t there. As federal court says in concluding the introduction: “While the IAD may have come to the same determination after considering the above-noted evidence, it is not for this Court to speculate as to the outcome. The matter is therefore remitted to the IAD for redetermination.”

The IAD now gets to reassess its decision, and will have to better articulate the “why?” it arrives at the decision it makes. Administrative decision makers need to ‘court proof’ their decisions in large part by showing their work.

Incidentally, for CAF members, this is the same sort of process when a grievance goes all the way past all administrative levels and goes to judicial review- same decision for the courts to make on “the as the decision reasonable, and was it arrived at with a reasonable process?” This is why for instance a CAF leader making decisions on remedial measures or release needs to take good notes and create a good written record of how each decision is reached.

Now, I’m not an administrative law guy and maybe our army.ca in house counsel will be along to correct some or all of this, but from looking at the decision I’m pretty sure I got it right.

There you go again adding “context” and “nuance” to a complex situation…