• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

New GG Announced

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,252
Points
1,090
The complaints are outside his mandate. The Queen's prerogative is not subject to the OL Act. And any recommendations made by PCO to the PM would constitute advice to the Minister and are thus confidences that would not be disclosed to an investigator.

He's either wildly ignorant about Canadian constitutional law, or a performative buffoon seeking attention.
Here is a copy of the act. Who and what is subject to the act and the duties of the Commissioner.


As far as I can see, the office of the GG is subject to that act. There is a list of exempted institutions like the Senate or HofC for example.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,714
Points
990
But this has nothing to do with the office of the GG respecting the OLA in their day to day operations.

It's about the decision to appoint an individual.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,252
Points
1,090
But this has nothing to do with the office of the GG respecting the OLA in their day to day operations.

It's about the decision to appoint an individual.
Actually if you read his statement the investigation PCO. Which also seems to fall under it he act. And it all depends on the nature of the complaints which the OLC have deemed admissible based on the act.

Having worked at a similar agency, generally a complaint comes in. The validity of which is judged by interpretation of the act. An investigation is normally launched after the legal types look at the complaint in relation to the act and recommend whether or not there is something to it or not. 430 complaints about one issue would have been enough for the commissioner to look into something where I was.

now I didn’t work at OL but where I did, participation in investigations was voluntary, so someone could just say eff off. This didn’t normally happen in gvt departments but it could sometimes. Naming and shaming was the primary tool but the Commissioner could take someone to federal court over the issue if push came to shove.

My take is that enough of the complaints had enough merit for the OLC to take a look. And it would not have launched without legal advice to do so.
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
903
Points
1,040
Here is a copy of the act. Who and what is subject to the act and the duties of the Commissioner.


As far as I can see, the office of the GG is subject to that act. There is a list of exempted institutions like the Senate or HofC for example.

But the the Queen is NOT!
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,252
Points
1,090
And, it could very well end with the OLC finding no issues with the process.
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
903
Points
1,040
Actually if you read his statement the investigation PCO. Which also seems to fall under it he act. And it all depends on the nature of the complaints which the OLC have deemed admissible based on the act.

Having worked at a similar agency, generally a complaint comes in. The validity of which is judged by interpretation of the act. An investigation is normally launched after the legal types look at the complaint in relation to the act and recommend whether or not there is something to it or not. 430 complaints about one issue would have been enough for the commissioner to look into something where I was.

now I didn’t work at OL but where I did, participation in investigations was voluntary, so someone could just say eff off. This didn’t normally happen in gvt departments but it could sometimes. Naming and shaming was the primary tool but the Commissioner could take someone to federal court over the issue if push came to shove.

My take is that enough of the complaints had enough merit for the OLC to take a look. And it would not have launched without legal advice to do so.

I suggest you consult Professor Philippe Lagassé; he is one of Canada's (few) real experts on our worthless Constitution. He says the Commissioner is full of crap.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,252
Points
1,090
I suggest you consult Professor Philippe Lagassé; he is one of Canada's (few) real experts on our worthless Constitution. He says the Commissioner is full of crap.
Having read that I don’t see where he is actually contradicting anything that is being said by the commissioner. The focus being on PCO. So with the number of complaints, some possibly with merit, he will look into where he can. And he may just come to the same conclusions the good professor makes. Not all investigations criticize. In fact there may be a precedent set here depending on what comes of it.
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,252
Points
1,090
Oh and one more thing to add food for thought. Some of those complaints may have come from within PCO and those that may have worked on this. Just saying.

it’s been known to happen in cases like this.
 

lenaitch

Sr. Member
Reaction score
977
Points
840
Maybe it's time Canada becomes a tri-lingual country.

It would be a tad more than three:

More than 70 Aboriginal languages are being spoken across Canada​


 

lenaitch

Sr. Member
Reaction score
977
Points
840
I suggest you consult Professor Philippe Lagassé; he is one of Canada's (few) real experts on our worthless Constitution. He says the Commissioner is full of crap.

Assuming that none are perfect, I think "worthless" is a bit of a stretch. Certainly better than those countries whose political leaders manipulate theirs as they please.
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
903
Points
1,040
Assuming that none are perfect, I think "worthless" is a bit of a stretch. Certainly better than those countries whose political leaders manipulate theirs as they please.

I contend that ALL written constitutions are flawed, some a lot more than others. I cannot think of one that was ever much good and most ~ even the ones, like the old USSR's, that seemed wonderful on the surface ~ could not be enforced. That applies to ours and to America's. Israel, New Zealkand and the United Kingdom have good constitutions; every other one is less good. Ours is, I repeat, worthless.

Don't even get me started on the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights ~ it's so bad that it makes our terminally silly 1982 Charter seem almost reasonable.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,997
Points
1,040
Don't even get me started on the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights ~ it's so bad that it makes our terminally silly 1982 Charter seem almost reasonable.
I've had a bit of experience developing constitutional documents for an international organization and let me just say that I'd rather roll around in a field of cacti before doing that again.

:giggle:
 

lenaitch

Sr. Member
Reaction score
977
Points
840
I contend that ALL written constitutions are flawed, some a lot more than others. I cannot think of one that was ever much good and most ~ even the ones, like the old USSR's, that seemed wonderful on the surface ~ could not be enforced. That applies to ours and to America's. Israel, New Zealkand and the United Kingdom have good constitutions; every other one is less good. Ours is, I repeat, worthless.

Don't even get me started on the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights ~ it's so bad that it makes our terminally silly 1982 Charter seem almost reasonable.


The UK Constitution is uncodified, but perhaps that is your point.


The UK Supreme Court (only in existence since 2009) cannot strike down legislation - parliament is supreme.
 
Top