Law Times

Page 6 June 19, 2017 • Law Times www.lawtimesnews.com COMMENT Most unloved law in Canada BY SUSAN DELACOURT I n Canada, the fundamental law of the land also happens to be the most un- loved law in the country. How did this happen? How did Canadians turn into a nation of Con- stitution haters? The newest round of all-around constitutional revulsion was stirred up by the Quebec government and its rather modest proposal in early June that Canada have a renewed conver- sation about making that province a sig- natory to the Constitution. Prime Minis- ter Justin Trudeau and many other poli- ticians rushed to slam that door closed almost as soon as it was opened. "We are not opening the Constitu- tion," Trudeau summarily declared. This is what happens when a country is united in constitutional aversion: Politicians don't even need to consult their public re- lations advisers for tactful ways to avoid the subject. A f lat "no" will do just fine. Talking about the Constitution in Canada is now roughly the same as promising to raise taxes or the salaries of public-office holders — an act of reck- less, political craziness. Only the brave few politicians — or retired ones — can depart from the consensus. Former Ontario premier Bob Rae would fall into both categories and was one of the few voices in the country to suggest earlier this month that maybe Quebec wasn't out of bounds in trying to get another constitutional con- versation underway. "The Constitution is a liv- ing thing. It's a living docu- ment. It's not some dead piece of paper," Rae told CBC Radio's The House. "The Constitution is about how we live together as Canadi- ans. And that's a conversation none of us wants to shut down." Others have wondered whether Trudeau would have been so quick to dismiss the constitutional conversation if proposed by indigenous Canadians. In Policy Options, Veldon Coburn, an Anishinaabe from Pikwakanagan doing his doctorate at Queen's University in in- digenous identity, put it bluntly. "Had Trudeau given any meaning- ful consideration of the perspective of indigenous peoples, he might not have dismissed constitutional dialogue so sharply," he said. In fact, Coburn suggests, a government that is serious about reconciliation with indigenous people might also have to be serious about making the Constitution re- f lect that new reality. Can Canada have a na- tion-to-nation relationship with its indigenous people without talking about the Constitution? Rae and Coburn are right. Somehow, a political communications strategy has cheapened how we talk about our Constitution and the nature of our country. Contrast this with the United States, for instance, where everyone from presi- dents to FBI directors (despite their seri- ous differences) talk about their solemn pledge to uphold that country's constitu- tion. In Canada, on the other hand, that is neither an oath nor a smart PR move. Members of Parliament and cabinet ministers swear allegiance to the Queen, not to the Constitution. Rae is a veteran of Canada's past con- stitutional debates. He pointed out that while those pro- posed agreements never managed to make it into law, it would be a mistake to call the efforts a waste of time. Those ill- fated constitutional deals were failures of process, not of political will. History has definitely taught Cana- dians that it is difficult — maybe impos- sible — to change the Constitution. But not everything in politics is supposed to be easy. It was 30 years ago this month that the Meech Lake constitutional ac- cord was signed and 25 years ago this year that the Charlottetown accord died in a national referendum. No one is keen to relive constitution- al dramas of the past, but it wouldn't be the worst thing if Canadians stopped re- coiling at the mere mention of the Con- stitution. The fundamental law of the land is surely owed more respect than slammed doors and abruptly ended conversations. LT uSusan Delacourt is an Ottawa-based political author and columnist who has been working on Parliament Hill for nearly 30 years. She is a frequent political panellist on national television and author of four books. She can be reached at sdelacourt@bell.net. ©2017 Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted or stored in a retrieval system without written per- mission. The opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily those of the publisher. Information presented is compiled from sources believed to be accurate, however, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions. Law Times disclaims any warranty as to the accuracy, completeness or currency of the contents of this publication and disclaims all liability in respect of the results of any action taken or not taken in reli- ance upon information in this publication. Publications Mail Agreement Number 40762529 • ISSN 0847-5083 Law Times is published 40 times a year by Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. LT.editor@thomsonreuters.com CIRCULATIONS & SUBSCRIPTIONS $205.00 + HST per year in Canada for print and online (HST Reg. #R121351134), $199 + HST per year for online only. Single copies are $5.00. Circulation inquiries, postal returns and address changes should include a copy of the mailing label(s) and should be sent to Law Times One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy Rd. Toronto ON, M1T 3V4. Return postage guaranteed. Contact Keith Fulford at .............. 416-649-9585 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . or fax: 416-649-7870 keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com SALES AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT Advertising inquiries and materials should be directed to Sales, Law Times, 2075 Kennedy Rd., Toronto, ON, M1T 3V4 or call: Sales Manager Paul Burton ............................................ 416-649-9928 paul.burton@tr.com Business Development Consultant: Ivan Ivanovitch ...................................... 416-887-4300 ivan.ivanovitch@tr.com Client Development Manager: Grace So ................................................ 416-903-4473 grace.so@tr.com Account Manager: Kimberlee Pascoe .................................. 416-996-1739 kimberlee.pascoe@tr.com Account Executive: Steffanie Munroe ................................... 416-315-5879 steffanie.munroe@tr.com Law Times Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd., One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy Rd., Toronto, ON • M1T 3V4 • Tel: 416-298-5141 • Fax: 416-649-7870 www.lawtimesnews.com LT.editor@thomsonreuters.com • @lawtimes Director/Group Publisher . . . . . . . . . Karen Lorimer Managing Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jennifer Brown Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gabrielle Giroday Staff Writer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Alex Robinson Copy Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Patricia Cancilla CaseLaw Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Leah Craven Art Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phyllis Barone Production Co-ordinator . . . . . . . . .Catherine Giles Electronic Production Specialist . . . Derek Welford u EDITORIAL OBITER By Gabrielle Giroday Unfake news, open info On the face of it, access to information and press freedom may not seem like the most lawyerly issues. But when it comes to lawyers playing an important public role as legislative experts and thought leaders, their attention to these mat- ters is indeed crucial. In this issue of Law Times, columnist Lisa Taylor — a lawyer and journalist — explains the importance of protecting press freedom in Canada, especially in light of verbal attacks on the press south of the border. There is also a piece on delays around the federal govern- ment's promise to reform the federal Access to Information Act. The recent annual report by the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada, which describes itself as the "the first level of independent review of government decisions relating to requests for access to pub- lic sector information," indicated it received more than 2,000 com- plaints in 2016-2017. This led to investigations into delays or refusals for public sector information. "Many of these investigations illustrate how the outdated Access to Information Act is used as a shield against transparency. The issues raised highlight the need to amend the Act to resolve long-standing deficiencies," said the report. The report also noted that investigations included "the deletion of emails subject to an access request referring to the provincial and fed- eral Liberal party; problems obtaining records in ministers' offices; a failure to document decisions related to the tasering death of Robert Dziekanski; difficulties obtaining information re- garding the governments' interactions with SNC- Lavalin; and lengthy delays to access information related to an Indian Residential School." The act — and its lack of reform — has implica- tions for privacy law, criminal law, administrative law, corporate/commercial law and beyond. Re- forming the legislation and promoting press free- dom is important to ensure the free f low of infor- mation and ideas. LT The Hill Susan Delacourt Susan Delacourt

• Cover