Opponents of fluoridation ask court for injunction
It's only been 10 days since Calgary began fluoridating the water once again, and already opponents are taking to the courts to stop it.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Colby Cosh: Cyclists' rights — the latest product of judicial hubris
You'll surely read a lot in the NP 's pages about the Wednesday ruling by Ontario Superior Court Justice Paul Schabas which found that the province's plans to remove exclusive bike lanes on some key Toronto arteries is contrary to the Charter of Rights. Legal conservatives will argue that this decision, if upheld on appeal, amounts to an arrogation of further new powers by a Canadian judiciary that has already been running amok for 50 years. They will characterize it as a matter of scribbling a 'right to bike lanes' into the Charter. Article content Article content The lefty/progressive retort is, well, right there in the decision itself. Pshaw, there's no question of creating a free-standing or universal 'right to bike lanes.' What happened was that cycling advocates approached a court with evidence that ripping out the Toronto bike lanes was likely to create extra risk of death or injury for people engaged in (and possibly dependent on) cycling, which is a wholly legal and approved activity. Article content Article content Article content Our Constitution recognizes that elected authorities can do this kind of thing, but it obviously engages Charter guarantees of life and personal security, so a sort of administrative due process applies. Such a decision must be founded on evidence, and cannot be 'arbitrary.' Article content And who decides what's arbitrary? Why, judges, of course. Justice Schabas is not afraid to comb over the record of internal government decision-making on the bike lanes and make himself the decider of public policy. The stated goal of the bike-lane removal was to reduce automobile traffic congestion in the relevant areas of Toronto, but the government's own evidence that 'ripping out' the lanes would have that effect is sketchy and anecdotal, in the judge's view. The cycling lobby, on the other hand, came very well prepared with data, surely seasoned with impressive-looking charts and tables gathered from the four corners of the urbanist universe. Article content Article content For all I know (or care), Justice Schabas is objectively correct: I might very well reach the same factual conclusion that he did if provided with the same PowerPoints. Who would stake their life on the proposition that the Ford government, or any government, can be blindly trusted to act on nothing but rational evidence and articulable motives? Article content The issue here is that the Charter was originally interpreted as only inhibiting the state in a 'negative' way, as forbidding certain unjust actions, rather than actively imposing 'positive' political obligations on governments (ones that might have price tags). But Canadian courts have wobbled occasionally, gradually making ever-wider exceptions to the old distinction between positive and negative liberty, and Schabas has voraciously corralled all of these exceptions (Chaoulli! Burns! PHS!) to justify his own ruling. He has, inescapably, created a Charter right to a small set of particular, existing bike lanes: that's just the literal effect of the judgment, subject to further appeals to other courts. Article content Now, if you're one of those trendy 'abundance agenda' liberals, or a 'techno-optimist' retro-libertarian, or perhaps even just a prime minister who got elected on a promise to build lots of infrastructure in an old-school heroic-age-of-engineering way, the Schabas ruling is bound to make you queasy. It is not only a Magna Carta for the endless legal delays to construction which already torment the English-speaking world; it creates the possibility that anything a government does succeed in building or providing may become effectively immovable, protected indefinitely like some endangered vole. If you are tempted to seek reassurance, Justice Schabas tries to provide it in paragraph 19 of his decision. Article content 'This decision does not open the floodgates to Charter challenges of traffic decisions. Most road and traffic decisions are well-grounded in data and safety concerns, as one would expect, and are unlikely to be challenged as arbitrary. In any event, fear of opening the floodgates to such challenges is not in law a basis for denying individuals their Charter rights. Rights claims are not denied because others may make a similar claim or because it is administratively inconvenient to comply with the Charter.' Article content Readers will immediately recognize a troublingly familiar form of liberal argumentation: 'Don't worry, X won't happen, unless it does, which would actually be a fine thing.' And there is surely an added dollop of toothsome irony in that second sentence. Article content The judge has just ruled in favour of a lobby group for cyclists — i.e., people who couldn't hold a café conversation for 11 minutes without mentioning how our civilization is irrationally consecrated to the automobile as a consequence of a century-plus of totally daft urban-planning decisions. 'Most road and traffic decisions are well-grounded in data and safety concerns' is a sentence you would expect to find in a defence of the car-centric concrete-covered world that so disgusts bike advocates (the more radical ones, anyway). Article content The essentially ideological character of this paragraph isn't very well disguised, and if a judge wishes to make forecasts about the effects of an obviously novel application of the law, well, who can stop him? When some elected politician implements a bad idea confidently, and it goes wrong, he is at risk of un-election. When a judge makes one, he is not likely to even be criticized by name. (Just ask the Longest Ballot Committee!) This is a fundamental reason our Constitution still incorporates a principle of parliamentary supremacy: it is not even about democracy, well-liked though democracy is, so much as it is about having ultimate decision power loosely yoked to accountability. Article content
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Avi Benlolo: Carney's message to Hamas — terrorism pays
Article content And what of Israel — the only democracy in the Middle East, a nation that faces existential threats on multiple fronts, including from Iran and its terror proxies in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen? Instead of support, Israel receives lectures. Instead of security assistance, it gets condemnation. Article content While Israel intercepts rockets from Yemen and navigates daily threats to its very survival, Canada is choosing this moment — this volatile, dangerous moment — to side with the forces that seek Israel's destruction. Article content If we are to have a winning mindset as a nation, we need to show strength and independence. This isn't leadership. Canada is merely following the crowd again like a 'me too' country, afraid to stick to its longstanding position of a negotiated solution. Article content The irony is that Carney's announcement comes while countries like France and the U.K. engage in similar posturing — none of them willing or able to answer basic questions, such as: Where are the borders? Who will lead this Palestinian state? Will it be democratic? Will it end terrorism? Will it recognize Israel's right to exist? Article content These questions remain unanswered because the reality is as inconvenient as it is undeniable: after October 7, a Palestinian State is less viable. Article content Canada's announcement is also detriment of all Canadians at a time when we are trying to negotiate a trade deal with the United States. On Thursday, U.S. President Donald Trump posted to Truth Social: 'Canada has just announced that it is backing statehood for Palestine. That will make it very hard for us to make a Trade Deal with them. Oh' Canada!!!' Article content Why are we provoking America by announcing a declaration of a Palestinian state? How does this help Canadian workers and taxpayers? Article content If Canada were serious about peace, it would be investing in Israeli security and demanding transparency from the Palestinian Authority. It would be calling out the glorification of terrorism, not enabling it. It would be standing firm on the principle that peace cannot be achieved through bloodshed and coercion. Article content Instead, Carney has chosen appeasement over peace. He has adopted a position of political theatrics rather than moral clarity. I am terribly disappointed. History will remember who stood on the right side in the aftermath of October 7 — and who chose to reward those who lit the match. Article content Article content Article content
National Post
an hour ago
- National Post
Ottawa's top HR official aims to reduce excess senior executives in public service: memo
'Dilution and duplication lead to unnecessary layers of decision making and unclear accountabilities,' federal Chief Human Resources Officer Jacqueline Bogden wrote in her memo. Photo by Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press/File OTTAWA — After 10 years of constant growth, the federal government now says there are too many senior executives in the public service, slowing productivity and creating workplace conflicts. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors In an internal memo Wednesday obtained by National Post, the federal Chief Human Resources Officer Jacqueline Bogden is clear: there are more assistant deputy ministers (421) in the bureaucracy than permanent positions at that level (355). Now, the top human resources official says her office will be cracking down on the overage, an exceptional move after years of substantial growth of the federal public service. Your guide to the world of Canadian politics. (Subscriber exclusive on Saturdays) By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again Bogden said just the assistant deputy minister (ADM) — the second highest ranking position in most departments — cadre ballooned by 50 per cent (or 140) since 2015. 'There is a need to take additional proactive measures to address the ADM overage situation and contain future growth of the ADM cadre,' Bogden wrote. An ADM's salary can range from $197,774 to $260,719 depending on their years of experience as well as their pay classification, according to the government's website. Bogden's memo says her office is implementing two new measures until the end of the year to address the overage. The first aims to reduce the number of ADMs by reviewing existing positions, particularly 'higher risk' situations where the senior executive is on a temporary assignment with no subsequent permanent position. The memo does not say if those positions will be demoted, eliminated or transformed into permanent positions to reduce the 'overage.' The second aims to 'contain' the growth of the ADM cadre by requiring all departments to get permission from her office before promoting a new person to the position. The internal announcement comes as Prime Minister Mark Carney's government is asking most departments and agencies to find spending cuts worth 15 per cent by 2029. It also comes after years of tremendous growth of the public service under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic beginning in 2020. Over his tenure, the public service grew by over 100,000, from 257,000 in 2015 to 358,000 this year, according to government data. Though Bogden's memo focuses on the ADM cadre, it also included a recent report by the Public Service Management Advisory Committee warning that there are too many executives overall in the public service.
