Court Challenges Program

The Court Challenges Program is one such loss. Dead at 12 years of age, the court challenges program came into being in 1994 “to provide financial assistance for important court cases that advance language and equality rights guaranteed under Canada's Constitution.”

They provided funding for numerous challenges that demonstrated a possibility that the law was being unevenly applied or that the law itself was problematic. For example, in the recent past they funded the Vancouver Rape Relief and Women’s Shelter to legally intervene on an appeal wherein the RCMP did not respond to a woman’s complaint that her ex-husband represented a threat to her.

In this case, seven weeks after his initial threats of violence, he went to her home shot their daughter, killed his ex-wife’s friend who was there, set the house on fire and then turned the gun on himself. Although the appeal was unsuccessful in proving a causal link between the two events, it was agreed by the three judges that the RCMP owed a duty of care to the woman and that their lack of response breached that duty. In this effort what is revealed is that the legal system needs to develop adequate responses to intimate partner violence. (Court Challenges Program of Canada programme de Contestation Judiciaire du Canada, Annual Report 2004-2005)

This is just one of many interventions funded by the Court Challenges Program. From Oct 1994 until March 31 2005 the Equality Rights panel funded 375 challenges and/or interventions. Of these 92 were related to aboriginal issues, 26 to issues of racism, 53 to disability, 40 to gender/sex, and 41 related to sexual orientation. (Court Challenges Program of Canada Programme de Contestation Judiciaire du Canada Annual Report 2004-2005.) It does not surprise me that the current gov’t ended the Court Challenges program as they have clearly stated that “special interest groups” (which means the majority of the CND population) will not be supported by the current gov’t. The Court Challenges program will be sorely missed, and the gap created by its premature death will be felt by all.

Status of Women

Although not yet dead, the Status of Women Canada is slowly being consumed by a disease found across Canada,capitalist corporatization. This deadly scourge is eroding social programs put in place to see to the benefit of citizens of Canada whose statuses have been marred by social markers that define them as less worthy. Marked by gender/sex, sexual orientation, poverty, race, immigration and able-bodiedness, people and organizations turned to the Status of Women to fund worthy programs aimed at education, networking, and awareness. Organizations such as the National Association of Women and the Law (NAWL) or the Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action (FAFIA) are two groups who depended on funding from the Status of Women Canada.

And across the county, a number of women’s organizations will have to close their doors as they too depend on Status of Women Canada for some or all of their funding and we know that 5 million dollars was cut from the Status of Women Canada’s budget. Financially crippled by the conservative budget, the Status of Women was further impaired by the change of mandate. Nancy Pickford writes,

At a meeting yesterday with women’s groups, Beverley Oda, Minister Responsible for the  Status of Women (SWC), informed representatives that new federal guidelines for funding will prohibit them from engaging in any advocacy or lobbying activities with federal funds (“New Federal Guidelines Bar Advocacy and Lobbying by Women’s Groups” Oct 4, 2006). 

  Images left and above from Status Report Mobilization Gallery. Add your photo.

Instead, a significant amount of the SWC’s budget will be spent within the government in order to “promote equitable public policy;” “to build knowledge and organization capacity on gender equality within the government” (as well as Profit, not-for-profit, and NGOs); and “to provide corporate services as per the principles of modern management.” In each instance, according to the 2006-7 Plans and Priorities report, measurable results and performance indicators are required. For example, with regard to public policy, the measurable results will be “federal government policies that advance gender equality” while the performance indicators will be “the percentage of policy recommendations made by Status of Women Canada that are accepted by federal departments.”

`Clearly with such convoluted requirements, the demise of the Status of Women Canada is in the not-to-distant future. Although females in Canada represent 51% of the population, neither our views, concerns, or citizen-needs represent 51% of the government’s orientation. Instead females in Canada require special programs such as the Court Challenges and the Status of Women to ensure and protect their basic human rights. The well-being of all the citizens of Canada is apparently of little concern to Stephen Harper and his government. Instead, power, wealth, corporate interest and management are central. The convervative budget claims these cuts are “savings” for Canadian citizens, but I would question this and ask, ‘just what is being saved?’ Certainly not dignity, compassion, justice, or the well-being of the land and peoples.

Well-being, that is something else we must mourn the loss of. We have lost a future of well-being for ourselves and our descendants. How could it be otherwise when Kyoto was jettisoned, having been considered untenable by Stephen Harper and his so-called environmental minister Rona Ambrose. Instead they presented their homegrown plan, the Clean Air Act. This act, they argue, will reduce significantly the level of greenhouse emissions starting in 2020, cutting them to about half of the 2003 levels by 2050 (“The Need for Immediate Action – Canada's New Clean Air Regulatory Agenda”). Ambrose denied that the gov’t terminated Kyoto; this despite their election promises to “dirty” industries that make billions on their C02 producing products. As David Suzuki commented in his weekly column, Science Matters on Nov 3, 2006,

I’m starting to wonder. Prime Minister Harper’s Clean Air Act – yes, the very one he touted and championed for so long, the one he deep-sixed Kyoto for...that one – landed with a resounding thud. It was immediately obvious to the media, the opposition,environmentalists and pundits alike that the Act lacked teeth. (“Maybe the Prime Minister Should Get Out More”)

Clean air is something most of us will wait for, wait until 2050. I expect to be dead or near to it, and so too Harper. Does he ask about the generations to come? Does he think about the gift of life? Clearly not, as neither he nor members of his caucus looked beyond the dollar that can be made today. Kyoto, although flawed in some ways, was our commitment to the future; the future of all peoples and not just Canadians. Kyoto gave us hope that possibly we can clean up the terrible mess we have made, and that there can be a decent future for our children and children’s children. With the assassination of Kyoto, Ambrose, Harper, and the conservative party-- (and all those other members of parliment who stood by and did nothing)-- they have darkened our future and reduced our hope.

We have come here to mourn, to mourn the death of the Court Challenges Program, and Kyoto and the creepy disease now afflicting the Status of Women Canada. These three brought us hope for a future of dignity and justice; one shaped by compassion. With their demise hope appears as if it is dwindling. But no, no we are not completely without hope: It was we who gave life to the ideals that brought the Court challenges Program, the Status of Women and Kyoto into being, and WE can certainly do it again.

Darlene M. Juschka

References

Court Challenges Program of Canada programme de Contestation Judiciaire du Canada, Annual Report 2004-2005.

http://www.ccppcj.ca/documents/Annual-Report-2004-2005.pdf Retrieved Nov 8, 2006.

“New Federal Guidelines Bar Advocacy and Lobbying by Women’s Groups” Oct 4, 2006” http://www.fafia-afai.org/en/node/367 Retrieved Nov 8, 2006.

“The Need for Immediate Action – Canada's New Clean Air Regulatory Agenda” http://www.ec.gc.ca/press/2006/061019-3_b_e.htm Retrieved Nov 8, 2006.

“Maybe the Prime Minister Should Get Out More”

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/about_us/Dr_David_Suzuki/Article_Archives/weekly11030601.asp Retrieved Nov 8, 2006.

Comments

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment 2.0!