Of all the places where the current government seems to have lapsed in their basic competencies, the most obvious tends to be their appointments process, and most especially when it comes to making judicial appointments. I’ll grant you that it’s more difficult than it can seem, especially when you are not only balancing the need for new judges with specific skillsets and linguistic capabilities (because you do need a certain number of minority-language speaking judges in every province), before you get to the issues of diversity, and the laudable goals of getting more women and visible minorities on the bench. What has made it more difficult is a process that relies on application rather than nomination, and this continues to be an ongoing saga. And while the courts have been adapting in the post-Jordandecision landscape by ensuring that criminal trials are getting precedence, it means that civil trials are falling to the wayside, and that has its own set of problems.
The Star delves into this problem, with a particular focus on Toronto-area vacancies, where they are chronically behind the number of judges they should have, and where the number that just got appointed will be offset by retirements within weeks. (As an aside, there is a push to get the complement of judges in the GTA increased further, because the total number has been deemed to be insufficient by the local bar). And what is perhaps most disconcerting here is that the minister keeps insisting that there needs to be broader culture change in the court system, not just more judges (when seriously, they’re looking for a full complement to start). I’m not sure that anyone disputes that culture change needs to happen, but the appointments are a pretty low bar that a government should be able to meet. And yet.
This having been said, there is some talk now that we may see more frequent appointments being made as cabinet starts meeting more regularly as Parliament resumes, given that Cabinet needs to approve these names for appointment. So maybe that will happen. But given the pace at which these things have happened, you’ll forgive my skepticism.
Good reads:
- Justin Trudeau has announced that on November 7th, the government will make its official apology for turning away Jewish refugees in 1939.
- Rachel Notley says that Trudeau promised her a new Trans Mountain timeline within weeks, not months.
- NAFTA talks continue to roll along. Farmers are already protesting.
- At a conference on the opioid epidemic, the federal health minister announced another $71.7 million for BC to deal with the issue.
- More investments were made to transfer more control over Indigenous healthcare to their communities.
- Despite promising to do something about prostitution laws, the government has yet to do anything, three years later.
- The opposition remains shocked – shocked!– that the Trans Mountain purchase, to alleviate project risk, contained contractual language to alleviate risk.
- Jagmeet Singh denied Erin Weir’s request to rejoin caucus (not surprising given how he was Mean Girled out). 67 Saskatchewan NDP veterans protested the decision.
- Kevin Carmichael walks us through the comments by the deputy Bank of Canada governor about how a collapse of NAFTA could mean higher interest rates.
- Matt Gurney traces the false narrative around handguns used in crimes back to a detective who made up a state and reporting that didn’t substantiate it.
- Susan Delacourt evaluates the performance of Canada’s NAFTA negotiators amidst the growing chaos in Washington.
- Paul Wells offers some context as to the state of the Quebec election, while Robert Hiltz sees shades of Thomas Mulcair in François Legault’s performance.
Odds and ends:
The obvious joke is that normally we see bears in the Market on Thursday nights, near the Lookout. #canqueer https://t.co/ci36OPC7FG
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) September 6, 2018
Programming note:Taking the weekend off of blogging for my birthday. See you next week!
Help Routine Proceedings expand. Support my Patreon.
