Blog

Re: ILSA Speaker Series Day 2: COVID-19 and Indigenous Health

Tansi Nîtôtemtik,

Day two of the speaker series examined how the pandemic has affected Indigenous health and their communities. The presenters were Reagan Bartel, Bonnie Healy and Dr. Daniele Behn Smith.

Reagan Bartel earned her Master of Public Health and Bachelor of Science in Nursing from the University of Alberta and has 16 years of critical care nursing experience delivering front-line care in an Edmonton ICU before moving into population health as the Director of Health for the Métis Nation of Alberta (MNA). 

Her focus in yesterday’s talk was Métis stories, experiences, and perceptions gifted to the MNA and how they must be incorporated into health advocacy, policy, programs, and services to ensure that equal care is provided for members. Bartell highlighted that there is a need for health information and data to be gathered and provided to prevent and alleviate jurisdictional challenges posed by the pandemic in providing equitable care. Advocacy for community members during the pandemic and the impact of COVID on the Metis community needs an equity approach to reduce those inequities related to access, self-governance and self-determination. 

The Metis nation was not immune from colonization traumas and exclusion from policy and process presents an opportunity for Metis people to be retraumatized rather than helped. There are nearly 115,000 self-identified Metis Albertans, a large number of people that are at higher risk of health problems and yet are excluded from the decision-making process with regards to vaccine rollout,  a horrible oversight of both the federal and provincial government. Previously no vaccines were allocated to Metis Albertans, but thankfully that has since changed. Metis Albertans will now be included in phase two of the vaccination plan due in large part to the efforts of the MNA  to push for adequate and equitable health measures for its members.

Aapooyaki Bonnie Healy is a Registered Nurse from the Kainai Nation. Bonnie’s professional background is multi-faceted as she has worked in numerous health capacities at the local, national, and international levels. She is currently the Blackfoot Confederacy Health Director and her work with leadership and First Nations communities have provided her with the ability to liaise and facilitate relationships between Western systems and First Nations.

Bonnie Healy spoke about the unique challenges facing communities during the pandemic including food security, access to services and housing, isolation housing problems and water access and quality. Many indigenous peoples on reserve only have cistern tanks and the delivery of water significantly declined during the pandemic which made it incredibly difficult for community members to adhere to public health guidelines. Transportation was also a big problem because it posed a barrier to community members being able to go get food and supplies, and was also a hindrance to economic development in the communities themselves. These obstacles are all particularly concerning, and in addition to those challenges First Nations people also have a much higher rate of risk of death or serious health problems. This is a fact which the government has acknowledged. Getting vaccines to First Nations as soon as possible with these realities in mind must be a priority. If the pandemic is widespread in First Nations communities, it has the potential to overwhelm the health care system. This is one of the reasons First Nations need to be kept on the priority list for the vaccine rollout plan.

The last panel speaker was the esteemed Dr. Danièle Behn Smith who has been working to support Indigenous health in the Office of the Provincial Health Officer since 2015, where she works alongside Dr. Bonnie Henry, BC’s Provincial Health Officer. She provides independent advice and support to the Ministry of Health on Indigenous health issues. In support of the ministry’s strategic agenda, Behn Smith works in meaningful partnership with Indigenous collectives, communities and organizations to advance wellness and disrupt colonial practices and policies. Behn Smith is Eh Cho Dene (Big Animal People) of the Fort Nelson First Nation in B.C. with French Canadian/Métis roots in the Red River Valley. 

She commented straight away how First Nations didn't come into the pandemic on equal footing because of the greater risk of health issues and potential of severe COVID  outbreaks on the communities because of their higher health risks. It was particularly concerning because the deadly virus posed a  threat to First Nations cultural continuity, as it threatened vulnerable First Nations elders who are the holders of traditional knowledge and who hold the essence of their nations, language, teachings, and invaluable ways of life practiced since time immemorial. For those reasons, COVID  is a very grave concern to First Nations communities. It threatens the knowledge keepers who must be protected at all cost.

It was important to hear these different perspectives so that society can be made aware of what challenges are being faced by Indigenous communities during this pandemic. This talk also demonstrated why it is so important to understand the gravity of protecting the most vulnerable as they hold an incredible amount of knowledge that if lost, is lost forever.

Today’s talk will introduce Professor Darcy Lindberg an assistant professor in the faculty of law at the University of Alberta, his talk is titled: “I am life”: Indigenous Water Sovereignty and the Alberta Coal Policy. Sounds like one you won’t want to miss!

You can join the talk here: (https://www.ualberta.ca/law/about/2021-ilsa-speaker-series.html) or here: Meeting Link: ILSASpeakerSeries2021  and please continue along with our reporting of the event all this week. 

Until Next Time

Team ReconciliAction YEG

Are Dementors Coming to Canada?

Separate from muggles (non-magical people), witches and wizards live their lives in secret. Hiding their magic from the non-wizarding community, they formed an entire world with schools, government agencies, and policing forces. Their existence is unknown to muggles as their government enacts laws to keep their identities and use of magic a secret.

Witches and Wizards live peacefully alongside No-Majs (Canadian and American muggles), attending the Calgary Stampede every summer, and skiing in the Rockies during the winter.

Similar to No-Maj Canada, serious offenders in the wizarding world are sent to prison. Across the pond in Britain, the guards of the magical prison, Azkaban, were Dementors (until the fall of Lord Voldemort, when they were replaced by specially trained wizards).

This begs the question: Could Dementors be validly employed as guards of Canadian wizarding prisons?

(For the purpose of this article I assume that all laws enacted in Britain for the wizarding population apply in Canada.)

Dementors have been called the scariest magical creature.¹ They feed on hope, happiness, and peace. They also “suck every good feeling, every happy memory” out of their victims. Many prisoners died in Azkaban, or turned insane from the Dementors.

The conditions at Azkaban were declared inhumane from the presence of Dementors, and would arguably breach s. 12 of the Charter: the right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment.²

In Canadian jurisprudence, cruel and unusual punishment is defined in R v Smith as “so excessive as to outrage standards of decency”, or “grossly disproportionate to what would have been appropriate.”³ The Court in Smith and later cases, provide guides to measure whether the punishment was proportional. Some of these include the the person’s characteristics, the seriousness of the crime, the objectives of the punishment, and how the individual would be impacted.⁴

Importantly, Canadian courts have made note that the test for a cruel and unusual punishment is deferential to the government and a finding of cruel and unusual should be rare.⁵

In Azkaban, all prisoners regardless of the crime are subject to the Dementors and their effects. This in-and-of-itself indicates that proportionality is an issue; the seriousness of the crime is not considered at all when prisoners are sent to Azkaban as they are subject to the same Dementor interaction.

In addition, the use of Dementors as prison guards could be deemed a form of psychological torture. Canada’s Criminal Code defines torture as “any act or omission by which severe suffering, whether mental or physical, is intentionally inflicted on a person”.⁶ Dementors purposefully breed on pain and suffering, driving prisoners to insanity and overwhelming them with their darkest, saddest memories. That most definitely constitutes a form of torture under the Criminal Code.

Torture is illegal in Canada under the Criminal Code, but is also declared cruel and unusual under s. 12 of the Charter. For these reasons and with acknowledgement of deferential judgments, I can conclude that the use of Dementors at Azkaban breaches prisoners s. 12 Charter rights to be free from cruel and unusual punishments.

However, Ministry action that breach Charter rights may be saved under s. 1, a justified infringement. The Ministry of Magic in Britain allowed Dementors to remain as the guards to Azkaban for hundreds of years for a number of policy reasons that must be acknowledged.

First, Dementors must feed on souls. By confining the creatures to the Island on which Azkaban is situated, it keeps them in a controlled area by allowing them to feed on prisoners’ souls. If Dementors were kicked off the Island, many fear that they would head for the cities to find souls to feed on, jeopardizing the souls of innocent witches and wizards.⁷

Second, they are incredibly effective prison guards.⁸ Prior to Azkaban’s existence, convicted witches and wizards would be sent to smaller prisons around Britain. Breakouts were common and the magical community feared breaching the International Statute of Secrecy when prisoners escaped and made a ruckus. Since Azkaban was built, only two prisoners have escaped.  

Third, Aurors (the specially trained wizards who now guard Azkaban) are an elite group of specially trained witches and wizards. They are the crème-de-la-crème of the wizarding world, and serve to protect. However, their use as prison guards at Azkaban is arguably a waste of resources. These magical people are specially trained to catch witches and wizards practicing in the Dark Arts. They are not trained in prison control or magic outside of the Dark Arts.

However, Dementors have declared their allegiance to Lord Voldemort; they allowed two mass breakouts of Death Eaters in support of He Who Shall Not Be Named. Though he is dead and gone, it is possible that another powerful evil wizard will come along and gain their support.

All this to say, it is not likely that the use of Dementors at Azkaban could be a justified infringement under the Charter given the policy factors discussed above.

Though I cannot in good conscience propose an alternative, Mr. Shacklebolt has agreed to listen to proposals from readers. He is expected to make the trip to Ottawa next week where he is taking appointments.

¹J.K. Rowling, “Why Dementors are the scariest magical creatures”, Pottermore (blog), online: <https://www.pottermore.com/features/why-dementors-are-the-scariest-magical-creatures>.

²Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11, s 12.

³R v Smith, [1987] 1 SCR 1045.

⁴Smith, supra note 3; R v Goltz, [1991] 3 SCR 485; R v Morrisey, 2000 SCC 39, [2000] 2 SCR 90.

⁵Steele v Mountain Institution, [1990] 2 SCR 1385.

⁶Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46, s 269.1(2).

⁷J.K. Rowling, “Azkaban”, Pottermore (blog), online: <https://www.pottermore.com/features/why-dementors-are-the-scariest-magical-creatures>.

⁸Ibid.

 

Ice on Whyte celebrates Canada 150

The Dominion is grateful for its readers nationally and internationally. Because we are based in Edmonton, we will promote and review events in Edmonton that celebrate Canada 150. We will also report on the Centre for Constitutional Studies events that feature excellent and interesting lecturers.

If you’re not in Edmonton, our event reviews are still designed to educate or entertain you. And if you’re elsewhere in Canada, check out Canada150.ca for events near you. 

Today’s post reviews Ice on Whyte, an annual ice-carving competition near Whyte Avenue with submissions from expert carvers around the world! It is located on Tommy Banks Way, which is fitting because Tommy Banks is a musician, former Canadian senator, and boasts a doctorate in laws and being awarded the Order of Canada. Events continue this coming weekend: Thursday and Friday 2pm to 10pm; Saturday and Sunday 10am to 10pm.

As is evident from the name, Ice on Whyte features a lot of ice. Whereas some Edmontonians might wish for warmer Januaries, the elaborate ice sculptures need the current temperatures to stay below zero for just a few more days.

The festival is mostly family friendly, but if you are looking for an 18+ environment, keep your eyes peeled for adults-only entertainment in the entertainment tent (at 2pm it turns into the Edmonton Beer Geeks Anonymous saloon). On Friday, January 27th, guests were treated to a vaudeville-style show with burlesque dancers and a contortionist/escape artist. The opening act, comedy duo Bud and Yolanda, set the evening’s bawdy tone with an upbeat song about an unfortunate, friendly cat; complete with double-entendre and a Trump joke.

  When the entertainment tent is not limited to an 18+ audience, it is open to minors. The “Ordinary People… Extraordinary Stories” exhibits recognize history made by notable Canadians, such as Alex Decoteau: member of the Cree nation, Olympic athlete, soldier, and the first Indigenous police officer in Canada. He attained the rank of Sergeant the Edmonton Police Service and died serving his country during the second battle of Passchendaele in World War I.

Across the fair grounds, the Second Cup Coffee igloo offers coffee for a $2 donation and hot chocolate for $1, as well as hosts quality local live music. Behind the igloo, both kids and adults can enjoy the giant ice-slide. Actors role-play to share history from Confederation-era Canada, especially appropriate for this year’s celebrations. Sit down for a fireside chat or climb into the giant canoe and pretend to paddle down the North Saskatchewan River. Please note that actually paddling down the North Saskatchewan in January is generally considered to be unwise.

Next Sunday, the tent will host the Old Strathcona Farmers Market Stew Off. If you can’t make the stew off, several food trucks are on site daily to take care of your hunger.

In addition to daily crafts, test out your carving skills with ice-carving challenges for kids and adults. Grab a hot chocolate and enjoy a sleigh ride, or watch the fascinating skill of the blacksmith demonstration. No matter your age or interests, this winter festival showcases some great Canadian talent and culture. This 1-page festival guide will help you plan your visit.

Legalization and Regulation: What the History of Alcohol Can Tell Us About the Future of Marijuana

Dear Sir or Madam,

Yesterday, we started our week on vices with an exploration of Canada’s brief flirtation with prohibition of alcohol. Today, we look at some cases regarding alcohol prohibition and what they may tell us about marijuana prohibition. We will make sense of some of the things that have been said about the upcoming legalization and regulation of marijuana.

As we’ve discussed previously, the British North America Act [BNA Act] divides powers between the federal and provincial governments.¹ Marijuana is currently under federal jurisdiction as part of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.² Why, then, are some provincial leaders such as Ontario’s Kathleen Wynne talking about their visions for how marijuana will be regulated in their jurisdictions?³ The answer is the double aspect doctrine. Some, complicated issues including mind-altering substances fit into heads of power under both s 91 and s 92.

Russel v The Queen is a case from the 1880s in which federal legislation permitting municipalities to allow or disallow the sale of alcohol was challenged. The Privy Council held that this law is a valid use of both the POGG (Peace, Order and Good Government) power and the s 91(27) criminal law power. (Come back during judiciary week next month to find out why it was the British Privy Council rather than the Supreme Court of Canada making this decision.) Alcohol was something that was a potential national issue, and banning sales was criminal law.⁴

This was interpreted by some people to mean that alcohol was a federal issue and provinces had no jurisdiction. Hodge v The Queen challenged provincial liquor sales regulation soon after Russel. This led the Privy Council to clarify their earlier decision. Alcohol falls under double aspect doctrine, meaning that the federal government could ban or allow it, but when it is allowed any regulations fall under provincial jurisdiction through s 92(13).⁵ This division of responsibility has been upheld in recent decades with a finding of invalidity regarding federal regulations on the labelling of “light beer”.⁶

This does not mean that the federal government will not try to keep the regulation of marijuana (and therefore its tax revenue) under their control. They have been running consultations regarding what regulation models people and stakeholders would prefer.⁷ The federal government could justify regulation under the POGG power, but it would certainly be challenged by the provinces. In order to invoke POGG, they would have to prove to the Supreme Court that there is  something special about marijuana that would make the individual provinces unable to properly manage it.⁸

The federal and provincial governments are always trying to carve more power away from each other. This is especially true when we have new areas or major changes in law. It is too early to be sure exactly which level of government will end up with control. But as always with the law precedent can  provide us with clues.

Your Humble and Obedient Servants,

The Dominion

¹Constitution Act, 1867 (UK), 30 & 31 Vict, c 3, s 91-92, reprinted in RSC 1985, Appendix II, No 5.

²Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, SC 1996, Schedule II, s 1.

³Robert Benzie, “Weed Sales Should be Restricted to LCBO: Wynne”, The Star (21 June 2016), online: <www.thestar.com>.

⁴Russel v The Queen (1882), 7 AC 829 (PC).

⁵Hodge v The Queen (1883), 9 AC 117 (PC); aff’g (1882), 7 OAR 246; rev’g (1881), 46 UCQB 141 (Ont HC).

⁶Labatt Breweries of Canada Ltd v AG Canada, [1980] 1 SCR 914, 110 DLR (3d) 594.

⁷Government of Canada, News Release, “Government of Canada moves forward on Marijuana Legalization and Regulation”, (30 June 2916), online: Government of Canada News <www.news.gc.ca>.

⁸General Motors of Canada Ltd v City National Leasing, [1989] 1 SCR 641, 58 DLR (4th) 255.

ConsTITutional Rights

Dear Madam and/or Sir,

Do you consider it to be “indecent” if a woman is topless in public? How about if a man is topless? Do you agree that women should have the same right as men to bare their chests? Perhaps you feel that only breastfeeding mothers should publicly milk the #FreeTheNipple campaign. Or perhaps you disagree with that too. If you run a Google search for “breastfeeding in public is”, the first four suggestions are “wrong”, “inappropriate”, “offensive”, and “nasty”.

Certainly, some nursing women choose to cover up or find a more private place. But is seeing a breast in public really offensive? Or inappropriate? What if you’re on an airplane and you want to nurse? Cover up? Seclude yourself in a tiny toilet room with your immuno-compromised baby? Now that’s nasty.  Nobody makes you eat your lunch in an airplane washroom.

Some people believe that women should have the right to walk around or enjoy life topless, just as men do. After all, they argue, without our common social construct that sexualizes breasts, they’re just two bags of skin filled with fat and glands. Indeed, some men have larger breasts than some women! And tit’s not just the outward appearance, it’s the internal breast tissue. The more tissue in the breast, the larger they grow. The Canadian Cancer Society notes male patients account for 1% of breast cancer cases.[1] So what’s the big deal about women’s breasts? Are we mam-merely maintaining modest traditional values?

Under the heading Disorderly Conduct, section 174 of the Criminal Code of Canada prohibits the act of “Nudity” in public without a lawful excuse.[2] Being “Nude” is then defined for the purpose of Nudity as being “so clad as to offend against public decency or order.”[3] This wording is quite vague, which allows for judicial interpretation, and some would argue, misinterpretation. Moreover, the word “clad” is misleading… it is the past participle of the word “clothed”, so technically, nudity should be unclad or partly clad. But further, what offends public decency or order? A breast? Part of it? What about “tasteful sideboob”?[4] What if we go the opposite way and people “clad” themselves in offensive garb? Here’s a fun collage to demonstrate the point:

But back to the tissue—we mean issue—abreast. Judicial interpretation occurs when courts interpret laws within the four corners of the written law. For example, s. 174 needs judicial interpretation of the words “offend”, “public decency”, and “order”. In 1996, Ontarian Gwen Jacob took her criminal charge for an indecent act[5] to the Court of Appeal for Ontario.[6] Apparently the police charged her with indecency in an attempt to nip it in the bud. Jacob was acquitted because the community standard of tolerance at that time indicated to the Court that her actions were not indecent. Further, the Court stated that there was nothing harmful, degrading, or dehumanizing about her conduct, and no one was forced to look at her.

We guess you could say... the Crown’s case went tits up.

So, twenty years later, how do we feel about topless women walking around town because it’s simply too hot for a shirt? CBC News reports that we don’t feel so hot about it.[7] Perhaps it’s because women fear censure, judgment, or ridicule.[8] Perhaps women fear assault or harassment because we live in a society where women’s bodies are objectified and harassment is trivialized. Ultimately, courts interpret laws in accordance with societal values and the Constitution is no exception. What do you think about women being topless in public? Comment below!

Thanks for the mammaries, Ms. Jacob,

The Dominion

 

[1] “Breast Cancer in Men”, Canadian Cancer Society, online: <www.cancer.ca/en/cancer-information/cancer-type/breast/breast-cancer/breast-cancer-in-men/?region=on>.

[2] RS 1985, c C-46 [Criminal Code].

[3] Ibid, s 174(2).

[4] Cards Against Humanity, Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 2.0.

[5] Criminal Code, supra note 2, s 173(1).

[6] R v Jacob (1996), 142 DLR 4th 411 (ONCA), 31 OR (3d) 350.

[7] Prithi Yelaja, “Women’s topless court victory 20 years later, CBC/Radio-Canada (28 Jul 2016) online: <www.cbc.ca/news/canada/women-s-topless-court-victory-20-years-later-1.1026403>.

[8] Ibid.

I Can't Beleive It's Not Criminal: The Strange Case of the Margarine Reference

Dear Sir or Madam,

Most of the time, the Supreme Court of Canada considers explicitly weighty issues which affect the fabric of our society. Not all cases are like that. This week we will be showcasing some of the weirder cases that have been heard by the courts. Of course, despite their absurd appearance, most of these cases really do have some important lessons. For example, today we review Reference Re Validity of Section 5(a) of the Dairy Industry Act [Margarine Reference]. This case, with  its seemingly ridiculous nickname, is actually an important development in the concept of criminal law and federal/provincial jurisdictional boundaries.

In the British North America Act [BNA Act], the provincial governments have control over property rights. This includes producing and selling margarine. One exception is when something is prohibited by criminal law, which is a federal power. We see this in how the federal government is able to ban marijuana and other drugs. (As an aside, be sure to come back next week when we examine the potential effect of these sections of the BNA Act on the upcoming legalization of marijuana.)

In the 1920s, the federal government attempted to ban margarine in an attempt to protect Canadian dairy producers. The Dairy Industry Act forbade the importation, production, and even possession of margarine in Canada. This legislation was challenged and heard by the Supreme Court on October 16, 1949. Justice Rand wrote the decision, which struck down the prohibitions on manufacturing and possession. His evaluation was that a key aspect of criminal law was that there had to be an objective related to “peace, order, security, health, [or] morality”. Rand J. identified that the real motive behind the legislation was trade related rather than an appropriate objective for criminal law. Therefore, the Court ruled that the prohibition was not valid criminal law. Only the ban on importation was upheld by the Court because international trade is with the federal government, not the provincial governments.

Categorization of laws can sometimes be tricky, especially when there is a dispute between provincial and federal authority. It is important to consider both the form and the function of the law. In this case, the form may have been the same as the form for criminal law, but the function was outside of the scope of that category.

Your Humble and Obedient Servants,

The Dominion

¹ [1949] SCR 1, 1 DLR 433.
² Constitution Act, 1867 (UK), 30 & 31 Vict, c 3, s 92(13), reprinted in RSC 1985, Appendix II, No 5.
³ Ibid s 91(27).
⁴ Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, SC 1996, c 19.
⁵ Margarine Reference, supra note 1.

Distilling Canada: The Story of John A Macdonald

Dear Sir or Madam,

Sir John A. Macdonald is known for two things, being Canada’s first Prime Minister and drinking heavily. However, he was more than both those things. He was instrumental to establishing the British North America Act (BNA Act), and given his life and the time he lived his heavy drinking was quite understandable.

John A. Macdonald watched his beloved wife die for more than ten years. During that time, his son died in infancy and his daughter was born with Hydrocephalus, which caused swelling and brain damage. She spent her entire life extremely disabled, cared for by her father.¹

Macdonald’s drinking was often triggered by stress. In an age when magistrates drinking in court was expected and it was not uncommon for people to consume upwards of 26 litres of alcohol per year, our first Prime Minister was known for his binges. One of his worst binges coincided with the 1872 election, during which he vanished from time to time and often could not remember the day’s events. His drinking habits had real consequences. There were times when bills failed because he was too drunk to defend them, and in 1870 he was almost felled by acute pancreatitis caused by alcohol abuse.²

The most terrifying incident occurred in London in 1866. Macdonald and others had travelled there for final negotiations with the British government to establish the BNA Act. After a particularly wild night, Macdonald fell into a sleep so deep that he did not immediately notice that he and his room had caught fire. Only his thick flannel shirt and the quick actions of fellow delegate George-Ếtienne Cartier saved his life. Also on this trip was a rare bright note in Macdonald’s personal life. He ran into an old friend by the name of Susan Agnes Bernard. By the end of the trip they were married.³ 

His drinking frustrated his contemporaries. The Governor General would write home to London about Macdonald’s benders. Lord Carnarvon, the colonial secretary who  presented the BNA Act to the British parliament, described him as plagued by a “notorious vice”. However, he also called him “the ablest politician in Upper Canada”.⁴ He was still a brilliant and charismatic leader, emerging as a celebrity during the London Conference, recognized in the streets.⁵ He often said that the people preferred him drunk to his enemies sober, and his many election victories and success at forging Confederation proved that sentiment correct.⁶

Sir John A Macdonald was a fascinating figure, with great strength for oratory and great weakness for drink. Despite all his flaws (which could fill many more blog entries), it cannot be denied that his strength of personality was an important factor in the creation of the BNA Act.

Your Humble Servants,

The Dominion

¹ “Sir John A Macdonald”, www.canadahistory.com, online: <www.canadahistory.com/sections/Politics/pm/johnmacdonald.htm> [Macdonald].
² Tristin Hopper, “Everyone knows John A. Macdonald was a bit of a drunk, but it’s largely forgotten how hard he hit the bottle” (January 9, 2015), The National Post, online: <news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/everyone-knows-john-a-macdonald-was-a-bit-of-a-drunk-but-its-largely-forgotten-how-hard-he-hit-the-bottle> [Hopper].
³ The Toronto Dreams Project, “Sir John A. Macdonald, Drunk & In Flames” (January 5, 2015), The Toronto Dreams Project (blog), online: <torontodreamsproject.blogspot.ca/2015/01/sir-john-macdonald-drunk-in-flames.html>.
⁴ Hopper, supra note 2.
⁵ The Toronto Dreams Project, “Sir John A. Macdonald, Drunk & In Flames” (January 5, 2015), The Toronto Dreams Project (blog), online: <torontodreamsproject.blogspot.ca/2015/01/sir-john-macdonald-drunk-in-flames.html>.
⁶ Macdonald, supra note 1.

Calgary's Shark Fin Ban...

Here is the latest breaking news from Calgary. Seems that more municipalities are pulling back from their initial commitments, noting education and awareness are key and that it is not properly a municipal issue.

I definitely agree that education and awareness are essential and that all of us committed to this issue will continue to advocate in favour of shark conservation. And with respect to the jurisdictional issue... wouldn't be so hard to accept if higher levels of governance decide to take meaningful action on the issue!

Read more here.

Sharks are contaminated... tell me more!

So, it is no surprise that sharks are contaminated with heavy metals such as mercury. I mean they (generally) occupy the top of the food chain, they are long-lived, and they feed on other marine animals that also accumulate contaminants. But there is more...

A recent study by Mondo et al that can be found here suggests that there is more to this story. Specifically, these researchers have found that a cyanobacterial neurotoxin also accumulates in shark tissue (including shark fins). This finding is interesting because this particular neurotoxin is under considerable investigation for its role in human neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's disease. Food for thought!

Here is a link to the story as it appeared in the NY Times this past summer:

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/shark-fins-are-loaded-with-a-neurotoxin-study-finds/

Look who else is born in Kenya

Get your own fake certified copy Kenyan birth certificate!

h/t Salon's War Room

There's no such thing as a free lunch

An article in yesterday's Victoria Times Colonist points out the unintended consequences of an antiquated  liquor law. 

 

Prior to Prohibition, a 'tied house' - a tavern that was contractually obligated to purchase alcohol from a specific manufacturer - would offer free lunches while encouraging the consumption of alcohol hence the phrase "there's no such thing as a free lunch."  After the well-documented failure of Prohibition, tied house legislation was enacted in B.C. (and other North American jurisdictions) to, among other reasons, "prevent big brewers and distillers from owning the bars and restaurants where their products are sold and to protect small operators." 

 

The article goes on to tell the story of a Victoria pub owner.  The owner Dave Thomas is not allowed to sell his own ale in his new pub due to the 'tied-house rule' that was originally designed to help protect small operators like Thomas.   

 

It's an interesting read on some regulatory folly.

 

(h/t WineLaw)