fbpx
Connect with us

News

Hillier court date postponed due to backlog caused by COVID offences

Ontario MPP and anti-lockdown activist Randy Hillier denied day in court to challenge constitutionality of COVID-19 lockdown

mm

Published

on

Ontario anti-lockdown activist Randy Hillier’s court date has been deferred due to a system-wide backlog created by a flood of COVID-19 restriction offences.

Hillier was charged on November 26 after holding an anti-lockdown rally at Queen’s Park in Toronto, in contravention of the Reopening Ontario Act.

Hillier has repeatedly stated his purpose is to challenge the constitutionality of the Act, which appears to trample the assembly rights guaranteed Canadians under Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter).

“Back in November I received a ticket for hosting a peaceful assembly outside the Ontario Legislature. I was disappointed in the enforcement of such unconstitutional orders, but pleased I would finally have my day in court to challenge the law. (Thursday) I would be able to argue my case to end these overreaching and harmful #COVID-19 policies,” Hillier posted yesterday on social media.

“Well, that day has now passed and I remain in limbo with (sic) the Ontario court system. Due to the overload of tickets and legal actions around the COVID orders, the systemic disruptions they have created in our courts, my fight to end these overreaching orders is delayed to an undisclosed date,” he went on.

“I will get my court date, and I’m confident the orders will be defeated. I hope to have more information soon.”

Constitutional challenges of this nature are typically argued around Section I of the Charter, which guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it are subject only to such “reasonable limits” prescribed by law as can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”

Hillier will likely have to prove that the provincial lockdown is not “reasonable” or “justified”.

Amidst the growing din of anti-lockdown voices around the world, and the increasing volume of scientific evidence showing that masks provide limited or no protection against infection, Hillier has support for his argument.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is currently urging world leaders to end lockdowns, due to the negative impact on physical and mental health, and the economic devastation caused by unemployment and bankruptcy.

In October, over 6,000 epidemiologists and scientists signed the Great Barrington Declaration also recommending an immediate end to lockdowns.

The Independent MPP from MPP Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston is being represented by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, who are specialists in litigation in support of right-wing causes.

If found guilty, he could face a fine between $10,000 to $100,000 and a year in jail.

Ken Grafton is the Western Standards Ottawa Bureau Chief. He can be reached at kgrafton@westernstandardonline.com

Continue Reading
2 Comments

2 Comments

  1. Laurel L. Russwurm

    January 9, 2021 at 2:12 pm

    Arguing that there is an “increasing volume of scientific evidence showing that masks provide limited or no protection against infection” based on a citation to an article that’s almost a decade old is problematic at best. The CDC’s ‘Scientific Brief: Community Use of Cloth Masks to Control the Spread of SARS-CoV-2‘ from November, 2020 tells a very different story, namely that “Use of masks and face coverings by the general public is an important mitigation strategy to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2. As the pandemic has progressed, evidence for the use of masks has strengthened.”
    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html

    Likewise, suggesting the WHO is “urging world leaders to end lockdowns” mischaracterizes the content of the article to which you link. Dr. David Nabarro states that the WHO doesn’t “advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” which, unfortunately, is what governments like Ontario’s have done. Failure to work with experts and citizens to plan and implement more effective and less disruptive pandemic policies has put our province in a position which Dr. Nabarro tells us a lockdown can be justified “to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted.“

    The Great Barrington Declaration is another political response to this global public health emergency, which is effectively rebutted by ‘The Great Barrington Declaration: When Arrogance Leads to Recklessness
    https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-11-06/when-scientists-arrogance-leads-to-recklessness-the-great-barrington-declaration

    Our governments should be following the example of places that have avoided lockdowns through effective public policies (like, for instance, universal mask adoption).

    We citizens need our politicians and media to put aside their partisan agendas during this pandemic for the good of us all.

  2. Warren Leigh

    January 9, 2021 at 11:33 am

    I wish MPP Hillier all the best in this fight even though I don’t live in Ontario anymore. I’ll be praying for him. Even the commie CCP run WHO is telling leaders to end the lockdowns. HELLO!! Time to move on!

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

News

CLEMENT: No reason to toast federal tax on non-alcoholic beer

Across the board, we should expect better from Ottawa, and the tax on non-alcoholic beer is yet another example of where they’ve gotten it wrong.

mm

Published

on

Sin-taxes, across all sectors, are fairly excessive in Canada. At almost every turn the government sinks its tax teeth into the process of you purchasing the products you like. This is true for cannabis products, alcohol, tobacco, vaping, gas, and annoyingly so, non-alcoholic beer. Yes, non-alcoholic beer in Canada is not exempt from federal excise taxes.

You read that right. The federal government also extends its sin-tax regime for non-alcoholic beer, at a rate of $2.82/hectolitre.

The application of excise taxes for non-alcoholic beer is problematic for a variety of reasons. The first, and most glaring, is that it is hypocritical given that the federal government has exempted non-alcoholic wine and spirits from the excise tax. Why apply it for beer, but not wine and spirits? Obviously, a more consistent approach would be to simply exempt all non-alcoholic beverages from the excise tax, because the purpose of the sin tax is to recover alcohol-related healthcare costs. That said, there are no alcohol-related healthcare costs at all from non-alcoholic beer, which immediately shows the lunacy of sin-taxing these products.

In addition to correcting hypocrisy, removing the excise tax for non-alcoholic beer would put federal policy in line with how the provinces treat these products. Provincial regulators, including Alberta, don’t require non-alcoholic beverages to be sold at licensed alcohol retail outlets, because they’ve accepted the obvious that these products don’t have alcohol in them and thus shouldn’t be strictly regulated. That is why in Alberta these products are often sold alongside carbonated water and pop. Removing the excise tax would be the federal government following the lead of the provinces in treating non-alcoholic beer differently than beer, because they are in fact different.

On the industry side, the federal excise tax acts as a barrier for product development in Canada, mostly because other beer producing jurisdictions (US,EU,UK) don’t tax non-alcoholic beer. Because of this the domestic industry in those jurisdictions has flourished, offering consumers more choice and at better prices. Their sane tax policy, coupled with increased consumer demand, is in large part why the non-alcoholic beer market is expected to grow to over $4 billion by 2025. These drinks aren’t just for hipsters, designated drivers and pregnant women anymore.

Lastly, and most importantly, is how non-alcoholic beer is yet another example of new products reducing harm for consumers. And while I don’t personally enjoy these drinks, I can see why someone would still want to enjoy a beer with their friends, or at a bar, without the alcohol that comes along with it.

From a harm reduction perspective, it makes perfect sense to have different tax strategies for products that vary in risk. The Trudeau government, at times, has championed harm reduction for illegal drugs but appears to have a blind spot when it comes to legal substances. This is an uncomfortable trend from Ottawa that is perfectly exemplified by the excise tax on non-alcoholic beer. Ottawa has kept the excise tax system for non-smokable THC cannabis products, like edibles and beverages, despite the fact they are significantly less harmful. They’ve sought to ban vape flavours, despite the fact that vaping is 95% less harmful than smoking, and flavours are an incredibly useful tool for adult smokers trying to quit.

Across the board, we should expect better from Ottawa, and the tax on non-alcoholic beer is yet another example of where they’ve gotten it wrong. Hopefully, come Budget 2022, they can correct this mistake and remove the excise tax from these products entirely.

David Clement is a columnist for the Western Standard and the North American Affairs Manager with the Consumer Choice Center

Continue Reading

News

EXCLUSIVE: 2003 hearing ruled Chu’s accuser ‘not to be believed’

“I find her evidence not to be believed and I was not able to consider her evidence when deciding a sentence.”

mm

Published

on

The accuser at the centre of the embattled Calgary Coun. Sean Chu controversy told a hearing he sexually assaulted her while holding a gun to her head, according to documents obtained by the Western Standard.

But the presiding officer at the police disciplinary hearing, Insp. Debbie Middleton-Hope, said the then 16-year-old minor’s testimony was not credible and not to be believed.

The sentencing hearing took place Jan. 31, 2003 and lasted eight minutes.

Chu did admit to caressing the woman’s leg while in uniform at the King’s Head pub on Macleod Tr. after meeting her while conducting a walk-through patrol in August of 1997.

After his shift, Chu went home to change into civilian clothes before returning to the pub to meet the girl.

Middleton-Hope said in her statement that Chu provided investigators with intimate details of sexual contact the pair had when they returned to his home.

“I find Const. Chu to be forthright in his description of the details and I find his evidence to be believed,” said Middleton-Hope, a long-serving, well-respected Calgary policewoman, now retired.

The woman, in turn, denied Chu had caressed her leg.

“… her evidence was directed on an aggressive, physical struggle at which time a gun was held to her head,” said Middleton-Hope.

But Middleton-Hope said she found the woman’s testimony “inconsistent.”

“Under cross-examination (the woman) had difficulty in recalling pertinent details,” said Middleton-Hope.

“I find her evidence not to be believed and I was not able to consider her evidence when deciding a sentence.”

Middleton-Hope also addressed the age of the woman, who was 16 at the time.

“I have no evidence before me Const. Chu was aware of this fact. Several witnesses said [the girl] appeared to be 19 to 21 years old,” she ruled.

The accuser also testified she had an interaction with Chu two years previous after an altercation at school. Chu wasn’t the investigating officer, but did speak to the girl on the phone.

“…and [received] a Christmas card from her as a result of that phone call,” Middleton-Hope said.

“No evidence was presented that Constable Chu was aware of her age from this verbal contact.

“I believe Constable Chu to be sincere when he indicates he was unsuspecting of [the accusers] exact age.”

Middletin-Hope then ordered Chu have a letter of reprimand on his file for discreditable conduct for caressing the accuser’s leg while on duty.

Chu was also ordered to undergo six months of ethics training.

Middleton-Hope noted performance reviews in his 10-year police career described Chu as “hard working” and “highly motivated.”

For the third time, Chu was elected on October 18 to be the councillor for Ward 4. He won by 100 votes, winning the advance poll, but losing on election day. Documents over the case had been leaked to the media just days before the election in what Chu called a “political assassination.”

There have been a chorus of demands from other politicians for Chu to resign and a byelection called. Alberta Premier Jason Kenney, incoming Calgary mayor Jyoti Gondek and most of the incoming council have demanded Chu resign.

Chu said he would be happy to meet with Mayor-Elect Gondek to discuss the situation.

Dueling protests — one for Chu and one against — are planned in front of city hall on Sunday.

Chu has vowed to not resign and wants to clear his name.

“I’m sorry, I didn’t mean any harm,” Chu told the Western Standard in an exclusive interview on Tuesday.

Chu admits there was “some touching underneath clothes” in the 1997 incident.

“She then said she wanted to go home and I drove her straight there.”

Chu denied media reports that a gun was produced during the evening at his home. He said he checked his service weapon in at the police’s traffic office when he signed off duty.

“If there had been a gun involved there would have been charges,” said Chu.

Documents obtained by the Western Standard and other media indicate that the woman claimed the whole process was a “cover-up.”

Chu served as a Calgary police officer from 1992 until he was elected in 2013.

Now Chu said he is looking at his legal options and a possible defamation suit over some of what he called the false reporting.

“I have always told the truth. My reputation is important to me and now my family is hurting,” said Chu.

Chu said he wouldn’t comment on remarks made by Gondek that she will try and remove him from council.

“I will continue to tell the truth at council and will be a fiscal hawk,” he said.

“The most important thing is I told the truth and the truth will prevail.”

Dave Naylor is the News Editor of the Western Standard
dnaylor@westernstandardonline.com
Twitter.com/nobby7694

Continue Reading

News

TV news mistakes leads to censure

“The details were clearly inaccurate and related to historical facts,” wrote the Canada Broadcast Standards Council.

mm

Published

on

A St. John’s TV station breached newsroom ethics when it put out a report containing mistakes, says Blacklock’s Reporter.

The TV station was censured for garbling a handful of facts in a local story.

“The details were clearly inaccurate and related to historical facts,” wrote the Canada Broadcast Standards Council.

Correct information “could have been easily verified by the reporter prior to airing the news segment,” wrote the Council.

NTV on its flagship suppertime newscast last April 26 broadcast a story on a local parole case that misstated the year of the crime, the date the killer was convicted, and the number of years the murderer served in the penitentiary.

“This whole story was riddled with inconsistencies,” complained one viewer.

“He was charged and convicted in 2003. They reported 2002.

“These facts were not factual. There were four mistakes in the story.”

NTV management apologized and acknowledged errors were made as the story was “rushed to air” but denied any breach of newsroom ethics.

“Although we do not believe our coverage of this story was in breach of any industry guidelines or codes, we understand every individual may view news material or programming from a different perspective,” wrote station managers.

The Canadian Association of Broadcasters’ Code Of Ethics states, “It shall be the responsibility of broadcasters to ensure that news shall be represented with accuracy.”

A similar Code Of Journalistic Ethics by the Radio Television Digital News Association states: “We are committed to journalism in the public interest that is accurate and reliable.”

“There was no deliberate attempt by NTV to change the narrative of this story which focused on the revocation of the parole of the convicted murderer,” wrote the Standards Council.

“It is understandable that in a rush to get the story to air, incorrect pieces of information were used.”

“Journalists should strive to verify facts and put them in context. These inaccuracies constitute breaches.”

There are no fines for breaching TV codes. The station must announce the violation on its newscast.

Continue Reading

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Share

Petition: No Media Bailouts

We the undersigned call on the Canadian government to immediately cease all payouts to media companies.

605 signatures

No Media Bailouts

The fourth estate is critical to a functioning democracy in holding the government to account. An objective media can't maintain editorial integrity when it accepts money from a government we expect it to be critical of.

We the undersigned call on the Canadian government to immediately cease all payouts to media companies.

**your signature**



The Western Standard will never accept government bailout money. By becoming a Western Standard member, you are supporting government bailout-free and proudly western media that is on your side. With your support, we can give Westerners a voice that doesn\'t need taxpayers money.

Share this with your friends:

Trending

Copyright © Western Standard New Media Corp.