povertyandhumanrights.org » Commentary

McIvor v. Canada

phrc — Fri, 19 Aug 2011 01:21:11 +0000

For decades Aboriginal women in Canada have sought justice in the courts and remedial action by legislators in an effort to bring an end to the sex discrimination in the status registration provisions of the Indian Act, but they have not yet succeeded in securing full recognition of their rights. Sharon McIvor, an indigenous woman and successor to Jeannette Lavell and Yvonne Bédard, launched her sex equality challenge to the Indian Act in 1989, suing the federal government under s. 15 of the Charter.

In 2007, after a full trial, the British Columbia Supreme Court issued a decision that was a complete victory for the plaintiffs. However, following an appeal by the federal government her victory was substantially narrowed. Subsequent legislative reform by the government of Canada left most of the sex discrimination in the status registration provisions in place. The McIvor petition to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, filed in 2010, has been necessitated by the longstanding failure of Canada to fully and finally eliminate sex discrimination from the legislative regime for registration as a status Indian.

Gwen Brodsky is counsel to Sharon McIvor and her son Jacob Grismer.

To view background materials below click on the links:

UN PETITION

To read the McIvor Petition to the United Nations Human Rights Committee please click here: McIvor UN Petition

To read Canada’s Response to the McIvor Petition click here: Canada’s Response to the McIvor Petition

To read the Petitioners’ Comments on Canada’s Response click here: Petitioners’ Comments

To read the Affidavit of Grand Chief Stewart Philip, Supporting the McIvor Petition click here: Affidavit of Grand Chief Stewart Philip Supporting the McIvor Petition

COURT DECISIONS

BC Supreme Court decision on the merits of the constitutional claim

BC Court of Appeal decision on the merits of the constitutional claim

PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS

House of Commons

First Reading

Introduction and First Reading 2010-03-11

HANSARD

VIDEO

Second Reading

Second Reading and Referral to Committee 2010-03-26, 2010-03-29

HANSARD:

VIDEO:

Committee Stage

Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development

The details of the Committee meetings, as well as webcasts of the Committee hearings are well laid-out on the Committee’s website at: Website of the Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development

Committee Report Presented 2010-04-29

HANSARD

VIDEO

REPORT

Speaker’s Rulings

Speaker’s Ruling on Committee Amendments 2010-05-11

HANSARD

VIDEO

Report Stage

Concurrence at Report Stage 2010-05-25, 2010-10-26

HANSARD:

VIDEO:

Third Reading

Third Reading 2010-11-22

HANSARD

VIDEO

Senate

First Reading

First Reading 2010-11-23

HANSARD

Second Reading

Second Reading, Referral to Committee 2010-11-25

HANSARD

Committee

Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights

TRANSCRIPT OF EVIDENCE 2010-11-29 (November 29): TRANSCRIPT

TRANSCRIPT OF EVIDENCE 2010-12-06 (December 6): TRANSCRIPT

VIDEO:

November 29th

December 6th

Committee Report Presented 2010-12-07

without amendment but with observations

HANSARD

REPORT

Third Reading

Third Reading 2010-12-08, 2010-12-09

HANSARD:

December 8th

December 9th

Royal Assent

Royal Assent Statutes of Canada: 2010, c. 18 2010-12-15

HANSARD

For further information about the Parliamentary process surrounding Bill C-3 please visit: Bill C-3 on LegisINFO

Access to Justice at Issue in R v. Caron

phrc — Mon, 30 May 2011 23:19:07 +0000

The Poverty and Human Rights Centre intervened as a member of the Equality Rights Coalition in the Supreme Court of Canada case R v. Caron 2011 SCC 5. The other members of the coalition were the Council of Canadians with Disabilities, the Charter Committee on Poverty Issues and the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund. The case concerned the proper criteria for the exercise of judicial discretion to award advance costs in constitutional litigation. This case involved vital issues related to access to justice, particularly for persons seeking to enforce their Charter rights. The Supreme Court recognized that lower courts have the inherent jurisdiction to grants costs in order to prevent an injustice, and to come to the aid of an inferior court to enable the latter to administer justice fully and effectively. To view the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada please visit: Supreme Court of Canada: R v. Caron

To see the PHRC’s factum follow this link: PHRC Caron Factum

The PHRC discussed the implications of the case with the Lawyer’s Weekly. To view their article, click on the link: Funding orders must be exceptional, says the Supreme Court

Take The Welfare Time Limit Off the Books

phrc — Fri, 02 Jul 2004 19:18:16 +0000

The Government of British Columbia now says that, over the next year, only 339 people will be affected by the 24-month time limit on welfare––the rule intended to limit “employable” welfare recipients to two-years of support during any five year period.

On Friday, the Government created a new exemption––the 25th. Now those who follow their employment plans and are seeking work will be exempted from the 24-month time limit. Though this is an encouraging development, the Government still has to go the full course and remove the time limit from the books.

Take The Welfare Time Limit Off the Books

UN singles out BC government on women’s rights (March 2003)

phrc — Sat, 01 Mar 2003 03:30:13 +0000

B.C. is not meeting its obligations to women under international human rights law. That

was the clear message of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of

Discrimination against Women in comments issued recently in New York City.

The U.N. Committee singled out the province of British Columbia for criticism in its

review of Canada’s compliance with the United Nations Convention on the Elimination

of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The Committee is concerned

about the disproportionately negative impact on women and girls of a number of recent

changes in British Columbia, including: funding cuts to legal aid and welfare assistance;

narrowed eligibility rules for welfare; the elimination of the freestanding Ministry of

Women’s Equality; the abolition of the independent Human Rights Commission; the

closing of a number of courthouses; cuts in support programmes for victims of domestic

violence; and proposed changes regarding prosecution of domestic violence.

B.C. is not meeting its obligations to women under international human rights law. That was the clear message of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in comments issued recently in New York City.

The U.N. Committee singled out the province of British Columbia for criticism in its review of Canada’s compliance with the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The Committee is concerned about the disproportionately negative impact on women and girls of a number of recent changes in British Columbia, including: funding cuts to legal aid and welfare assistance; narrowed eligibility rules for welfare; the elimination of the freestanding Ministry of Women’s Equality; the abolition of the independent Human Rights Commission; the closing of a number of courthouses; cuts in support programmes for victims of domestic violence; and proposed changes regarding prosecution of domestic violence.

UN Singles Out B.C. Government on Women’s Rights

Majority embraces stereotype of the poor (December 2002)

phrc — Sun, 01 Dec 2002 01:14:50 +0000

Majority Embraces Stereotype of Poor

by Shelagh Day

The majority decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in last week’s welfare rights case,

Gosselin v Quebec, is a disturbing one. Five judges endorsed a Quebec scheme that

consigned thousands of 18 to 30 year old welfare recipients to extreme poverty, and

found that it did not harm the human dignity of these poor young people.

The majority decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in last week’s welfare rights case, Gosselin v Quebec, is a disturbing one. Five judges endorsed a Quebec scheme that consigned thousands of 18 to 30 year old welfare recipients to extreme poverty, and found that it did not harm the human dignity of these poor young people.

Majority Embraces Stereotype of Poor

Who’s in contempt over the Woodward’s squat? (November 2002)

phrc — Fri, 01 Nov 2002 01:02:06 +0000

the BC Housing Corporation dropped proceedings against

the 54 Woodwards squatters charged in October with contempt of court for occupying a

publicly-owned and vacant building. The Corporation seems to have realized that

continuing the contempt proceedings against the “Woodwards 54” would have increased

the public’s sympathy for the protesters, and further underlined the contempt that the

provincial government is guilty of––its contempt for the rights of people who need

homes.

The BC Housing Corporation dropped proceedings against the 54 Woodwards squatters charged in October with contempt of court for occupying a publicly-owned and vacant building. The Corporation seems to have realized that continuing the contempt proceedings against the “Woodwards 54” would have increased the public’s sympathy for the protesters, and further underlined the contempt that the provincial government is guilty of––its contempt for the rights of people who need homes.

Who’s in Contempt Over the Woodward’s Squat? (Nov 2002)

Proposed human rights legislation gets failing grade (September 2002)

phrc — Sun, 01 Sep 2002 00:54:37 +0000

For the second time in twenty years, the Government of British Columbia has decided to

abolish its Human Rights Commission. If the draft legislation set out in Bill 53 passes,

the Commission will be erased again, this time in the name of providing British

Columbians with a new, more efficient “direct access” model of human rights

enforcement.

For the second time in twenty years, the Government of British Columbia has decided to abolish its Human Rights Commission. If the draft legislation set out in Bill 53 passes, the Commission will be erased again, this time in the name of providing British Columbians with a new, more efficient “direct access” model of human rights enforcement.

Proposed Human Rights Legislation Gets Failing Grade (Sept 2002)

Human rights plunge into the past (April 2002)

phrc — Mon, 01 Apr 2002 00:43:46 +0000

Human rights in British Columbia may be about to plunge backwards by twenty years. In

1983 Bill Bennett abolished the Human Rights Commission, fired all the Commissioners

and staff, and narrowed human rights legislation in one sweeping assault. Though a little

slower off the mark, the current government seems poised to substantially weaken the

province’s human rights institutions and protections.

Human rights in British Columbia may be about to plunge backwards by twenty years. In 1983 Bill Bennett abolished the Human Rights Commission, fired all the Commissioners and staff, and narrowed human rights legislation in one sweeping assault. Though a little slower off the mark, the current government seems poised to substantially weaken the province’s human rights institutions and protections.

Human Rights Plunge into the Past