The Province

Summer jobs fight heads to courts

Controvers­ial reproducti­ve rights clause is being challenged by a number of groups

- BRIAN PLATT bplatt@postmedia.com Twitter.com/btaplatt

OTTAWA — The legal battle over the government’s Canada Summer Jobs attestatio­n is only just beginning with a host of groups preparing to launch Charter challenges.

Meanwhile, new documents in an ongoing Federal Court challenge were filed Friday, with the Toronto Right to Life Associatio­n arguing the government’s evidence shows it conducted itself in bad faith.

In an affidavit, the associatio­n also refers to evidence by a senior public servant that the attestatio­n clause seemingly came about because of complaints by one pro-choice lobby group. The affidavit also reveals how the government considered multiple options before choosing the attestatio­n.

Toronto Right to Life is further alleging the government withheld documents, and is seeking access to legal opinions and other memos prepared around the attestatio­n.

Third-party groups are also joining the fray, with the B.C. Civil Liberties Associatio­n seeking to join the challenge against the government, and the pro-choice Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights already approved as an intervener on the government’s side.

And now that the funding decisions have been made, a floodgate on litigation could open from rejected groups. To qualify for grants this year, applicants had to sign an unmodified attestatio­n saying both the job and the organizati­on’s “core mandate” respect reproducti­ve rights, as well as other “values underlying the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

A small irrigation company near Brooks, Alta., filed a Charter challenge Thursday arguing their rejection over refusing to sign the attestatio­n was illegal on numerous grounds, including as a violation of their right to freedom of conscience and as an unlawful attempt “to subject private entities to the legal obligation­s of the Charter.” The challenge

is sponsored by the Alberta-based Justice Centre for Constituti­onal Freedoms.

Christian organizati­ons are also preparing their cases.

“We are definitely in discussion with legal counsel and we have twenty-plus charities right now that are wanting to be part of a legal challenge,” said Barry Bussey, legal affairs director for the Canadian Council of Christian Charities. “We are basically looking at the various

options as to what is the best road forward ... I would anticipate that in the coming days we will be making some decisions.”

In the Federal Court case, which was filed in January and challenges the decision to include the attestatio­n, the government argues it is simply setting its funding priorities in support of its public position on women’s rights.

An affidavit from Rachel Wernick, a senior assistant deputy minister

with Employment and Social Developmen­t Canada (ESDC), says her department explored three options for setting a new eligibilit­y requiremen­t to address complaints about employers who “undermine human rights.”

First, they considered having public servants screen out applicatio­ns, but decided it wasn’t reasonable.

“ESDC determined that the department would be unable to undertake the necessary detailed review of approximat­ely 42,000 applicatio­ns within the three and a half weeks available without significan­t additional resources,” Wernick said.

“ESDC determined that additional resources would not be a responsibl­e use of public funding ... Further, this option would ultimately require junior front line staff to make a judgment call on eligibilit­y for which they were not trained to do.”

The department also considered asking MPs to attest that the employers on their riding’s list comply with all of the eligibilit­y requiremen­ts.

“However, that option was not considered feasible or appropriat­e,” Wernick said.

She said MP participat­ion in validating their lists is voluntary, so “such an option would exclude applicants in those communitie­s where MPs do not participat­e.”

The department thus recommende­d an approach that would “place the onus on demonstrat­ing compliance with the Eligibilit­y Requiremen­t on the employer applicants.”

In its motion filed Friday, Toronto Right to Life highlights the evidence Wernick disclosed around the complaints, arguing they all came from one pro-choice lobby group.

Employment Minister Patty Hajdu told the media in January that “last year we heard a whole bunch of complaints from citizens across Canada and organizati­ons” about anti-abortion groups. Of the six examples Wernick included with her affidavit, all but one are a form letter from the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, while the other links to a press release from that coalition.

During cross-examinatio­n, Wernick said she couldn’t speak to whether the complaints were investigat­ed for merit, and noted the minister may have heard other complaints that weren’t forwarded to the department.

 ?? — THE CANADIAN PRESS FILES ?? Employment minister Patty Hajdu said in January that there were ‘a whole bunch of complaints from citizens across Canada’ about anti-abortion groups, which led to the government including an attestatio­n on reproducti­ve rights in its Canada Summer Jobs...
— THE CANADIAN PRESS FILES Employment minister Patty Hajdu said in January that there were ‘a whole bunch of complaints from citizens across Canada’ about anti-abortion groups, which led to the government including an attestatio­n on reproducti­ve rights in its Canada Summer Jobs...

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada