The Harper Conservative government more or less ignored the anniversary of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms on April 17. Individual rights are not of paramount concern with conservatives. Nor are they in the forefront with socialists. Individual rights are of the most concern in liberal societies. It is the strong support for individual rights in Canada that convinces us that the Liberal Party of Canada has to better define its role and direction. It has to be better at leading.
The negative opinion of conservatives is best explained by the attitude of Brit Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and her cabinet at the time of the Charter. Our brand of Rights and Freedoms did not sit well with the rank and privilege of British society. The Thatcher government knew they could hardly refuse to approve it but cabinet archives of the period now show that they seriously considered it. What obviously stopped them was the prospect of offending Pierre Trudeau, his cabinet and millions of Canadians.
Conservatives like rank and privilege. They contribute a large amount of the support to keeping the fiction of Royalty in Canada. Heck, Conrad Black gave up his Canadian citizenship to become a British lord. While the Harper Conservatives will probably let him visit Canada after he gets out of the American slammer, he should not expect a warm welcome from most Canadians.
Canada’s right-wing politicians have constantly complained about the Supreme Court being able to override politicians. They want Parliament to have the final word. Even the Justices of the Supreme Court might not want the responsibility for our rights but it is a responsibility that they accept to preserve the freedoms of Canadians.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is careful not to condemn the Charter but he puts Prime Minister John Diefenbaker’s 1960 Bill of Rights ahead of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Charter was adopted because the earlier Diefenbaker version did not have the same enforceability.
A surprising left-wing objection was voiced the other day. An NDP politician made the suggestion that the Charter conflicts with the common good. This politician felt that society should not look on individual rights as entitlement. He was worried that the Charter could harm social programs. The example used was if there was a long waiting list for hip surgery, people might sue under the Charter to get payment for treatment in another country that did not have as long a waiting list.
He is probably correct that under a socialist regime, individuals would not be entitled to sue. And that is what is wrong with socialism. A healthcare system that puts the individual first is the ideal. And if someone wants to sue, as in that example, the system needs to fix the problem.
Canada is a better place because of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We should protect it.
-30-
Copyright 2012 © Peter Lowry
Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]