Loading...
Times-Advocate, 1981-09-23, Page 28Page 12A Times -Advocate, September 23, 1981 �nnutauunauuuuunultll,lllllllllu(ulluuuuuuntuuunuuutllullmltttutttltllttuuttttlltltllieututtuultuattlltltlllltultllutulluetunuuutuuuunuuuuuunuuunuuunnatttuupnttnuuuuuuunnnualltlltwNlstuuunutuuatttatllunutlnu ItetstnttlttattltHu E By JACK RIDDELL, MP? The Resources Develop- ment Committee of which I am a Member has been meeting for a number of weeks to hear presentations by individuals. groups, organizations and associations on Bill 7 "An Act to Revise and Extend Protection of Human Rights in Ontario". Most would agree with the principle of the Bill that every person has a right to euqal treatment in the en- joyment of services, goods and facilities without dis- crimination because of race, ancestry. place of origin, colour. ethnic origin, citizenship. creed, sex, age, marital status, family or handicapped. However. many are con- cerned including myself with sections of the bill which seem to infringe on certain basic rights which are essential to a free socie- ty. It is my conviction that the purpose of society is to foster the growth of the in- dividual in freedom, dignity and responsibility. Bill 7 is a revision of the Ontario Human Rights Code, which goes back to the year 1981 when it was introduced by the then Minister of Labour. The Honourable W.K. Warrender. The princi- ple changes include: 1. The circumstances un- der which discrimination is prohibited are extended to include: (al Discrimination in the equal enjoyment of goods, services and facilities generally and not limited to those available in a place to which the public is customarily admitted: (b) discrimination in con- tracts: (c) discrimination because of a person's association with others (d) discrimination on a ground that has the result of discrimination because of a prohibited ground: (e) harassment of an occu- pant of accommodation by the landlord or another occu- pant because of a prohibited (f) harassment of an employee by the employer or another employee because of a prohibited ground of discrimination. (g) sexual solicitation, reprisal or threat of reprisal by a person in a position of authority. 2. The prohibited grounds of discrimination are ex- tended to include' (a) handicap: (b) marital status with cer- tain exceptions in the case of accommodation (c) record of offences in the case of employment: (d) age between 18 and 65 years: (e) family with certain ex- ceptions in the case of ac- commodation (f ) receipt of public assistance in the case of ac- commodation. 3. Sanctions against dis- crimination in employment by contractors under Government contracts. 4. Protection in employ- ment is extended to domestic workers. tt Jack's jo4ting: Expresses concern over new human rights bill 5. Landlords and employers may be made responsible to prevent harassment of tenants and employees. 6. The Bill would bind the Crown and have primacy over other legislation. 7. The Commission is em- powered to recommend the introduction and implemen- tation of affirmative action programs. 8. A Race Relations Divi- sion is established with its own Commissioner. 9. Boards of inquiry are required to issue decisions within 30 days of the conclu- sion of their hearings. 10. Boards of inquiry are empowered to make orders respecting access for the handicapped after a finding of discrimination has been made. 11. Boards of inquiry are empowered to award damages for mental anguish. When Mr. Warrender in- troduced the original On- tario Human Rights Code he said "Prejudice cannot be dug out and eliminated by the passage of a statute but its outward manifestations can be curbed" It is in- teresting to note that in 1977, 16 years later Thomas Symons. the thenChairmanof the Human Rights Commis- sion, in a preface to "Life Together: A report on Human Rights in Ontario", published by the Commis- sion he chaired, had this to say, "Requirement of un- derstanding and mutual respect will not grow of its own initiative. It requires careful and constant nutur- ing and encouragement through public education and legislative action." The messages were similar .and equally clear. No law can of itself end all discrimination nor is an out- burst of official piety a sub- stitute for tolerance, un- derstanding. education and attitudinal change. and few would disagree with the first paragraph of the preamble to the present Human Rights Code, which has been carried forward to Bill 7 and reads as follows. "Wheras recognition of the inherent dignity and the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom. justice and peace in the world. and is in accord with the universal declara- tion of human rights as proclaimed by the United Nations:" Without getting into a clause by clause analysis and comparison of the pre- sent Ontario Human Rights Code, with the proposed new statute, suffice it to say that much of the two documents is the same. However, I would like to touch on the differences. The first major difference between the present legisla- tion and the proposed legislation is the enlarge- ment of the prohibitive grounds for discrimination. At present prohibitive grounds for discrimination are race, creed, colour, nationality, ancestry or place of origin. The proposed legislation extends those grounds to include a physical or mental handicap, whether that be from a birth defect or caused by bodily injury. It also includes a handicap because ofimental retarda- tion or mental disorder. Marital status is also add- ed as a ground and is defined to include the status of living with a person of the opposite sex in a conjugal relationship outside of marriage. The new legisla- tion would also prohibit descrimination because of the conviction for an offence in respect of any provincial enactment or an offence in respect of which apardonhas been granted under the Criminal Records Act (Canada). The prohibitive grounds of discrimination are extended as well to include age, between 18 and 65; family, which is defined to mean persons in parent and child relationship; and persons who are in receipt of public assistance in regard to ac- commodation. The second major differnece between the pre- sent legislation and the proposed legislation is the extension of the cir- cumstances under which dis- crimination is prohibited. Previously, circumstances were much narrower and discrimination in regard to the equal enjoyment of goods. services and facilities. was limited to those available in a place to which the public is customarily admitted. Now ther would be no limitation. Discrimination under Bill 7 would be prohibited as well in regard to contracts or because of a person's association with others such as a trade or occupational association. Circumstances under which discrimination would be prohibitive include harassment of an occupant of accommodation by the landlord or another occupant because of a prohibitive ground: harassment of an employee by an employer or another employee because of a prohibitive ground; sex- ual soliciatation, reprisal, or Harassment is defined as "Engaging in a course of vexatious comment or con- duct". Sexual solicitation is not defined. The proposed new legisla tion would provide for sanc- tions against discrimination in employment by contrac- tors under government con- tract. Protection in employ- ment is extended to domestic workers. Landlords and employers may be held responsible for the harassment of tenants and employees respectively. Bill 7 gives the Ontario Human Rights Commission a much wider mandate than it has at present including the function of recommen- ding the introduction and im- plementation of a special plan or program to en- courage the employment of members of a group or class of persons suffering from an historical or chronic disad- vantage. While this in itself could be deemed dis- criminatory it is deemed by the proposed legislation not to be. A Race Relations Division is also established with its own Commissioner. Boards of inquiry may be appointed to hear complaints and are empowered to make orders respecting access for the handicapped and award damages not exceeding $15,- 000 for mental anguish. A person investigating a complaint may, without warrant. enter any place that is not actually being used as a dwelling, remove any writings or papers and question any person on any matter relevant to the com- plaint and may exclude any other person from being pre- sent at the questioning. A t warrant is required to search and seize anything that is in any place that is being used as a dwelling. Although it is not included in the Bill there are strong presentations made re- questing the inclusion of sex- ual orientation as prohibitive grounds for dis- crimination in the Ontario Human Rights Code. Such inclusion. of course, would give homosexuals the right to teach in the school system which causes considerable anxiety among people who feel that such legislation would open the door to homosexuality as an accep- table lifestyle with the right to impose its moral standard on the general public, to be free to openly proselytize, and to also be free to override the rights of others who hold divergent moral views. Separate School Boards believe that they must have preserved their right to deny employment to any person whose personal conduct!s likely to be a moral in- fluence contrary to the es- tablish teachings of catholicism. I know that there are many in the public school system who feel that they should have the protected right to refuse to have persons teaching in the classroom who justify their past, persent or future con- duct, where that conduct objectively is contrary to their own teachings and beliefs. Being a Member of that Committee I have my own personal views and in ex- pressing those views, 1 would hope that I am also speaking for the constituents of my Ridire I feel that we must all work for the enlargement of the in- dividual and the growth of the human spirit. But we are not godly enough to read human thought, construe motives and interpret human behaviour sufficient- ly clearly to impose severe sanctions. To be forced to hire someone or rent premises to someone whose lifestyle and conduct is repugnant to one's moral standards and religious beliefs is hardly an expression of fairness and freedom. But to hold employers and landlords responsible for the workers and tenants' treatment of one another is un- conscionable. It is nothing more than crass exploitation of an innocent person's authority to police personal relationships. To endow personnel with authority to search and seize property without a warrant, when those actions may be triggered by ill -intentional, misdirected people with ul- terior motives, may, in a spirit of. christian generosi- ty, be called merely scan- dalous. But to give a legal right to an investigator to in- terrogate someone suspected of violating the Human Rights Code without even giving the person being questioned the right of legal Counsel is tyrannical. It not only conjures up in one's mind the conduct of the gestapo but this behaviour in itself is a resounding refutation of the principle of "mutual respect for the dignity and worth of each person", so glowingly proclaimed in the preamble of the Human Rights Code. Before long, reverse onus of proof could become a reali- ty. The accused would have to prove his innocence rather than the accuser proving guilt. Another contradiction In the Code is the power given to the Human Rights Com- mission to discriminate. The Commission may, upon its own, initiate` special programs" torelieve hardship or economic disad- vantage. These special problems are also known as affirmative Action programs and often amount to reverse discriminatin. The danger inherent in such programs is to give preferential treatment of provide employment quotas on the basis of sex, cultural original or mother tongue. the proposed new Human Rights Code is much more than the enunciation of prin- ciple and social policy. It is designed to become an economic blueprint as well. I apologize for this lengthy column but I think it is Im- portant for the people to know that we are dealing with probably one of the most far reaching pieces of legislation that has ever been pasted into law. I have been quite vociferous In Committee on certain sec- tions of the Bill and I am pleased that a latecomer to the Committee is also voic- OPTIMIST LIFE MEMBER - Kirkton-Woodham Optimist Club post president Murray Musty congratulates Brian Bertrand on being named o life member of the dub. T -A photo ing his strong ob'ecUons to certain parts of the Bill. I want to end this article by quoting the person to whom I have just alluded, Jim Taylor, the Conser- vative Member for Prince Edward Lennox. I don't agree with everything that he says in connection with this Bill but I do share many of his views. I was par- ticularly interested in the following comments made by Jim Taylor in commen- ting on the Bill: "I want to say that we .should not feel awkward in proclaiming our Christian heritage as a part of our Western Civlization. Nor should we tamper lightly with the concept of natural justice and a judicial system that has taken hundreds of years to evolve. Our law§ and principles of equity are British in origin and these too, are part of our heritage. These are principles and beliefs for which many pioneers and builders of our nation laid down their lives. They are a part of our culture protected at great cost to the people of our country. Canada must be more than a nation In name. It must be more than a collection of ethnic groups, each of them being a people. Canada must be a people. No one, can deny the im- portance of justice and fairplay but a good govern- ment must not let the search for justice paralyze it into action. Nor must it, for the purpose of efficiency and stability. fall into the in- justice of dictatoretip or tyranny. As a Province and as a Na- tion we must recapture the confidence of free people. And the revival of national and provincial purpose will generate a new and per- suasive spirit of leaderhsip. When we become a genuine- ly affirmative society, we will not always have to be proclaiming high pruposes because we will be em- bodying them. I believe we have reached too high in our current attempt to mandate human rights. The long reach has rendered us unsteady and the props erected to help us acheive our goal will collapse when put to the test. The means are often more relevant than the end, so they too must be judged. In my view. they are not wholly justified." Would you think that light- ning has any value? At average home rates. each bolt of lightning produces $37.50 worth of electrical energy. ANYTIME... ANYWHERE-... ANYBODY Oinswiesin AUCTION us no as 1 Sunday, September 27, at 1 p.m. Selling a nice selection of quality furnishings (new, used and antique) which include an outstanding set of 4 matching press back chairs, 3 matching press back chairs, 2 matching wicker rockers, round pine table, wooden bed, stove, new 19x12 rug, colour & B.W. TV's sterling spoons, old jewelery, occ chairs, tables, antique auto parts, wheel balancer, yard light, books, dishes, bottles, etc. PLUS c, collection of Canadian & American old silver coins. 1 1 1 1 Viewing: 12 noon day of sale. Good clean consignments accepted. Pat Lyon Auctioneer Phone 243-2713 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 we No we me we se Nu ea IN as me me 11 �al.%ellli'�.fdo�ia/i� Unreserved Construction AUCTION We • have been instructed by the proprietor of Sweitzer Construction, 60 Waterloo St., Exeter, to sell by Public Auction, the property. All equipment, vehicles and shop tools, without reserve on Saturday 26 Sept, at 10:30 a.m. PROPERTY — Located as Lot 251, Plon 20 now ac- cording to Plan 376 and Lot 254, Plan 376 zoned as R3 for high density residential, residential and com- mercial. Lot size is 155.8 frontage by 327.6 depth. TERMS — Deposit of $1,000.00 coy of sale, balance in 30 days unless otherwise arranged. Sell- ing subject to reasonable reserve. EQUIPMENT — 680 Hy Hoe, Euclid 4 wheel drive loader, Case 680 loader backhoe, Case 580 loader, backhoe, 4' fully hydralic riding roller, Bomag 30" walk behind compactor, Wisconsin 14" compactor, protobe 12" water pump, 8' dozer blade, 3 trenching buckets, 3 extra front end buckets, Massey Ferguson roll cage, 50 gallon saddle tanks. VEHICLES: 1965 Dodge 800 Tandem dump truck, 1965 Ford Tandem dump truck, Dodge 1000 single axle truck, 1973 Chev Blazer, 1969 Chev C10 pickup, 1971 Ford 4 wheel drive Bronco sw 6' hyd. snow blade, 30" twin axle low bed trailer, 6' x 4' wooden trailer, 6' x 4' metal trailer, Skidoo Nordic snowmobile - 200 original miles. SHOP TOOLS: Macoy Machinery Co. 8' machine lathe, Lincoln Ideal Arc 500 welder, 2 h.p. horizontal air compressor, Remington 24" chain saw, portable salimander, automatic riviter, 1 ton press, torch set, 'h" and 3/4" socket sets, Rodal 90 degree air gun, G.P. air chisel, Deullbiss paint gun, 3/4" electric socket gun, tune up testers, 9" grinder, belt sander, are" and 'h" drills, B & D 71/4" saw, jigsaw, Tap & Die sets, pipe wrenches, files, wrenches, plus many more small items related to this type of business. Terms: Cash For further information contact: Dick Robinson - Sales Manager 527-1458 ezdevei� AUCTIONEERS. LIQUIDATORS. APPRAISERS 77 MAIN ST. • SEAFORTH. ONTARIO NOK IWO (519) 527-1458 HONOUR VOLUNTEERS - Cathy McCormick received a jacket from Steve Thomson at a recent meeting of the Kirkton-Woodham Optimists for her help with the club's minor ball program Carol Edwards was also honoured, but, was absent. T -A photo BULKI'BAKER'S "BACK TO HOME BAKING SALE" CHECK BELOW FOR GREAT, SAVINGS ON BAKING SUPPLIES ITEM SPECIAL PRICE ITEM SPECIAL WALNUTS - 350 g SIZE CHCIPPED OR PIECES 'COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS • $3.57 VALUE 249PURE EACH COCOA - 400 g SIZE 'COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS • 14.74 VALUE 249 SWEETENED SHREDDED OR DESICCATED COCONUT - 450 g SIZE 'COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS - $2.80 VALUE �� EACH CHOCOLATE FLAVOURED CHIPS 900 g SIZE 'COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS - $3.93 VALUE 299 SEEDLESS SULTANA RAISINS - 900 g SIZE 'COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS • $3.89 VALUE °LACED CUT29 MIXED FRUIT - 680 g SIZE329 - COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS • $3.45 VALUE RED, GREEN OR MIXED GLACE CHERRIES - 450 g SIZE *COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRAND • $3.99 VALUE 299 EACH LARGE -QUICK -INSTANT -1--- , OATS - 2 KG SIZE *COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS • $2.89 VALUE 229 EACH PURE GROUND CK PEPPER - 45o SIZE �► g •COTO NATIONAL BRANDS • $7.88 VALUE 349 GARLIC POWDER - 450 g SIZE 'COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS • $11.66 VALUE 349 PRETZELS - 500 g SIZE STICKS OR NIBBLERS 'COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS - $2.47 VALUE 89 1 EACH SCOTCH MINTS, JUJUBES CANDIES JELLY BEANS, A.B. GUMS 400 g TO 800 g SIZE 'COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS • $1.99 VALUE 89 1 EACH *COMPARED TO NATIONAL BRANDS MEANS THE NATIONAL BRANDS REGULAR RETAIL PRICES IN EQUIVALENT WEIGHTS TO BULKI•BAKER SIZES. AVAILABLE' AT DARLING'S EXETER LUCAN PRICES EFFECTIVE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 26TH