Ontario, it's an interesting time
So Canada has a clause in our charter, which is apparently uniquely Canadian, in the notwithstanding clause
It was put in to get consensus among provinces which without it would not agree
Theoretically, any piece of legislation can be pushed through by a government using it. It has a term limit of two years for reason as the idea was suggested in case of emergency/extreme cases, like in 1981 Trudeau Sr (who pushed for the charter which is what includes the notwithstanding clause) used it to much criticism for setting a curfew in Montreal where there was much political conflict and bombings.
Now, Ontario, has a premier who thinks interrupting a municipal election, mid election, for the purpose for government expediency/efficiency thus circumventing the right to representation as he has a vendetta against Toronto as they didn't elect him once when he tried to become mayor. Toronto took him to court and won the verdict.
If you were petty, vindictive, why not just use the legislative tool of the not withstanding clause?
It was put in to get consensus among provinces which without it would not agree
Theoretically, any piece of legislation can be pushed through by a government using it. It has a term limit of two years for reason as the idea was suggested in case of emergency/extreme cases, like in 1981 Trudeau Sr (who pushed for the charter which is what includes the notwithstanding clause) used it to much criticism for setting a curfew in Montreal where there was much political conflict and bombings.
Now, Ontario, has a premier who thinks interrupting a municipal election, mid election, for the purpose for government expediency/efficiency thus circumventing the right to representation as he has a vendetta against Toronto as they didn't elect him once when he tried to become mayor. Toronto took him to court and won the verdict.
If you were petty, vindictive, why not just use the legislative tool of the not withstanding clause?
