Alright -- last one from me on this SK/ECCC water incident. @CTVNews reached out. I told them the weekend amendment to the Trespass to Property Regs -- which now define "persons" as "the Crown in right of Canada" -- was meaningless pandering: regina.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=2… 1/n #skpoli
From the clip, it appears that CTV reached out to Scott Moe's office for his response re: whether the amendment actually changed anything. To which they responded as follows: 2/n
[excuse me for a moment] 3/n
Section 17 of the Trespass to Property Act sets out who is exempt. That list is pretty clear -- and it doesn't include the kind of inspection/testing that set this whole fiasco in motion. Even if it did, Moe's weekend amendment makes no relevant change to that section! 4/n
Indeed, as my colleague @BankesNigel pointed out to me, while unnecessary the amendment actually helps the feds b/c it makes abundantly clear that a "person...acting under a right or authority conferred by law" includes "the Crown in right of Canada," i.e. federal inspectors. 5/n
[excuse me for one more moment] 6/n
What to make of all of this? 1st, the golden rule: haste makes waste. 2nd, @PremierScottMoe & his crew are either painfully incompetent or recklessly cynical (& don't think very highly of their constituents). None of this is good for the fine people of the province I grew up in.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Martin Z. Olszynski 🇺🇦

Martin Z. Olszynski 🇺🇦 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @molszyns

Jul 22
“Vancouver sets aside $660,000 for big oil lawsuit to recoup climate change costs” via ⁦@globeandmail

Some thoughts on this development, first in terms of the law & then the politics… 🧵 1/n #cdnpoli #ableg theglobeandmail.com/canada/british…
1. There are 3 potential kinds of actions in "tort law" that are most often considered in this context: negligence, public nuisance & private nuisance. To my mind, public nuisance is the most intuitive tort here, but I note the reference to a "class action" in the story... 2/n
... which brings to mind a potential class action in private nuisance. Those who followed the Freedom Convoy shd be familiar w/ the potential effectiveness of that approach (where rep. plaintiff succeeded in getting an injunction, trial pending) (see ablawg.ca/2022/02/09/rig…). 3/n
Read 10 tweets
May 15
We hear a lot lately in #cdnpoli about so-called “gatekeepers” (aka regulatory bodies & agencies), usually w/ a thinly veiled accusation that they deliberately — gleefully even — stand b/w us and freedom & prosperity. With few exceptions, however, the opposite is true… 1/4
I’ve brought this up b4. #mtpolley, #lacmegantic, & many others — clear examples of insufficient regulatory oversight. But now smarter persons than me have explained how a robust admin state is actually a safeguard against — wait for it — local elites: volts.wtf/p/volts-podcas… 2/4
Which, if you stop to think about it for 5 seconds, shld be obvious. It’s like the climate change conspiracy re: academics/scientists — observe just one faculty or departmental meeting to see how laughable that is. The same is true of any bureaucracy: it’s too vast & diverse. 3/4
Read 4 tweets
May 10
The ABCA opinion in the IAA Reference is out: albertacourts.ca/ca/publication…. As expected, a 4:1 majority says that the Act is unconstitutional. I have a lot of paras to read, but I'll eave y'all w/ this one. It doesn't require a law degree to understand, b/c it's not legal reasoning:🤷‍♂️
OK, here's the doctrinal DL:

1) A *lot* of this opinion hinges on the hypothetical of an otherwise "provincial project" (which isn't a thing, actually) not requiring any other federal permits but still being subject to the IAA. To the best of my knowledge, there is not... 1/n
...a single project on the registry like this. I find it hard to believe the feds would ever require a full IA of such a project, but in any event, if that is the main concern, esy enough to sever that element. ABCA did not, and this brings us to the core of their concern... 2/n
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(