i

’
Hu". m- YØa
Righ Y
;:
f •
JV
ndln g
VV
~•
•. •§
•
; •
-
. ..
..V
•
•

•.
V_ .

V
I r
V
V.

•
V

. VV
=
• .
’
V .• ••
⁄.V-
• •V
. V m.
_ •V -
V V.

V
.. .- • ••
• •• V VV
..»•
.•
V
•V

V V V

• •
•⁄.
•
•

• V. • ;V
V• Vi:
•
V
• ;•

‘ •_ :•f
. V
-
V
- ‘
V
•
V ’ V
•
V
•
• V
.•

V -V
~ V

Ve
•
VZ
V

V
•
._ _

V
__ _

••
V
V
V •
Human Rights in Ontario

Overview

l am delighted to join you today at the Canadian Club. Delighted to join you
very fortunate in
in Ontario, the best place to live in the World. We are
most diverse
many ways. Ontario is a very special place. We are the
from all over the World live here.
place to be found anywhere. People
have joined
Every country, every language, every faith and ethnic group
with as many or
our Founding Peoples in Ontario. Over 200 countries,
that is Ontario is
more ethnic origins, and over 150 languages. The magic
together,
that people from all over the World live, work and play
rn the World. You would be
peacefully. This does not happen everywhere we
hard pressed to find any other similar place. None is as diverse as
differences. We
are. We find strength in our diversity. We celebrate our
work hard to make our Society inclusive.

lt was not
What we have in Ontario is not inevitable. lt didn t just happen.
an accident. We are a place unlike anywhere else. You can find people
in Ontario are able
who have left conflict in one part of the World, and yet
to live, work and play side-by-side with the very relatives of people they
were in conflict with. We are a unique, special combination. Some can
trace their ancestry back centuries. Others, just minutes. In fact, every
year, over 100,000 new people arrive.
You
You might ask why Ontario has such a successfully diverse society?
that
might ask how? There are undoubtedly many reasons. l suggest
Ontari0’ s approach to protections for human rights, the rights of those
around us, is one of them.
to
It would be easy to take where we are for granted. lt would be easy
believe that things will always be as they are. ln fact, the experience from
elsewhere in the World suggests that we are unique. Every day we are
challenged by something new. We must work hard at addressing the
challenge, or not only will we not improve, but we risk losing ground and
World in their struggles.
joining so many other places in the
World,
When such diverse people come together from all over the
founded in curiosity, others
questions will undoubtedly arise. Some will be
will be less benign. Change can sometimes be difficult. lt often requires
effort to leam, understand, and adapt to change. Grievances and
complaints will inevitably arise.

Page 1 of 7
 as
Whether you address the questions, and how you do, will often be
willing to
important as the answers. The approach is critical. That we are
to
hear people out is an important start. Our willingness to ask questions,
informally,
challenge ourselves and to address the questions, sometimes
answers we
sometimes formally, strengthens and helps legitimize the
reach.

recently arrived.
Of course, human rights issues do not only involve those
been
Some of the most important changes involve those who have long
been
here. Society s development, our refusal to accept what has always
simply because it is, has given rise to substantial and significant changes.
The rights of women are one example.

Ontario’ s approach to human rights has developed over the years through
that
social, political and judicial engagement and activism. Part of
development is a specialized Human Rights Commission and a Tribunal to
the
consider, examine and hear human rights issues. This year
Commission celebrated its 50th anniversary. I would like to recognize its
Chair, Barbara Hall. The issues we face are increasingly complex, and our
approach must keep up with that complexity.

What is most important is that it works. Oh, I agree: there are some
issues that still need to be addressed, or addressed better. Some are
recent, others longstanding. Don t let my comments today suggest
anything but a continued determination to move fonrvard. The constant
desire to do better must be the guiding principle. No, what I am speaking
about today is part of the foundation for Ontario, part of why it works. Our
collective approach to human rights is part of that foundation.

Many people and many different organizations rightly see themselves and
their work in the strength and the magic that is Ontario today. They rightly
see their contribution, whether through a singular event or ongoing work,
for the important part it played in who we are. I acknowledge and thank
them all for their work. I want to refer to one.

Hugh Bumett

His name is Hugh Burnett, and all he wanted to do was to get coffee. Hugh
Burnett was a Second World War Veteran. He wanted coffee. He wanted
to be served at a place called Mckay’ s restaurant in Dresden. Dresden is
the terminus of the Underground Railroad, that great transportation
corridor which in the 1800s saw so many lifted from the bonds of slavery to
freedom.

Page 2 of 7
The people of Dresden had a reputation for welcoming people and getting
at
them started in their new lives. Mr. Burnett went for a cup of coffee
McKay’ s restaurant, but he was not served You should also know that Mr
Burnett was a carpenter. On his return from the Second World War he
established himself as a carpenter. By all accounts his carpentry business
was successful, so Mr. Burnett could pay for his coffee. You should also
know that Mr. Burnett was a resident of Dresden. He lived in
the
community, so they knew him. He was no stranger to the community when
he presented himself in the restaurant and asked for coffee. Veteran,
tradesman, community resident. None of it mattered. Mr. Burnett was not
not
served. He was not served because he was a black man They drd
serve to black people. He didn t think that was right.

Today everyone can look back and say of course it’s not right. Why would
anyone think that it would be right? Of course, at the time many
restaurants and other establishments refused to serve people because of
the colour of their skin. It happened throughout Ontario. Colour was not
the only reason people were denied service, or housing, or employment.

Mr. Burnett started a journey. It was a long and difficult journey. He

organized a referendum in Dresden, but lost. He could not look to the
Courts, because they were not particularly helpful or friendly to the issues
at the time. The law was not supportive, and neither was the government.
So, he started to agitate. His motto was agitate, agitate, agitate . Many
took up the cause. Some whose names you might recognize, like Bora
Laskin and David Lewis, many others who remain anonymous. Some of
those who joined the struggle did so at great risk to themselves, their
family or their work. Mr. Bumett had to move to London because residents
in Dresden stopped using his carpentry business.

He won the right to be served in the mid- 50s. We can marvel at the
strength of this man and his determination. We can acknowledge the
simplicity of his request, and stand in awe of what it gave rise to. His
with a Heritage Dedication
joumey was recognized on July 31, 2010
ceremony in Dresden. By 1962, Ontario had a Human Rights Code and a
Human Rights Commission.

I am pleased that his daughters, Patricia and Cheryl, have joined us today.

The years that followed saw the strengthening of our human rights
approach to
protections. Both the protections themselves, and the
examine and hear complaints, were added to by successive
Premiers from
govemments. From Premier Frost to McGulnty, through 8

Page 3 of 7
all three political parties, the resolution to strengthen our human rights
system has continued.

by a
The years have seen the recognition that complaints can be heard
Courts.
Board of Inquiry, and that the Board is subject to review by the
that
This is important, because it means that the checks and balances
cases. The
characterize our system of justice also apply to human rights
Human Rights Tribunal dedicated to
years have seen the development of a
access
hearing human rights cases and, today, that Tribunal allows direct
to those with a complaint.

Why a specialized Tribunal? The issues are unique, and ever- changing.
issues
They reflect the increasingly diverse society in which we live. The
need to be addressed. People need the right to have their grievances
heard. The Tribunal is founded on the principles of justice that
characterize our judicial system, but it does not have all of the formality of
a court. In many ways it reflects those who come before it- people who are
not all Iavvyers, who often do not have the money to retain one, many of
whom are not familiar with the specifics of court procedure or the rules of
evidence. Issues need to be heard, and heard as effectively as possible. It
is often when issues are not heard that problems arise.

Where From Here?

It is against 50 years of human rights history in Ontario, 50 years of our

Society s approach to protecting and strengthening human rights, that calls
for reform are judged. Not for a moment would I claim the system cannot
be improved. 50 years of recent history has conhrmed that it can be. Our
recent changes to the system confirmed that. The question that any
is it consistent with the approach to
proposed change or reform will face is,
strengthening human rights that Ontario has taken? ls it consistent with an
approach that has enabled us to build and be part of this uniquely diverse
Province. This is where I have a few comments and observations about
the proposals made by the Leader of the Opposition Mr. Hudak.

Mr. Hudak has spoken of these issues at two different periods of time.
First, when he was running for Leader of his Party, when he spoke of the
issues many times, and more recently in a speech he delivered in Ottawa.
I will respectfully suggest that his approach has not changed.
"
Two years ago Mr. Hudak proposed scrapping the human rights tribunal
and replacing it with a court" . He spoke of the tribunal system being a
Kangaroo Court too often.

Page 4 of 7
Kangaroo Court. Strong words Words you do not often hear in Ontario
about our institutions. Words which suggest a complete rejection of the
approach taken in Ontario over the past 50 years to protect human rights

He continued by suggesting that " politicaI advocacy" was

jamming up the
system. Political advocacy. What does he mean? Why does he suggest
advocacy is jamming up the system? Where is the evidence to
political
justify the charge? Remember, when Hugh Burnett wanted coffee, it was
not a popular request in that restaurant in Dresden. By their very nature,
human rights issues often involve a degree of advocacy. Just recently the
Commission issued its report and recommendations into the alleged
harrassment of Asian anglers in the Lake Simcoe region. Was that political
advocacy, or was it a report to reduce conflict?

Now I know what you might do. You might point to a case or a series of
cases to justify whatever action you propose to make. Well, having
practiced law for 25 years, I can assure you that it wouldn t take long to
produce a list of cases anyone doesn’ t like from any Court, Tribunal, Board
or Commission. That is why there are checks and balances in these
adjudicative systems. I suspect everyone in this room could produce a list
of cases or decisions they disagree with, whether for what was decided or
how it was decided. It would be interesting to see if everyone has the
same list.

Sometimes it is easy to look at an issue and make a judgement about it

before the case is heard and the evidence is in. What judgement did the
people make in 1948, when Mr. Burnett wanted coffee? Today s difficult
case might be tomorrow’ s obvious answer. We might not know until
tomorrow. We must let tomorrow come.

You dont throw out an approach to human rights protections developed

over 50 years by many people from many different backgrounds because
of a decision or series of decisions. Depending on your point of view, you
might not have much of the judicial system left by the end of the week.
You certainly don t throw the approach out because a case can be heard,
and does come before an adjudicative body. A fundamental principle of
justice is the right to be heard. Being heard does not mean you will
succeed.

I am concemed. Concerned because what we have in Ontario is special.

Ontarios approach is the result of a lot of work over the years. If it is to be
rejected, then what will replace it?

Page 5 of 7
’

Mr. Hudak returned to the theme in a recent speech. He characterized his

approach as fixing the system. That is much less controversial a
statement than eliminating it. Interestingly, however, Mr. Hudak has never
rejected his original position. He has never withdrawn the suggestion that
"
the system is a kangaroo court" . He has never withdrawn the assertion
"
that the approach is poIiticaIIy motivated" . Indeed, he has said that his
approach will achieve what he was talking about during the Leadership
campaign. So the new statement of approach must be seen as a
continuation of the old. Indeed, when confronted that this was a flip flop,
Mr. Hudak specifically rejected that notion. Should we take him at his
word?

One of the fixes he suggests is to give the power to dismiss cases quickly
when they are without merit. That has already been developed by the
Tribunal and became effective July of last year. In addition, the Tribunal
uses a variety of approaches to resolve cases that might be resolved
quickly.

Another statement of his is to clear up the backlog, which he put at 4000

cases. Well, in fact, the Tribunal receives about 3500 applications every
number every year- so it is
year, and has been clearing about the same
broadly current in numbers. In addition, it has cleared up almost all of the
old cases it received from the previous approach, which took too long from
complaint to hearing.

As an aside, there is a lot of work underway at the moment to speed up the

court system. That work is moving successfully and in the right direction.
"
However, let me just say that Courts are not generally thought of as fast" .

The recent reforms we introduced also allowed direct access to the

Tribunal or hearing panel. That means you no longer need permission
before you can get your case before the Tribunal. People have the right to
be heard. lf it is without merit it can be quickly dismissed, but you do have
the right to be heard. Cases are moving a lot faster as a result.

And for those who are not Iavvyers, or are without the funds to hire one, we
established the Legal Support Centre, to make sure there is access to
specialized knowledge for those with human rights questions.

Page 6 of 7
Conclusion

There are differences between Ontario’ s approach in protecting human

rights over the past 50 years, and Mr. Hudak s approach. We are
continuing the development and strengthening of a system consistent with
the approach taken over 50 years in Ontario. It is an approach taken
through 8 Premiers, from Frost through McGuinty. It is an approach taken
with a lot of hard work and advice from many people, recognizable and
not, who, together, have built the most diverse and successful community
in the World. It works here.

We will always work hard for improvement. We will never rest on the past,
but always look to build a brighter tomorrow. The approach we have
taken, together, is not easy. It is and can be hard work, requiring much
effort, but the results it has produced are undeniably the envy of the
World.

We are a unique society. People from all over the world live, work and
hard work and the
play together. Peacefully. Ontario has been built by the
determination of many. Ontario s approach to human rights is part of our
foundation. We must continue to strengthen it. We must continue the
work of those who have gone before so we can build and see an even
brighter tomorrow.

Chris Bentley

Page 7 of 7