OTTAWA, Feb 10 (LifeSiteNews) – Canadian court decisions have laid the groundwork for the federal Liberals’ comprehensive pro-homosexual legislation about to be imposed on Canada. Critics note however that Canada’s federal and provincial governments have unnecessarily allowed these judicial bodies to dictate law. Both levels of government have refused to use the notwithstanding clause to counter court decisions and they have also failed to effectively challenge some lower court decisions thus giving them tacit approval. Pro-family groups note that such court decisions provide a good cover for unpopular legislation, which would otherwise face rejection by Canadians. Yesterday in the House of Commons question period, John Maloney (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.) responded to a question Reform family critic Eric Lowther had submitted some time ago asking about court decisions which affected same-sex benefit legislation.
Maloney said: “The major court and tribunal decisions include: The provision of the Income Tax Act, which allows employers to register pension plans, was ruled contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Rosenberg decision, as it did not allow registration of pension plans where employers chose to offer survivor benefits to same sex partners of employees, Ontario Court of Appeal, 1998. The decision of the Federal Court, Trial Division in Moore and Akerstrom affirmed the decision of the Human Rights Tribunal that the federal government must grant the same employment benefits under collective agreements to same sex couples as those offered to common law spouses of public service employees, 1998. In May of 1999, two challenges before the Pension Appeals Board to the survivor benefit provisions of the Canada Pension Plan were conceded, Hodder and Boulais, and a similar case was conceded before the Federal Court of Appeal in September, Fisk, resulting in a payment of survivor benefits to the three individuals involved. In November 1999, the Government of Canada settled a number of cases, including White, which involved the challenge to the voluntary quit provisions of the Employment Insurance Act. There are a number of arbitral decisions and decisions under provincial jurisdiction which have also awarded benefits to same sex couples, including the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in M. v H., (May 1999). There are many pending court cases in this area.”
See the full response in the Hansard.