Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T22:02:39.548Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Evolution of Human Rights Policy in Ontario*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2009

R. Brian Howe
R. Brian Howe
Affiliation:
Brock University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since the Second World War, a public policy on human rights has been put into place in Canada to control discrimination through human rights legislation and human rights commissions. This policy has changed over time, incorporating elements both of expansion in human rights protections and of restraint in the enforcement of the legislation. This study seeks to explain this change by examining the evolution of the policy in the province of Ontario, home of the oldest and largest commission in Canada. The conclusion drawn is that the evolution has been shaped largely by conflicting pressures for reform and restraint, reflecting an underlying conflict between rival liberal ethics which comes into play as consciousness grows of gaps between the principles and practice of rights.

Résumé

Au Canada, depuis la Deuxième Guerre mondiale, une politique des droits de la personne a été mise en place pour combattre la discrimination au moyen de lois sur les droits et libertés et d'une Commission des droits de la personne. Cette politique a évolué depuis ses débuts, en intégrant des éléments qui, à la fois, élargissent la protection des droits mais limitent l'application de la loi. Cette étude a pour objet d'expliquer cette évolution de la politique des droits dans la province de l'Ontario, là où se trouve la plus ancienne et la plus grande Commission des droits de la personne au Canada. La conclusion montre que l'évolution s'explique largement en fonction de pressions contradictoires pour des réformes et des limitations, reflétant un conflit sous-jacent entre des éthiques libérales rivales, lequel conflit est devenu plus explicite à mesure que l'on prenait conscience de l'écart entre les principes et l'application des droits.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , December 1991 , pp. 783 - 802
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For an excellent discussion of social rights as human rights and the contending views, see MacMillan, C. Michael, “Social Rights Versus Political Rights,” this Journal 14 (1986), 283–304Google Scholar.

2 Tarnopolsky, Walter and Pentley, William, Discrimination and the Law (Toronto: Richard De Boo, 1985)Google Scholar; Keene, Judith, Human Rights in Ontario (Toronto: Carswell, 1983)Google Scholar; Côté, Andrée and Lemonde, Lucie, Discrimination et Commission des droits de la personne (Montréal: Editions Saint Martin, 1988)Google Scholar; Flanagan, Thomas, Knopff, Rainer and Archer, Keith, “Selection Bias in Human Rights Tribunals,” Canadian Public Administration 31 (1983), 483–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Knopff, Rainer, Human Rights and Social Technology: The New War on Discrimination (Ottawa: Carleton University Press, 1989Google Scholar); and Flanagan, Thomas, “The Manufacture of Minorities,” in Nevitte, Neil and Kornberg, Allan, eds., Minorities and the Canadian State (Oakville: Mosaic, 1985), 107–121Google Scholar.

3 Manzer, Ronald, Public Policies and Political Development in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985)Google Scholar.

4 Myrdal, Gunnar, An American Dilemma (New York: Harper, 1944)Google Scholar. For the development and application of this idea to the study of movements in American history, see Huntington, Samuel, American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981)Google Scholar.

5 See Russell, Peter H., “The Political Purposes of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” Canadian Bar Review 63 (1983), 36–43Google Scholar.

6 Under the label “reform” ethic, I include social democrats (like Frank Scott) as well as reform liberals. Under the “conservative” label, I include libertarians in the tradition of Hayek and “rule of law” liberals in the tradition of Dicey.

7 See Betcherman, Lita-Rose, The Swastika and the Maple Leaf (Toronto: Fitzhenry and Whiteside, 1978), 50–52Google Scholar, and Sohn, Herbert, “Human Rights Legislation in Ontario” (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, 1975), 40–45Google Scholar.

8 [1940] S.C.R. 139.

9 Statutes of Ontario, 1944, c. 51 (hereafter S.O.).

10 Re Drummond Wren (1945) O.R. 778.

11 Noble v. Wolf and Alley (1948) 4 D.L.R. 123. The original decision was upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1951, but for different reasons than in Re Drummond Wren.

12 See Atkinson, L., “The Japanese Controversy is Reviving Liberalism,” Saturday Night, July 15, 1944, 6–7Google Scholar; Fowke, Edith, “Justice and Japanese Canadians,” The Canadian Forum, January 1947, 225–226Google Scholar; and La Violette, F. E., “Social Psychological Characteristics of Evacuated Japanese,” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 11 (1945), 420–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Editorial, “The Admission of Refugees,” The Dalhousie Review 19 (July 1939), 242–244Google Scholar; MacLennan, Douglas, “Racial Discrimination in Canada,” The Canadian Forum, October 1943, 164–165Google Scholar; and Berton, Pierre, “No Jews Need Apply,” Maclean's, November 1948, 53Google Scholar.

14 See Oliver, W. P., “Cultural Progress of the Negro in Nova Scotia,” The Dalhousie Review 29 (October 1949–1950), 293–300Google Scholar; editorial, “The Great White Way,” The Canadian Forum, May 28, 1949; and Katz, Sidney, “Jim Crow Lives in Dresden,” Maclean's November 1949, 8–9Google Scholar.

15 Forsey, Harriet, “Will Women Win the Peace?” The Canadian Forum, August 1944, 106–108Google Scholar; Stoddard, Hope, “No Women Being Hired,” The Canadian Forum, June 1946, 58–59Google Scholar; and Whitton, Charlotte, “The Exploited Sex,” Maclean's, April 15, 1947, 37–38Google Scholar.

16 See Coburn, Kathleen, “The Red Man's Burden,” The Canadian Forum, October 1944, 153–154Google Scholar; Ward, H. Glynn, “Canada's Indian Problem,” The Dalhousie Review 25 (April 1945), 46–49Google Scholar; and Walsh, Anthony, “Restore Self-Confidence in Indians of Canada,” Saturday Night, August 21, 1948, IIGoogle Scholar.

17 The Globe and Mail, June 14, 1948; The Financial Post, May 1, 1948; and The Telegram, June 25, 1947.

18 Views are summarized in “A Bill of Rights… Now,” Canadian Business, September 1952, 38–41.

19 See “Dominion Jurisdiction over Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,” Canadian Bar Review 27 (1949), 513–534Google Scholar, and Canada, Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Special Senate Committee, Minutes of Proceedings (1950), 15–32.

20 “Discrimination Problem,” Saturday Night, February 1950, 7.

21 See Hawkins, Freda, Canada and Immigration (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1972), 54–60Google Scholar.

22 See Rea, K. J., The Prosperous Years (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985), 29–34Google Scholar.

23 Census of Canada, 1941 and 1961.

24 Ontario Statistics, 1986.

25 Interviews, Kalmen Kaplansky, August 7, 1987; Irving Himel, August 24, 1987; Benjamin Kayfetz, October 18, 1988; and A. Alan Borovoy, September 25, 1987.

26 For details, see Bruner, Arnold, “The Genesis of Ontario's Human Rights Legislation,” University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 37 (1979), 236–242Google Scholar.

27 See S.O., 1951, c. 24 and c. 26; 1954, c. 28; 1958, c. 70; and 1960–1961, c. 28.

28 S.O., 1961–1962, c. 93.

29 For commentary on the approach by human rights officials themselves, see Eberlee, T. M. and Hill, D. G., “The Ontario Human Rights Code,” University of Toronto Law Journal 15 (1964), 448–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 See Oliver, Peter, Unlikely Tory (Toronto: Lester & Orpen Dennys, 1985), 110Google Scholar.

31 For general discussion, see Williams, Cynthia, “The Changing Nature of Citizen Rights,” in Cairns, Alan and Williams, Cynthia, eds., Constitutionalism, Citizenship and Society in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press for Supply and Services Canada, 1985), 99–131Google Scholar.

32 For details of the education programme, see Jacobs, Dorene, The Ontario Human Rights Commission: A History (Toronto: Ontario Human Rights Commission, 1970), 38–67Google Scholar.

33 For ethnic minorities, see Census of Canada, 1961 and 1981; for working women, see Ontario Statistics, 1985.

34 Concerns were expressed in various ways including community briefs, special studies of discrimination and articles in the Commission's bulletin Human Relations.

35 New organizations during this time included the Ontario Committee on the Status of Women, the Ontario Status of Women Council, the Jamaican Canadian Association, South Asians for Equality, the Urban Alliance on Race Relations, the Coalition on Human Rights for the Handicapped and the Coalition for Gay Rights in Ontario.

36 For a discussion of broad board interpretations in regard to the issue of accommodation, see Hunter, Ian, “Development of the Ontario Human Rights Code,” University of Toronto Law Journal 22 (1972), 253–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 But noted conservatives also played a role. Examples included Commission Chairman Thomas H. B. Symons (1975–1978), a self-described “red tory,” and Labour Minister Robert Elgie, also known as a red tory.

38 See Life Together (Toronto: Ontario Human Rights Commission, 1977), 18Google Scholar.

39 S.O., 1965, c. 85; 1966, c. 3; 1967, c. 66; and 1968–1969, c. 83.

40 S.O., 1970, c. 501; 1971, c. 50; and 1972, c. 119. Sex was incorporated into the Code as a ground in 1972.

41 See Life Together, 92–109. The government's proposed legislation in 1981 was Bill 7.

42 For discussion, see Arthurs, H. W., “Rethinking Administrative Law,” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 17 (April 1979), 1–45Google Scholar.

43 Ontario board of inquiry, 1969. For discussion, see Stenning, P. C., “From Conciliation to Judgment” (unpublished LL.M. thesis, Osgoode Hall Law School, 1974), 54–57Google Scholar.

44 (1969), 6 D.L.R. (3d), 585.

45 (1971), 18 D.L.R. (3d), 1.

46 See Volume I of the Royal Commission Inquiry into Civil Rights (Toronto: Queen's Printer, 1968), 1Google Scholar.

47 For discussion, see Willis, John, “McRuer Report: Lawyers' Values and Civil Servants' Values,” University of Toronto Law Journal 18 (1968), 351–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 Most important for the Human Rights Commission was the Statutory Powers Procedures Act, 1971 and amendments to the Code in 1971 and 1972. For further analysis, see Stenning, “From Conciliation to Judgment,” 239–57.

49 For media opposition, see Newspaper Articles on OHRC Changes (Toronto: Ontario Human Rights Commission, 1977)Google Scholar. For examples of business and other opposition, see briefs to the Standing Committee on Resources Development on Bill 7.

50 See Fletcher, Joseph and Chalmers, Marie-Christine, “Attitudes of Canadians Towards Affirmative Action: Opposition, Value Pluralism and Non-Attitudes,”paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Association for Canadian Studies,San Francisco,November 1989.Google Scholar

51 S.O., 1981, c. 53.

52 S.O., 1986. c. 64, s. 18.

53 S.O., 1981, c. 53, preamble.

54 “It's a Bill They Can't Refuse…,” The Toronto Sun, October 22, 1981, 9.

55 “A Better Bill, But…,” November 3, 1981, 6.

56 Hunter, Ian, “Liberty and Equality: A Tale of Two Codes,” McGill Law Journal 29 (1983), esp. 22–23Google Scholar.

57 For general discussion, see Bryden, Kenneth, “The Politics of the Budget,” in MacDonald, Donald, ed., The Government and Politics of Ontario (2nd ed.; Toronto: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1980), 428–447Google Scholar.

58 Interview, Borden Purcell (Commission chairman 1982–1987), September 9, 1988. See also “Human Rights Boss Demands Staff, Money to Fight Backlogs,” The Toronto Star, January 19, 1987.

59 Interview, Ray Brillinger, director of industrial relations, Canadian Manufacturers' Association, Ontario Division, September 22, 1988.

60 For example, the Systemic Investigation Unit was created in early 1989 to investigate and remedy systemic barriers to equal opportunity, but the Commission had been given the mandate to act on this in 1981.

61 “Human Rights Legislation Still Plagued by Wrongs,” The Globe and Mail, August 1, 1985.

62 See Côté and Lemonde, Discrimination et Commission des droits de la personne.