🚨 Watch the video for 911 🚨

💌 The September fan envelope is here! 💌
Sign in to follow this  
society

Ontario Conservatives Promise Severe Fines For Covid-19 Rule Breakers

Economy

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/ontario-s-ford-promises-fines-for-people-breaking-social-gathering-rules-1.1495037

 

Premier of Ontario Rob Ford has promised that the Province is going to get tougher on people breaking rules such as surpassing the limits on size of gathering or failing to wear masks where they are required

 

The Conservative Party Premier says that because many are still not listening and getting the message cracking down with tougher measures is the only way to force compliance and that he plans on making Ontario have the heaviest fines in Canada for non-compliance

 

Toronto Mayor John Tory publicly supported the Premier in tougher crackdowns

Edited by Economy
  • YAAAS 2
  • Love 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
derpmonster

Don't we love when people of all major political affiliations believe in common sense? :bear:

The US could truly never.

If a Democrat says, "Don't eat poop," Republicans will start doing it and vice-versa.

Check out iTunes data & graphs at CHARTPOP.live
  • LMAO 5

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fish

just want to point out that these kind of measures are controversial, and some studies suggest that they are affecting much harder poorer and marginalized groups, on top of not being necessarily efficient.

See this report by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, for example. 

https://ccla.org/cclanewsite/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/2020-06-24-Stay-Off-the-Grass-COVID19-and-Law-Enforcement-in-Canada-1.pdf

 

  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
2 minutes ago, Fish said:

just want to point out that these kind of measures are controversial, and some studies suggest that they are affecting much harder poorer and marginalized groups, on top of not being necessarily efficient.

See this report by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, for example. 

https://ccla.org/cclanewsite/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/2020-06-24-Stay-Off-the-Grass-COVID19-and-Law-Enforcement-in-Canada-1.pdf

 

That PDF is 44 pages long u might wanna summarize :enigma:

 

But regardless of who gets targeted more... Ur still responsible if u don't follow the rules

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fish
5 minutes ago, Economy said:

That PDF is 44 pages long u might wanna summarize :enigma:

 

But regardless of who gets targeted more... Ur still responsible if u don't follow the rules

 

There is an executive summary, i highlighted the parts that I felt are important. It's just another point of view. It is not necessarily true to say that high fines and strict law enforcement and policing is efficient to fight covid. And even, it might affect the already discriminated, the poor, and the marginalized, in a disproportionate way. This is important. 

 

Executive Summary

 

Over a ten-day span in March 2020 every Canadian province and territory declared some kind of state of emergency in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Unprecedented restrictions on individuals’ freedoms quickly followed. Many public spaces across the country were shuttered. Indoor and outdoor gatherings were restricted. Public health recommendations to maintain physical distancing became legallyenforceable laws pursuant to legislation and emergency orders. Many of the laws were overly broad, vague and confusing. Penalties for violating emergency orders were significant - $880 in Ontario, for example, and $1500 in Quebec. The broader analysis of the civil liberties impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and Canadian governments’ responses to date was examined in a report released by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association earlier this month, “Canadian Rights during COVID-19: CCLA’s Interim Report on COVID’s First Wave.”1 This report focuses in more detail on one aspect of Canada’s pandemic response: the use of coercive fines and law enforcement to respond to a public health crisis. Lessons from previous public health emergencies have shown that compliance with public health strategies is most effectively secured through good will and education – not policing, fines and arrests.2 For some provinces in Canada, the focus was on education, not enforcement, and many provinces very effectively ‘flattened the curve’ of the pandemic by relying on public health recommendations and education. Other provinces, however, turned to punitive enforcement to secure compliance. Based on publicly-available sources we estimate that between April 1 and June 15, 2020 there were over 10,000 tickets issued or charges laid related to COVID-19. Across the country this has resulted in over $13 million dollars in COVID-related fines to date. The vast majority of COVID-related fines – a full 98% of the national total – have been issued in just three provinces: Quebec (6600 COVID-related charges, 77% of all fines), Ontario (2853 charges, 18%) and Nova Scotia (555 charges, 3%). In early April the Canadian Civil Liberties Association launched an online COVID tickets tracker where Canadians could record their experiences with COVID-related stops, searches and charges. Over the ensuing ten weeks over one hundred people have gotten in touch with CCLA to share their stories of being stopped, questioned or ticketed. While this represents a small proportion of the total number of tickets issued across the country, there is a notable consistency across the individual accounts. Many of the experiences Canadians shared demonstrate how over-zealous, technical enforcement of confusing, broad and vague laws frequently led to fines that were completely disconnected with the goal of protecting public health. Many people were given hefty fines for minor technical violations of emergency orders: standing three feet inside an unmarked and unfenced soccer field, having a child run ahead and jump up on a park bench for a few seconds, or walking alone on a path that the municipality had specifically flagged as open – only to receive a ticket when a police officer disagreed on the legal interpretation. Many others who contacted CCLA seemed to have been ticketed for actions that were not contrary to any emergency orders at all. Multiple individuals recounted tickets being issued for walking or running, alone, through open parks. Several others said that they were charged $880 for a violation of an Emergency Order for having their dog off-leash. Yet another reported that an uncle had been ticketed for sharing a ride home from work with his essential services co-worker. It has only taken a few months for the inequality in contemporary Canadian society to be reflected in unequal COVID-19 infection rates in our communities. Inequality in our society also plays out in the unequal application and impact of laws. Data from other jurisdictions around the world has made it clear that long-standing discriminatory patterns of policing are being reproduced in the context of COVID-19 enforcement. Unfortunately, we may never have quantitative data regarding discriminatory patterns of COVID-19 enforcement in Canada. Many police forces across Canada do not collect demographic data, such as race, gender, or socioeconomic status, of their enforcement patterns. Despite large data gaps, however, there are numerous indications that the arbitrary rules, increased enforcement powers, and significant fines are having a disproportionate impact on specific communities, including Black, Indigenous, and other racialized groups, those with precarious housing, recent immigrants, youth, members of the LGBTQ2S community, and certain religious minorities. Numerous individuals who got in touch with CCLA and self-identified as racialized felt that they had been targeted by law enforcement because of their race, and multiple investigations in various jurisdictions have been launched after allegations of discriminatory actions on the part of bylaw officers. The pandemic has also been used as a justification to increase the ability of a variety of law enforcement officials to stop individuals and demand that they provide identification, a practice also known as “carding” which has been used disproportionately against people who are Black, Indigenous, who have mental health disabilities, who are experiencing homelessness, and who are otherwise racialized and marginalized. The focus on individuals’ behaviour in public spaces also disproportionately impacts those who rely on parks and other public spaces, including those who are precariously housed, living in shelters or on the streets. Community organizations in Quebec in particular reported to CCLA that their street-involved clients have received many tickets for alleged physical distancing infractions. Increased police targeting of this community has also reinforced the pre-existing distrust between marginalized individuals and the police, directly undermining an effective public health response, which requires trust, open communication, and the ongoing provision of services and supports. v The requirement in several jurisdictions that individuals stay physically separated from those who are not in their household also raises significant concerns about an increase in discriminatory policing on the basis of age, family status, religion and sexual orientation. Individuals in same-sex relationships reported that they felt targeted by law enforcement, as they were stopped, questioned about their relationship, and required to provide identification, while heterosexual couples in the same spaces were allowed to walk by without suspicion. Young people, who often live with roommates, also reported increased targeting from law enforcement. And in Quebec, several individuals who self-identified as members of the Jewish community told CCLA that they felt they had been specifically targeted because of their religion. Numerous individuals who contacted the CCLA also commented on the impact of high monetary fines. Students, elderly persons on fixed incomes, single parents and those who were unemployed or about to lose their jobs all commented to us that the amount of the fine was crushing. For many, the amount of money they were fined represented their entire rent or grocery budget for the month. Finally, the unclear and complex nature of the underlying orders has been particularly hard for those who do not speak English as their first language, including refugees and recent immigrants. At this point in time it appears that most of the country has made it past the peak of the first wave of this pandemic. It also seems that we have made it through the peak of the punitive law enforcement approach. After weeks where thousands of fines were handed out, the restrictions are starting to loosen and some jurisdictions that initially responded with fines are returning to education approaches. But we are being told to expect a second wave of infection. It is highly likely that, in some portions of the country, public health officials will recommend a return to tighter restrictions on daily activities. This should not also mean a return to law enforcement stops, searches, and charges. The only way through this is with a robust, democratic, constitutionally-compliant public health approach. Government leaders must resist the temptation – and the calls from scared constituents – to back up every public health recommendation with the force of law and give a carte blanche to law enforcement. Trying to police our way out of this pandemic is unimaginative, sometimes unconstitutional, and ineffective. When rules don’t make sense, people stop listening to those in authority. When laws are unworkable or indecipherable, people ignore them. When enforcement is unfair, arbitrary, and discriminatory people become less compliant and more defiant. They focus less on trying to obey the rules, and think more about trying not to get caught. And when a public health approach is rejected in favour of a law enforcement approach, the individuals that feel the brunt of the punitive measures are those who are at most risk in the first place. Instead, governments must take the time to explain the risks, the science, the evidence-based measures that each and every person needs to take. They must demonstrate a real, long-term commitment to education. And work with communities to ensure the supports are there to allow the public health vi recommendations to become a reality. Canadians – and particularly those communities most impacted by the pandemic - need public health supports, not punitive law enforcement and fines

  • Like 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
26 minutes ago, derpmonster said:

Don't we love when people of all major political affiliations believe in common sense? :bear:

The US could truly never.

If a Democrat says, "Don't eat poop," Republicans will start doing it and vice-versa.

Well to be fair Ontario's current Conservative Party is actually "PC" Party or "Progressive Conservatives"

 

I think it's supposed to mean that they are progressive in some aspects and conservative in others. They are definitely quite Right-Winged on economy but on social issues they seem to be more Moderate Centrists

 

In actually both at the Provincial Level and at the Federal Level our dominant "Conservative" party is actually more like Centre-Right but not full on right winged

 

"People's party of Canada" is actually the far right wing party in Canada (I don't know if they exist Provincially) but they are so irrelevant many don't even know they exist. Most just assume the standard "Conservatives" are our far Right Wing but they are not

 

Federally I know it goes in this order:

 

People's Party Of Canada: Far Right

Conservatives: Centre-Right

Liberals: Centre (Currently in Power)

NDP: Centre-Left

Green Party: Far Left

 

The 3 in the middle in bold are the only relevant ones. The Green Party and far right PPC never win enough seats to be relevant. There's also a 6th party "Bloc Quebecois" which is a separatist party for Quebec but I don't know how left or right winged they are

 

Edited by Economy

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
2 minutes ago, Fish said:

 

There is an executive summary, i highlighted the parts that I felt are important. It's just another point of view. It is not necessarily true to say that high fines and strict law enforcement and policing is efficient to fight covid. And even, it might affect the already discriminated, the poor, and the marginalized, in a disproportionate way. This is important. 

 

Executive Summary

 

Over a ten-day span in March 2020 every Canadian province and territory declared some kind of state of emergency in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Unprecedented restrictions on individuals’ freedoms quickly followed. Many public spaces across the country were shuttered. Indoor and outdoor gatherings were restricted. Public health recommendations to maintain physical distancing became legallyenforceable laws pursuant to legislation and emergency orders. Many of the laws were overly broad, vague and confusing. Penalties for violating emergency orders were significant - $880 in Ontario, for example, and $1500 in Quebec. The broader analysis of the civil liberties impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and Canadian governments’ responses to date was examined in a report released by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association earlier this month, “Canadian Rights during COVID-19: CCLA’s Interim Report on COVID’s First Wave.”1 This report focuses in more detail on one aspect of Canada’s pandemic response: the use of coercive fines and law enforcement to respond to a public health crisis. Lessons from previous public health emergencies have shown that compliance with public health strategies is most effectively secured through good will and education – not policing, fines and arrests.2 For some provinces in Canada, the focus was on education, not enforcement, and many provinces very effectively ‘flattened the curve’ of the pandemic by relying on public health recommendations and education. Other provinces, however, turned to punitive enforcement to secure compliance. Based on publicly-available sources we estimate that between April 1 and June 15, 2020 there were over 10,000 tickets issued or charges laid related to COVID-19. Across the country this has resulted in over $13 million dollars in COVID-related fines to date. The vast majority of COVID-related fines – a full 98% of the national total – have been issued in just three provinces: Quebec (6600 COVID-related charges, 77% of all fines), Ontario (2853 charges, 18%) and Nova Scotia (555 charges, 3%). In early April the Canadian Civil Liberties Association launched an online COVID tickets tracker where Canadians could record their experiences with COVID-related stops, searches and charges. Over the ensuing ten weeks over one hundred people have gotten in touch with CCLA to share their stories of being stopped, questioned or ticketed. While this represents a small proportion of the total number of tickets issued across the country, there is a notable consistency across the individual accounts. Many of the experiences Canadians shared demonstrate how over-zealous, technical enforcement of confusing, broad and vague laws frequently led to fines that were completely disconnected with the goal of protecting public health. Many people were given hefty fines for minor technical violations of emergency orders: standing three feet inside an unmarked and unfenced soccer field, having a child run ahead and jump up on a park bench for a few seconds, or walking alone on a path that the municipality had specifically flagged as open – only to receive a ticket when a police officer disagreed on the legal interpretation. Many others who contacted CCLA seemed to have been ticketed for actions that were not contrary to any emergency orders at all. Multiple individuals recounted tickets being issued for walking or running, alone, through open parks. Several others said that they were charged $880 for a violation of an Emergency Order for having their dog off-leash. Yet another reported that an uncle had been ticketed for sharing a ride home from work with his essential services co-worker. It has only taken a few months for the inequality in contemporary Canadian society to be reflected in unequal COVID-19 infection rates in our communities. Inequality in our society also plays out in the unequal application and impact of laws. Data from other jurisdictions around the world has made it clear that long-standing discriminatory patterns of policing are being reproduced in the context of COVID-19 enforcement. Unfortunately, we may never have quantitative data regarding discriminatory patterns of COVID-19 enforcement in Canada. Many police forces across Canada do not collect demographic data, such as race, gender, or socioeconomic status, of their enforcement patterns. Despite large data gaps, however, there are numerous indications that the arbitrary rules, increased enforcement powers, and significant fines are having a disproportionate impact on specific communities, including Black, Indigenous, and other racialized groups, those with precarious housing, recent immigrants, youth, members of the LGBTQ2S community, and certain religious minorities. Numerous individuals who got in touch with CCLA and self-identified as racialized felt that they had been targeted by law enforcement because of their race, and multiple investigations in various jurisdictions have been launched after allegations of discriminatory actions on the part of bylaw officers. The pandemic has also been used as a justification to increase the ability of a variety of law enforcement officials to stop individuals and demand that they provide identification, a practice also known as “carding” which has been used disproportionately against people who are Black, Indigenous, who have mental health disabilities, who are experiencing homelessness, and who are otherwise racialized and marginalized. The focus on individuals’ behaviour in public spaces also disproportionately impacts those who rely on parks and other public spaces, including those who are precariously housed, living in shelters or on the streets. Community organizations in Quebec in particular reported to CCLA that their street-involved clients have received many tickets for alleged physical distancing infractions. Increased police targeting of this community has also reinforced the pre-existing distrust between marginalized individuals and the police, directly undermining an effective public health response, which requires trust, open communication, and the ongoing provision of services and supports. v The requirement in several jurisdictions that individuals stay physically separated from those who are not in their household also raises significant concerns about an increase in discriminatory policing on the basis of age, family status, religion and sexual orientation. Individuals in same-sex relationships reported that they felt targeted by law enforcement, as they were stopped, questioned about their relationship, and required to provide identification, while heterosexual couples in the same spaces were allowed to walk by without suspicion. Young people, who often live with roommates, also reported increased targeting from law enforcement. And in Quebec, several individuals who self-identified as members of the Jewish community told CCLA that they felt they had been specifically targeted because of their religion. Numerous individuals who contacted the CCLA also commented on the impact of high monetary fines. Students, elderly persons on fixed incomes, single parents and those who were unemployed or about to lose their jobs all commented to us that the amount of the fine was crushing. For many, the amount of money they were fined represented their entire rent or grocery budget for the month. Finally, the unclear and complex nature of the underlying orders has been particularly hard for those who do not speak English as their first language, including refugees and recent immigrants. At this point in time it appears that most of the country has made it past the peak of the first wave of this pandemic. It also seems that we have made it through the peak of the punitive law enforcement approach. After weeks where thousands of fines were handed out, the restrictions are starting to loosen and some jurisdictions that initially responded with fines are returning to education approaches. But we are being told to expect a second wave of infection. It is highly likely that, in some portions of the country, public health officials will recommend a return to tighter restrictions on daily activities. This should not also mean a return to law enforcement stops, searches, and charges. The only way through this is with a robust, democratic, constitutionally-compliant public health approach. Government leaders must resist the temptation – and the calls from scared constituents – to back up every public health recommendation with the force of law and give a carte blanche to law enforcement. Trying to police our way out of this pandemic is unimaginative, sometimes unconstitutional, and ineffective. When rules don’t make sense, people stop listening to those in authority. When laws are unworkable or indecipherable, people ignore them. When enforcement is unfair, arbitrary, and discriminatory people become less compliant and more defiant. They focus less on trying to obey the rules, and think more about trying not to get caught. And when a public health approach is rejected in favour of a law enforcement approach, the individuals that feel the brunt of the punitive measures are those who are at most risk in the first place. Instead, governments must take the time to explain the risks, the science, the evidence-based measures that each and every person needs to take. They must demonstrate a real, long-term commitment to education. And work with communities to ensure the supports are there to allow the public health vi recommendations to become a reality. Canadians – and particularly those communities most impacted by the pandemic - need public health supports, not punitive law enforcement and fines

I'm not sure all this applies to what Ford was talking about tho

 

When he talked about tougher fines He seemed to be stressing ppl not wearing masks and having parties whose number of guests exceed the max number currently allowed

 

Those are not fuzzy rules with grey areas for interpretation they are very direct. We have a specific number that's allowed and the law is very clear that masks are to be worn in all indoor public spaces

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...