Tag: 45th Federal Election

Categories
Judicial

The Right To Respond

This is a short update for those who care to hear that the social media network ‘Facebook’ has been prohibiting access to political candidates during this election while it is used to disseminate misinformation about those same candidates.

I am unable to login to my account because Facebook claims it does not exist. This makes it effectively impossible to use the social media platform to respond to those disseminating false information on it.

Disabling the social media account of a political candidate is an act of intent. Without exception, all of our pages have been taken down. This includes our party page www.facebook.com/nationalistca.

Facebook cannot claim to be “non-exclusionary” when it is prohibiting access to political candidates in the ongoing 45th Federal Election. What this social network is doing is prohibiting access to political candidates while disseminating misinformation about those same candidates in an attempt to influence our electoral processes.

This matter has been reported to Elections Canada (EC-000268152), but has received no relief:

Elections Canada is tasked with administering the Canada Elections Act. Such jurisdiction includes false statements on social media (Facebook) that a candidate has committed an offense under the Criminal Code of Canada.

Publishing false statement to affect election results
“No person or entity shall, with the intention of affecting the results of an election, make or publish, during the election period, a false statement that a candidate, a prospective candidate, the leader of a political party or a public figure associated with a political party has committed an offence under an Act of Parliament or a regulation made under such an Act — or under an Act of the legislature of a province or a regulation made under such an Act — or has been charged with or is under investigation for such an offence.”

– Section 91(1), Canada Elections Act

Facebook is being used to publish claims that I have been found guilty of harassing a “woman and her child” from July 29th, 2023. However, contrary to claims made, the child is question is not the complainant’s.

The woman remains at suspicion of abducting a child under the age of 14 years.

Abduction of person under age of 14
Every person who, not being the parent, guardian or person having the lawful care or charge of a person under the age of 14 years, unlawfully takes, entices away, conceals, detains, receives or harbours that person with intent to deprive a parent or guardian, or any other person who has the lawful care or charge of that person, of the possession of that person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years; or an offence punishable on summary conviction.

– Section 281, Criminal Code

The onus remains on the Crown to demonstrate that the woman has de jure possession of the child. This element of the Province of Saskatchewan’s prosecution has not been addressed.

The matter is currently on appeal with the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal and scheduled for a May 14th hearing.

On April 2nd, Michael Irvine of Estevan is using the Facebook social media platform to disseminate false statements about local political candidates. The same candidates whom the false statements are being made about are prohibited from accessing the social media network in order to respond.

On a balance of probabilities, this would affect election results and warrants an investigation on behalf of Elections Canada.

Elections Canada is obligated to investigate a suspected breach of section 91(1) of the Canada Elections Act.

Categories
Policy

Québec Independence

I am not a Western Separatist. However, I do believe Canada would benefit by divorcing Québec (s. 91(26) British North America Act, 1867). I am also willing to bet most Québecois would prefer to be independent of Ottawa …

It must be admitted that attempting to occupy two competing positions (languages) at the same time is awkward and difficult. It creates a cultural impasse and stymies social progress because nationality is defined linguistically.

Official bilingualism is another ill-conceived policy of the Trudeau administration (Pierre administered the Official Languages Act in 1969 making Canada officially bilingual). Since then, our country has been 50% as efficient.

It would be wrong to continue trying to fit Francophone Québec within an Anglophone Canada because it creates a conflict of interest at the national level that permeates everything from education to law courts. Requiring every government document and sign to be printed/pronounced in both languages is a competitive disadvantage and a waste of taxpayer resources.

Canada would be better off unilingual (English only). In the long-run, Canada will be either French or English – but not both. This has been a development in the making for a considerable time now. Therefore, we ought to accelerate this process by endorsing only one of these languages while granting the other independence.

This grant of sovereignty would be conditional on maintaining a geographic trade corridor between the Maritime provinces and the rest of Canada.

This is not an easy topic to address because it would fundamentally change the structure of our confederation. Canada would never be the same. However, it would be in the best interests of our nation to do so. It would also release a considerable amount of political tension caused by our constitution’s attempt to fuse divergent nationalities into a single country.

Under this arrangement, Québec would be its own sovereign country within the British Commonwealth in accordance with Article 4 of the Treaty of Paris (February 10th, 1763).

Subject to the will of God, Québec is now independent of Canada:

“What God has joined together, let no man separate.”

– the Gospel according to Mark 10:9

Solemnly declared,

Travis Mitchell Patron
Independent Candidate for Parliament (45th Federal Election)
www.travispatron.ca

Canadian Nationalist Party
Since 1933
www.nationalist.ca

Categories
Policy

Memoriam Eorum Retinebimus

The Royal Canadian Legion is a public house subject to the right of candidates running in the ongoing 45th Federal Election to make reasonable use of the premises in order to promote Canadian nationalism:

Right of Candidates to Campaign in Public Places

No person who is in control of a building, any part of which is open without charge to members of the public, whether on a continuous, periodic or occasional basis – including any commercial, business, cultural, historic, educational, religious, governmental, entertainment or recreational place – may prevent a candidate from campaigning in that part when it is open without charge to members of the public.

– Section 81.1(1), Canada Elections Act

The purpose of the Royal Canadian Legion is to promote the ideology of Canadian nationalism.

RCL Branch #293 in Redvers is no exception to this rule. When the writ is in force, election candidates are entitled to make reasonable use of the space.

Provincial Public Works and Property to be Property of Canada
“Custom Houses, Post Offices, and all other public buildings, except such as the Government of Canada sees appropriate for the use of the provincial legislatures and governments.”

– Third Schedule(8), British North America Act (1867)

The Canada Elections Act sets out the rights of candidates and their representatives to canvass and campaign in public places.

A person gains the rights of a candidate to canvass and campaign in certain locations under section 81 and 81.1 when their nomination is confirmed by the local returning officer.

After election day (April 28th), the rights pursuant the Canada Elections Act empowering candidates to the use of public places for campaigning expires. This is not to say that a political entity loses the right to use public property for campaign purposes, only that the provisions contained in the Canada Elections Act cease to apply after April 28th.

A person who claims to be in control of a public building must identify themselves if they are invoking an exception to deny candidates and their representatives the right to campaign there.

A wide variety of locations that are open free of charge to the public, even if privately owned, qualify as public places.

When deciding whether to invoke an exception to the right of access for canvassing or campaigning, the person in control of the premises should interpret the candidate’s right broadly in light of the democratic principles at stake and must treat all candidates equitably.

The person in control of a premises may be committing an offense if their decision to deny access is not based on an applicable exception.

Every person in control of premises who refuses to give access to a building open to the public when an exception does not apply is guilty of an offense.

Election Offenses requiring intent — summary conviction

Every person who contravenes subsection 81.1(1) (refusal to give access to place open to the public) is guilty of an offense.

– Section 486(2), Canada Elections Act

As it now stands, there exists no reason to exclude myself or members of the Canadian Nationalist Party from making use of Redvers Legion Branch #293 for electoral purposes. Neither does there exist reason to exclude us from any branch of the Royal Canadian Legion.

The reason many of these Legion branches are on the brink of insolvency is because they are managed by people who do not represent the values held dear by Canadians.

For the sake of our national heritage, it may be time for a changing of the guard at the Royal Canadian Legion …