[Lemmy]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The laws of the Crown trump any little municipal bylaw. The Canada Post Act trumps Hamilton's municipal bylaws with respect to the building code.

That's factually incorrect. The constitution divides powers. Federal law doesn't trump municipal law. Municipal law (well, as a branch of provincial law) trumps federal law in areas where the province has been given that authority constitutionally. Provinces cannot print money or legalize pot because criminal law is federal. The federal government can't impose forestry regulations because natural resources are provincial authority. The federal government is acting ultra vires its authority if it does things that fall under provincial authority. Building/construction and urban planning have always been municipalities' domain.

So, no, the Canada Post Corporation Act absolutely does not trump Hamilton's bylaws. This case is an example of that grey area where both levels of government make a defensible claim to authority. Now we have to wait for the courts to decide who has the legal authority. My guess is Hamilton will win. Common sense says the municipality should have to be consulted. Maybe not.

[DrCaleb]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Who said it want's an issue on the other half of Hamilton? The Crown must still abide by the law, and the rights of Municipalities are set in law.

It wasn't an issue. That's why you didn't hear about it. 2/3 of Canada already get their mail this way already. NIMBY'ism.

You have a very hard time understanding the law or you continue to ignore what you've been told.

You're welcome to have your opinion on the subject, but that doesn't mean it's right.

The judge presiding agrees with me:

$1:

"This is not a political exercise," said Justice Alan Whitten.

"This is not an exercise [for the city] to impose their political will about whether there is door-to-door delivery."

He said the case is focused on a much narrower slice of jurisdiction: Who has the right to control where mailboxes for carrying out federally mandated postal delivery should go?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/ ... -1.3088535

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The laws of the Crown trump any little municipal bylaw. The Canada Post Act trumps Hamilton's municipal bylaws with respect to the building code.

The Crown cannot override the Constitution. The Canada Post Act does not supersede Section 92(8) of the Constitution.

[OnTheIce]

Lemmy Lemmy:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The laws of the Crown trump any little municipal bylaw. The Canada Post Act trumps Hamilton's municipal bylaws with respect to the building code.

That's factually incorrect. The constitution divides powers. Federal law doesn't trump municipal law. Municipal law (well, as a branch of provincial law) trumps federal law in areas where the province has been given that authority constitutionally. Provinces cannot print money or legalize pot because criminal law is federal. The federal government can't impose forestry regulations because natural resources are provincial authority. The federal government is acting ultra vires its authority if it does things that fall under provincial authority. Building/construction and urban planning have always been municipalities' domain.

So, no, the Canada Post Corporation Act absolutely does not trump Hamilton's bylaws. This case is an example of that grey area where both levels of government make a defensible claim to authority. Now we have to wait for the courts to decide who has the legal authority. My guess is Hamilton will win. Common sense says the municipality should have to be consulted. Maybe not.

I'll refer to the CP lawyers on this.

[Lemmy]

Refer or defer? We'll all, including the CP lawyers, defer to the court.

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The Crown cannot override the Constitution.

True, but they can just ignore it.

[OnTheIce]

An update:

$1:

The judge noted that Canada Post has said “repeatedly” they’re willing to consult with the city on the location of the mailboxes.

But the city’s lawyer admitted it hasn’t reviewed the hundreds of locations submitted by Canada Post and doesn’t know whether they meet the standards laid out in the bylaw.

So it appears Canada Post has consulted the City but the City hasn't reviewed any of the locations.

$1:

The judge questioned whether city council just didn’t like the idea of cancelling door-to-door delivery.

Their lawyer denied it saying the city simply wants to regulate where the boxes can go to make sure they don’t conflict with existing infrastructure and are placed in safe locations.

http://www.chch.com/canada-post-and-ham ... al-battle/

[OnTheIce]

$1:

A judge grilled the attorney representing the city of Hamilton in court Wednesday, asking why, if it wanted some input on the placement of mailboxes, it didn't just give that input to Canada Post when the postal service asked for it last fall.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/ ... -1.3089947

[OnTheIce]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The Crown cannot override the Constitution. The Canada Post Act does not supersede Section 92(8) of the Constitution.

The City of Hamilton disagrees with you:

$1:

Hidalgo said the city acknowledges it doesn't have the right to choose the mailbox locations, but "is entitled to a supportive role."

[2Cdo]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

$1:

A judge grilled the attorney representing the city of Hamilton in court Wednesday, asking why, if it wanted some input on the placement of mailboxes, it didn't just give that input to Canada Post when the postal service asked for it last fall.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/ ... -1.3089947

An still people want to claim it isn't for political reasons.

Months and months later, and hundreds of locations submitted and they haven't even looked at the requests.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

What a bunch of whiney, lazy shits at CP. The USPS STILL delivers mail 6 days a week and in smaller communities will actually pick up your outgoing mail. And I don't mean from the mail boxes at the end of the driveway with the little flag to indicate you have outgoing mail. I mean they pick up outgoing mail from your mailbox that's on the outside wall next to your front door.

I'm also curious as to how this is a money saving thing. The superboxes didn't just materialize out of nowhere so there's certainly a cost associated with them. They're certainly not going to reduce how much mail letter carriers have to deliver either.

It just sounds like a bunch of lazy union turds not wanting to do their jobs properly anymore, despite wanting the job in the first damn place.

[OnTheIce]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

I'm also curious as to how this is a money saving thing. The superboxes didn't just materialize out of nowhere so there's certainly a cost associated with them. They're certainly not going to reduce how much mail letter carriers have to deliver either.

It just sounds like a bunch of lazy union turds not wanting to do their jobs properly anymore, despite wanting the job in the first damn place.

Superboxes have a 1 time cost.

Superboxes replace letter carriers. When you have 1 letter carrier than can do the work of 10, it makes financial sense.

[DrCaleb]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The Crown cannot override the Constitution. The Canada Post Act does not supersede Section 92(8) of the Constitution.

The City of Hamilton disagrees with you:

$1:

Hidalgo said the city acknowledges it doesn't have the right to choose the mailbox locations, but "is entitled to a supportive role."

Yes, they do.

$1:

The city argued Tuesday it owns the roads and is responsible for the oversight of equipment installed on them. The city can use its existing bylaws to review each location to help ensure that mailboxes aren't installed too close to fire hydrants or blocking driveways, Hidalgo said.

Interesting you'd skip that bit. Or this one:

$1:

"Outside the bylaw, there's nothing to stop the city from consulting with Canada Post, correct?" Whitten asked.

"No," Hidalgo said, "but Canada Post indicated yesterday that ship has pretty much sailed."

[Brenda]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

$1:

A judge grilled the attorney representing the city of Hamilton in court Wednesday, asking why, if it wanted some input on the placement of mailboxes, it didn't just give that input to Canada Post when the postal service asked for it last fall.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/ ... -1.3089947

An still people want to claim it isn't for political reasons.

Months and months later, and hundreds of locations submitted and they haven't even looked at the requests.

I was wondering how CP had not consulted the city, because they usually do go by the rules. They did.

I can only agree with CP to take it to court when the city refuses to get back to them in a timely manner.

[OnTheIce]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The Crown cannot override the Constitution. The Canada Post Act does not supersede Section 92(8) of the Constitution.

The City of Hamilton disagrees with you:

$1:

Hidalgo said the city acknowledges it doesn't have the right to choose the mailbox locations, but "is entitled to a supportive role."

Yes, they do.

$1:

The city argued Tuesday it owns the roads and is responsible for the oversight of equipment installed on them. The city can use its existing bylaws to review each location to help ensure that mailboxes aren't installed too close to fire hydrants or blocking driveways, Hidalgo said.

Interesting you'd skip that bit. Or this one:

$1:

"Outside the bylaw, there's nothing to stop the city from consulting with Canada Post, correct?" Whitten asked.

"No," Hidalgo said, "but Canada Post indicated yesterday that ship has pretty much sailed."

Why would I gloss over sections that support my point?

[DrCaleb]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The City of Hamilton disagrees with you:

Yes, they do.

$1:

The city argued Tuesday it owns the roads and is responsible for the oversight of equipment installed on them. The city can use its existing bylaws to review each location to help ensure that mailboxes aren't installed too close to fire hydrants or blocking driveways, Hidalgo said.

Interesting you'd skip that bit. Or this one:

$1:

"Outside the bylaw, there's nothing to stop the city from consulting with Canada Post, correct?" Whitten asked.

"No," Hidalgo said, "but Canada Post indicated yesterday that ship has pretty much sailed."

Why would I gloss over sections that support my point?

I don't know, in order to make an argument where none exists?