Social Contracts In Canada Essay

Canada was founded in 1867, laws have existed in our society. At the time, the vast majority of didn’t exist like how they today, and were rules known as what political philosopher Thomas Hobbes referred to as “Social Contracts”. Social Contracts can best be described as an acted-upon agreement among a society of individuals which is conceived with a goal of mutual benefit and regulation of ill-behavior. Social Contracts were never cut-in-stone rules, and were never structurally implemented in Canadas legal system at the time of her foundation. Many social contracts in Canadas history have evolved into laws today, and vice-versa. For example there were many actions heavily frowned upon by society in the early 1900s, however there was no ambiguous

punishment through Canadas court system at the time. Today, a lot of these actions would not only be frowned up, but they could possibly send you to prison by federal consequence (I.E. breaking the law lol). This is proof that through time & progress, we have much more laws in place now than we had back then, and even laws that still exist from the dawn of the century have become much more thorough and well-defined. As society evolves and the paradigm shifts, as do the laws with it.

Though most people born in our legal system don’t take much notice, law affects everything that occurs in our day-to-day lives.

From work to at home, every person’s actions are influenced by law. If you walk past a storefront and come across a television you’d like to have, what stops you from just smashing the window and grabbing it in the modern day? Section 322 of the Canadian criminal code; a law. Even some of the most morally corrupt citizens follow the law in their daily lives because they understand the consequences that coincide with not doing so. An example of how law shapes our society would be the differences in workplaces over the past 100

years.

At the beginning of the industrial revolution, workplaces were often dangerous, resulting in many workplace injuries due to workers not being provided proper safety equipment by their employers. There were a number of changes that started occurring starting in 1914 with the introduction of the Workmans Compensation Act. Prior from this, the only way for workers to receive compensation for accidents was to sue their employers but as lawsuits increased, employers turned to the government seeking an insurance plan for industrial accidents. With this act, a trade-off was introduced where workers gave up their right to sue in exchange for compensation. This quickly transformed into the worker taking the government leeway when in 1919 the government Ontario officially introduced first-of-its-kind labor legislation (Labor Ministry Ontario). This was essentially forced into place under the pressure of the newly-formed labor unions taking shape at the time.

Prior to 1919, unionization was highly illegal and resulted in harsh punishments both legally, and socially. However around the time when soldiers were returning from WW1 to find high rates of unemployment they were very unhappy with the state of the economy and could no longer afford to feed their families. The social tides started turning very quickly, and a prime example of society influencing the law was created. Veterans from the war started voicing their displeasure with the treatment of workers, and the first steps to changing labor laws were set in motion after ‘Bloody Sunday’ when plenty of workers unionized (both public & private sector) and were injured by RCMP during a strike, and the public revolted immediately against the government.

The influence of law in our country is of bilateral rule. As much as law influences society, society influences law even greater. Our laws wouldn’t exist without social contracts and a society congruent upon which actions negatively impact our community and nation at large. Many past laws have been amended such as laws outlawing gay marriage when bill c-38 came to pass in 2005, legalizing the marriage of homosexuals. Laws have been overturned massively as societies opinion has changed on such matters over time. Many things that were previously considered socially acceptable are now becoming outright illegal as our community has deemed these actions deplorable. The previously mentioned workplace laws only came to fruition because the workforce collective unionized and demanded the laws change to better suit their needs, and create better environments in their day to day lives. This is also an example of how our laws in Canada are often a democratic process, influenced by the individual’s needs.

The very first state of a law begins with the social contract. The matjority of our society comes to an agreement that a certain action or issue is reprehensible. This can happen for many issues including public safety, human rights conflicts, and abuses of power. What will often happen is the public will voice their concern through a platitude of measures such as politicians or social forums. What happens from here depends on the type of law intended to be passed. There are municipal laws, provincial laws, and federal laws. Municipal laws are centered around the issues of an individual city, and only apply to the city at hand. An example of a by-law would be Hamilton’s own 01-218 implemented in 2011 which prevents vehicles from parking on a street for more than 12 hours at a time. They are by far the most streamlined, and are sometimes referred By-Laws. Provincial laws tackle the issues of the province at hand and are often handled by the elected MP. Federal laws are the most important and apply to the entire country. An example of a federal law would be the Firearms Act of 1995 which placed further restrictions on Canadians ability to purchase a gun. On the federal level, when these social contracts gain notable traction in the public they get written into bills.

A bill goes through a number of stages, and perhaps changes before it becomes law.

Bills can either be created through the House of Commons or through the Senate, both of which are sections of parliament set to serve the Canadian people. The bill goes through what’s called the first reading, which takes place in the chamber the bill is introduced. The bill is simply considered read after this point, with no debate taking place. From here, the bill goes through the second reading where parliamentarians debate the precepts of the bill. If the chamber votes for the bill and it passes, it moves on to the committee stage. The committee members hold special hearings, and seek out advocacy from experts inside and outside of government. The committee can place amendments to the bill when it gives it back to the chamber. Here, then what’s called a third reading occurs where the bill gets debated again based on the changes that may have occurred from the committee. If it passes the third reading, it then goes to the other chamber, where the same process occurs. Once both chambers (Senate & House Of Commons) have passed the bill in the exact same structure and wording, it gets passed to the Governor General for final approval, and then becomes

law.

Much like the bill creation process, there are many debates in our contemporary society regarding not only the laws themselves, but the efficiency of our law-making process. These standpoints vary on a scale of libertarian, to authoritarian. The authoritarian side believes that humanity is better off with more laws to regulate/mold society, and often a larger government to enforce them. A historical example of an Authoritarian would be Adolf Hitler because of the countless policies he implemented like Nuremburg laws of 1935 that in turn allowed him to forcefully remove the human rights of certain individuals for the “greater good”. The libertarian perspective however, views most laws as woefully unnecessary and burdening upon the average citizen. An example of a Libertarian would be Angela Merkel who opened the borders of Germany in 2015 for thousands of undocumented immigrants to come in for free and rape their women. Elected officials such a politicians, lawmakers, and bill-writers, all fall on the spectrum. This means that it’s often public opinion influencing the vigor of law emplacement at any given period, and why our legal code is such a dynamic system.

Having established an understanding in how societies wants/needs influence the laws in Canada, it’s important to also delve into legal diversity, and how Canadian laws can uphold the rights, and accommodate the needs of diverse individuals, and secular groups of our citizens. It’s no secret that Canada has a vast history of shortcomings in this area. A recent example of this being due in part to section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, wherein First Nations peoples were not provided with full access to human rights protection until the legislation was repealed in 2008. There have also been copious amounts of unfair trials due to the accused’s race, gender, and sexual preference. Our legal system has been arguably fine-tuned since the days of Jim Crow laws, but in the current year, Canada is not without flaws in her legal system. However much to our credit, Canada has surpassed many nations in the progress made to adjusting our legal processes, but our culture to boot, in order to correct the errors of our past and further protect the legal rights of our diverse community.

Law has, and always will affect every Canadian and world citizen so long as society exists. Whether it be through social contracts, defined human rights, or written laws, our communities would cease to function without law. In Canadas democratic system, we have a broad voice in shaping our laws, and the laws we abide by have much power in influencing the day to day lives of a Canadian. Our legal structure and bill-making process has historical significance to us as a nation, and has been tried-and-true as according to our nation, and our ancestors who pioneered our modern legal system. Our legal implications may have perhaps fluctuated over the years, but as have the laws themselves with every paradigm shift. And most importantly, though we are able to build and reflect upon Canadas ability to use its laws to uphold the rights of our diverse community, we can acknowledge that law serves a very important role in our contemporary society as well as our future generations to come.