As Canadians, we live in a society that is defined as being free and democratic. The Government of Canada works extensively in order to ensure that the country’s laws are regulated and maintained and eventually followed by society. These rules and regulations arrive from the decisions made by the court systems and the government. Politicians are elected by us, the citizens, in order to represent our views on the regulation of certain laws but also assist in taking care of society and the economy by influencing public policies and making critical decisions. Living in a democratic country, these elected officials are expected by society to be honourable and fair when it comes to making decisions that are in the best interests of the
…show more content…
The significance of this factor is that it states that when the law does not allow an appeal for a decision, you must be given a full opportunity to be heard and to provide all the evidence possible. Courts usually want to get things done right the first time and worry about it less afterwards. However, this factor goes against procedural fairness in that in an event of an appeal, new evidence is usually discarded or not permitted. When looking at the McGuinty case again, this factor can be seen through the Premier’s actions. He was dishonest, unethical, unfair and secretive in his plan for putting a stop to minimum wage increases. There was no interest put towards the public and their say in the matter of employment and wages. As discussed in our administrative law modules, it is very important that both parties be heard and represented before a final decision is brought forth. This factor was clearly lacking in McGuinty’s intentions.
The third factor to be considered when determining how procedural fairness must be applied concerns the importance of the decision to the lives of those affected. The more significant the decision, the more procedural fairness is taken into consideration. This factor is of major concern due to the fact that importance can be defined differently by every single individual. What is important to one person may not necessarily be important to another. With McGuinty’s decision of