Duration from onset of symptoms to radiological confirmation of pneumonia, days5 (3–9)5 (3–7)Duration from onset of symptoms to ICU admission, days9 (6–12)11 (7–14)Heart rate, beats per min89 (20)89 (15)Systolic blood pressure, mm Hg133 (20)140 (21)

Heart rate, respiratory rate, and mean arterial pressure did not differ between patients who received ICU care and patients who did not receive ICU care. These measures were recorded on day of hospital admission for all patients, then divided into those who were later admitted to the ICU or not.

Common complications among the 138 patients included shock (12 [8.7%]), ARDS (27 [19.6%]), arrhythmia (23 [16.7%]), and acute cardiac injury (10 [7.2%]). Patients who received care in the ICU were more likely to have one of these complications than non-ICU patients.

When Ace2 is transgenically overexpressed in mouse heart, cardiac defects are again observed, most notably a lethal ventricular arrhythmia, which is associated with disruption of gap junction formation [9Donoghue M et al.Heart block, ventricular tachycardia, and sudden death in ACE2 transgenic mice with downregulated connexins.J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol. 2003; 35: 1043-1053Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (142) Google Scholar]. The high incidence of sudden death in these mice correlated with the levels of Ace2 transgene expression. Surviving older mice showed a spontaneous downregulation of the transgene and restoration of normal cardiac function.

and respiratory dysfunction and hypoxaemia caused by COVID-19, resulting in damage to myocardial cells.

Nose and nasoethmoidal fractures should be assessed carefully to identify damage to the lacrimal drainage system or to the cribriform plate producing cerebrospinal fluid rhinorrhea.

The typical clinical course of an epidural hematoma is an initial loss of consciousness, a lucid interval, and recurrent loss of consciousness with an ipsilateral fixed and dilated pupil. While decompression of subdural hematomas may be delayed, epidural hematomas require evacuation within 70 minutes.

The goal of resuscitation and management in patients with head injuries is to avoid hypotension (SBP of <100 mmHg) and hypoxia (partial pressure of arterial oxygen of <60 or arterial oxygen saturation of <90%).

Automattic uses WordPress to power WordPress.com, and it contributes back code and time to the WordPress project. It is a symbiotic relationship. It isn’t accurate to say that WordPress is Automattic’s product, or that WordPress came from Automattic. Indeed, the opposite is true — Automattic came from WordPress, and Automattic (through WordPress.com) exists as part of the vast WordPress community and ecosystem.

To complicate things further, if you classify your social-sharing-plugins-usage as required functionality, and those need to set their own 3rd party cookies (as they themselves classify those as required), hello to 3rd party cookies being set by default and no way for users to opt-out (except by turning them off via browser, which means the whole thing is redundant, might as well just instruct users to disable third party cookies if they don't want to participate in social sharing crap?)

How do relevant ads help pay for content and services? Advertising is the engine that powers much of the content and services that consumers enjoy online. More relevant ads get more clicks, and advertisers pay more for these ads, allowing content and services providers to continue to operate without charging visitors to their sites.

pattern library with the specific goal of naming and shaming deceptive user interfaces

And this is where we can all see dark clouds forming: if Recaptcha is opt-in (as the GDPR requires) then all a spammer needs to do to bypass Recaptcha, is to not accept cookies, right?

Also note that the first two opt out tools are currently cookie-based and prevent Oracle from using, sharing, or selling your personal information for interest-based advertising on the browser on which they are installed. As a result, the opt out will only function if your browser is set to accept third-party cookies and may not function where cookies are sometimes automatically disabled or removed (e.g., certain mobile devices and operating systems). If you delete cookies, change your browser settings, switch browsers or computers, or use another operating system, you will need to opt out again. Oracle does not use persistent, unique identifiers to revive a previously opted-out profile or deleted cookie.

Note that the scope of personal data is truly broad, which makes processing complex and tricky. So, even though, for instance, you employ anonymization in Google Analytics to get rid of all information that falls under this category, you’re still in a catch-22 situation. This is because GA stores a visitor online identifier in a cookie, and under the GDPR that file constitutes a piece of personal data. That means you still need to obtain consent from visitors to process their data.

The Digital Edge How Black and Latino Youth Navigate Digital Inequality

5. Bosiger YJ, McCormick M. Temporal links in daily activity patterns between coral reef predators and their prey. PLoS One 2014; 9:e111723. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111723 PMID: 25354096

7. Sims DW, Wearmouth VJ, Southall EJ, Hill JM, Moore P, Rawlinson K, et al. Hunt warm, rest cool: bioenergetic strategy underlying diel vertical migration of a benthic shark. J Anim Ecol 2006; 75:176–190. PMID: 16903055

hook and line

US National Fish and Wildlife Refuge

We used bio-logging to quantify the daily activity cycles

Hence, predator behaviour may aim to maximize foraging success based on both prey behaviour and the physiological processes that can influence behaviour of prey (i.e. metabolic rates).

(http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/MoonFraction.php)

therefore never truly rest

* Information-Processing Analysis : about the mental operations used by a person who has learned a complex skills

Dick and Carey Model

Global industrial robot sales

Fourth-party logistics (4PL) market size from 2018 to 2027

no difference

Holmberg, distance education ischaracterized by the following statements:

Holmberg's (1989) theory of distance education, what he calls "guid-ed didactic conversation," falls into the general category ofcommunication theory. Holmberg noted that his theory had explanatoryvalue in relating teaching effectiveness to the impact of feelings ofbelonging and cooperation as well as to the actual exchange of ques-tions, answers, and arguments in mediated communication

Theory of Interaction and Communication

That's the problem with therapy: The people who really need help are often the onesnot trusting others (as a result of bad experiences)not recognizing they have a problem in the first placebeing too scared to open up (or leave the house)being too exhausted to goless likely to be able to afford it. (That's only an issue in countries without a proper health care system.)

One thing well. rbenv is concerned solely with switching Ruby versions. It's simple and predictable.

And since it’s just a client, you can always use the todo.txt format text file created by it in the very beginning with any other client. Give it a try.

(40) Next I inquired, why the Hebrews were called God's chosen people, and discovering that it was only because God had chosen for them a certain strip of territory, where they might live peaceably and at ease, I learnt that the Law revealed by God to Moses was merely the law of the individual Hebrew state, therefore that it was binding on none but Hebrews, and not even on Hebrews after the downfall of their nation.

Idee uniformi nate appo intieri popoli tra essoloro non conosciuti,debbon’avere un motivo comune di vero.

147 The nature of things is nothing but their coming into being (nasci- mento) at certain times and in certain fashions. Whenever the time and fashion is thus and so, such and not otherwise are the things that come into being.

144 Uniform ideas originating among entire peoples unknown to each other must have a common ground of truth.

Types of questions and where to ask: How do I? -- ask on Server Fault (tell them what tags to use -- your product tag at minimum) I got this error, why? -- ask on Server Fault I got this error and I'm sure it's a bug -- report it on your own site I have an idea/request -- report it on your own site Why do you? -- ask in your own community (support forum, etc) When will you? -- ask in your own community

Basically, the standard said something, interpreters ignored it because the standard seemed illogical, but now interpreters like Bash have really confusing semantics, and no-one wants to fix it.

I was like the Arabian who had been buried with the dead

Leigh Hunt’s “Rimini.”

It doesn't use a database (unlike Keepass) and thus doesn't open all passwords at once. Just one at a time. Since it's just a directory of encrypted files, you can access your passwords with any PGP-compatible tool.

Using find and cpio is a more unix-y approach in that you let find do the file selection with all the power that it has, and let cpio do the archiving. It is worth learning this simple use of cpio, as you find it easy to solve problems you bang your ahead against when trying tar.

Case histories are presented showing rapid recovery (less than 7 days) from major depression using 125-300 mg of magnesium (as glycinate and taurinate) with each meal and at bedtime. Magnesium was found usually effective for treatment of depression in general use.

By default, fetch() doesn’t provide a way to intercept requests, but it’s not hard to come up with a workaround. You can overwrite the global fetch method and define your own interceptor, like this

As Onivim 2 completely handles the rendering layer, this Vim-modelled-as-a-pure-function could focus on just buffer manipulation.

It is responsible for

It makes sense that the incoherent render would not be committed to browser and that it would not have any consequences most of the time. But that means that you render logic must be ready to manage incoherency between props and states without crashing. E.g. a list of resource ids in props that doesn't match a list of http requests from a previous id list in the state could lead to weird situations. This is a worry that didn't exist in class components.

in Figure 1A,B: (I) The NP reaches the membrane surface via diffusion. (II) The NP diffuses over the water–membrane interface

do something specific and do it well

Epiphany aims to present the simplest interface possible for a browser. Simple does not necessarily mean less-powerful. The commonly-used browsers of today are too big, buggy, and bloated. Epiphany is a small browser designed for the web: not for mail, newsgroups, file management, instant messaging, or coffeemaking. The UNIX philosophy is to design small tools that do one thing and do it well.

To optimize learners' experience and the efficacy of learning outcomes, instructors need to consider how technology can offer approaches better suited to adult learning.

Teaching and learning methods: opreparing for teaching ofacilitating the integration of knowledge, skills and attitudes oteaching and learning in groups ofacilitating learning and setting ground rules oexplaining ogroup dynamics omanaging the group olectures osmall group teaching methods and discussion techniques oseminars and tutorials ocomputer based teaching and learning – information technology and the World Wide Web ointroducing problem based learning ocase based learning and clinical scenarios

Employers can engage in the creation and classroom integration of tech tools

The main objectives of this article are to present the theoretical evidence for the design and delivery of instructional materials and to provide a practical framework for implementing those theories in the classroom and laboratory.

A description field may include HTML elements or Markdown, with special characters escaped or encoded.

) Blockchain MemoryWe let LL be the blockchain mem-ory space, represented as the hastable L:{0,1}256→{0,1}NL:\{0,1\}^{256}\rightarrow \{0, 1\}^{N}, where N≫N \gg 256 and can store sufficiently-large documents. We assume this memory to be tamperproof under the same adversarial model used in Bitcoin and other blockchains. To intuitively explain why such a trusted data-store can be implemented on any blockchain (including Bitcoin), consider the following simplified, albeit inefficient, implementation: A blockchain is a sequence of timestamped transactions, where each transaction includes a variable number of output addresses (each address is a 160-bit number). LL could then be implemented as follows - the first two outputs in a transaction encode the 256-bit memory address pointer, as well as some auxiliary meta-data. The rest of the outputs construct the serialized document. When looking up L[k]L[k], only the most recent transaction is returned, which allows update and delete operations in addition to inserts.

A former union boss jailed over receiving a coal exploration licence from his friend, former NSW Labor minister Ian Macdonald, was an "entrepreneur" who found a "willing buyer" in the disgraced politician, a court has heard.

Liberal and Conservative Representations of the Good Society: A (Social) Structural Topic Modeling Approach

Based on the values of the partition function as well as the difference in time scale between the leakage process and the entry process (seconds or minutes vs nanoseconds), we assume that a steady-state condition is rapidly reached. Therefore, by comparing eq 5 with eq 4, we find that

“Under 'zero tolerance' — which is the reason they are separating families in the first place

Chippewas

t's possible to lower an individual's hedonic set-point by inflicting prolonged uncontrolled stress;

c is a constant that depends on

the GQD concentration inside the vesicle and the bilayer

2 to 8

biolabeling

wound disinfection

cancer therapy

like drug delivery

KD is estimated by using the approach outlined in ref

Figure 9. Measured GQD leakage from different lipid vesicles. (A) Experimental images of photoluminescence change over a 1 h period. Images were taken every 15 min. White scale bar is 50 μm. (B) Photoluminescence intensity over a 1 h period for GQD-encapsulated vesicles with different lipid compositions is indicated. (C) Comparison of the model’s predictions to the permeability measured from experiment (error bars correspond to one standard deviation).

KD of the NP in water/lipid as

Specifically, a buckminsterfullerene, a curved OH-terminated graphene quantum dot (GQD), and GQD functionalized with two cysteine groups (cys-GQD) were used.(40) This selection covers NPs of similar size but different shape and hydrophilicity

ller nanoparticles can instead cross the membrane by passive transport, that is, by displacing, sometimes irreversibly, the lipids or by diffusing in the hydrophobic region of the membrane and then on the other side

For particles with the smallest dimension larger than the membrane thickness, approximately above 10–15 nm, the permeation is generally controlled by membrane deformation(23) and endocytosis.(24)

an effective barrier. Nonetheless,

ensing of cellular behavior.(6−10)

led release,(3,5)

such as drug delivery,(2−4)

are especially frustrating in biomedicine. Indeed, recently, there has been a blooming of applications

However, this is not the case for most macromolecules, such as proteins or nanoparticles (NPs), whose hydrophilicity and large size hamper direct diffusion through the membrane lipid bilayer.(1)

primary school classroom

But while the gamification of the classroom through educational software is clearly less physically violent than corporal punishment,

even hope to record and understand how students think and feel.

new digital tools

This shows both the short and long-term effect that intrusion into our private lives can have on perfectly legal activities.

Another way to promote surveillance integrity would be to do something analogous to the way media businesses use crowdsourcing to rate everything from doctors to taxi drivers. Along these lines we propose creating a third-party validation of surveillance recordings.

After the shooting, the police seized the four recordings of the event and reported that all were blank, even though transit officials had already viewed the shooting.

Hollow-point bullets are used by law enforcement but illegal in war.

body worn cameras.

r, individual police

Though the web has evolved, its methods for training future web developers have not. Sure, the resources are more attractive now. They’re better written and more easily findable. But they continue to be geared toward a very narrow kind of person. They’re generally online, self-guided, impersonal, and novice-unfriendly.

Section 2 then begins the real ball game, namely everyone has the following fundamental freedom. The one difficulty we had, as a committee, is with Section 2(b). What do we do with freedom of thought when you have got legislation dealing with have propaganda? How far is it possible to retain such articles as Section 281(1) of the Criminal Code and Section 281(2)? Moreover, you will see we have quoted from Article 20 of the United National Covenant of Civil and Political Rights where propaganda of this kind is regarded as inconsistent with freedom of speech. [Page 87] So we raised the question which seemed to me to be necessary to raise with you, that caution must be exercised, we hope, by the courts in due course, or by you, as draftsmen on how far you are prepared to push the concept of free speech consistent with our experience of hate propaganda. One suggestion we make here-and I do not wish to do anything more than to drop it as a hint, but you may want to have some language that some of the modern constitutions have, which state very starkly and flatly that the advocacy of genocide or group libel is forbidden. But I had the honour to be the chairman of the special committee on hate propaganda in 1965. At that time we came to the flat conclusion that the advocacy of group hatred and genocide was totally inconsistent with the democratic process and no democratic state could tolerate it. Now, whether you want to put that flatly in a constitution is for you to consider; but I think it is for us to bring it to your attention, because it is of importance.

This Committee did not have a parochial view; this Committee does not pretend that the human rights question belongs to any sector of the Canadian people. It belongs to them all. But, peculiarly enough, there are two or three areas where the Jewish interest happens to be special, and in some cases very sensitive. One is the problem of war criminals, and how that relates to certain protections offered by a charter of rights in the criminal law field. Another is the problem of free speech, and how far that affects such things as hate propaganda

We want to make it very clear, first of all, that in principle we support the entrenchment of a bill of rights in the constitution. We want to see the constitution patriated to Canada and we want to see in that constitution an entrenched bill of rights. However, we do have some concerns. We are not altogether happy with all of the bill of rights. in that connection we are, I suppose, in somewhat the same situation as a number of other groups who have appeared before you. For example, we feel that some of the statements are too vague. Having been a part of the preparation of the brief of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, I can say that I, personally, share some of the concerns that they have in terms of the vagueness of some of the language, and I speak particularly of such words as “fundamental freedoms”, and those kinds of things in which we talk about “natural rights”, et cetera. We would like to see some of these things spelled out. On the question, for example, of freedom of speech, we believe very strongly in freedom of speech, while at the same time, of course, being against censorship. But we would like to see freedom of speech limited only in certain specific ways. In the brief we have indicated, for example, that to a large extent we believe in the doctrine of clear and present danger. We think that freedom of speech should be curtailed where the danger is clear. For example, we have no right to go into a crowded theatre and shout “Fire!” resulting in people being trampled to death as a result of fleeing from a fire which is nonexistent and where there is no danger at all. In a situation like that, obviously, we do not have absolute freedom. But we think this needs to be spelled out a lot more clearly than it is today.

I would like to ask you if you have considered, Ms. Hardy, the notion of freedom of the press as an individual right or collective right? Ms. Hardy: It could be considered both because if you speak of freedom of the press for a newspaper, it includes the whole role of a newspaper in a community as well as the role of an individual reporter or columnist, so that I really feel that there would be no point in having freedom of the press for an individual if you did not have it for the publication for which the individual happened to be working, either perhaps in the electronic media or in the print media. So I would prefer to have it refer to both an individual and collective group. Senator Lapointe: Do you think that editors of papers or radio stations would have to come here also to express their opinion on freedom of the press? Ms. Hardy: We would include them as responsible leaders, presumably in the community, and the value of having responsible leadership is very noticeable now that the Royal Commission on Newspapers is sitting and I think that you have to have the leadership in order to develop followers and principles.

Research from Chelsea and Westminster Hospital has found that placing art in the NHS trust has helped to improve patient wellbeing, decrease hospital stays and reduce anxiety, depression and pain.

I want to refer you to Section 2 of the resolution which is a Section on fundamental freedoms. It says: Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion, (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion expression, including freedom of the press and other media of information What I want to ask you is, how do you think the word “everyone” would be interpreted as it pertains to everyone has the following freedoms, the freedom of the press, freedom of other media of information. I want to take you back in this country about four of five years when the government across the way introduced legislation, which I supported, concerning Time magazine and Reader’s Digest, to try and Canadianize the magazine industry in this country. I am wondering whether or not if we were to enshrine Section 2 in the constitution as written, Time magazine or Reader’s Digest could have gone to the courts and said: “We have a consitutional right in this country of freedom of expression and freedom of the press and freedom of information, freedom of the media; therefore, the government of Canada [Page 12] and the Parliament of Canada do not have the right to legislate restrictively against our two organizations.” Could it be interpreted in that way? Ms. Crandall: Mr. Nystrom, I think that is the kind of question which an expert should be asked to answer. This is what we are saying now, We have not had an opportunity to look at all sides of these questions to give you any kind of an answer. Again, I am not trying to be difficult. But that is one of the questions which we would like to ask someone who is knowledgeable. Mr. Nystrom: I appreciate the answer. The reason why I ask the question is that the words “everyone” and “citizens of Canada” are used throughout the resolution. I am not a lawyer myself, but it would seem to imply that these could be given a fairly wide interpretation, and I am concerned that we might have in a constitution something that is restrictive where we could not increase Canadian content. Let me ask you the same question again about the electronic media. There is growing concern that we Canadianize radio, television—and the CRTC is concerned about this, about television programs coming in from the United States. There is talk now about a second CBC network in this country. Again, I want to ask you a similar question pertaining to the electronic media. If everybody has the freedom of expression and freedom of the press and other media of information, in your opinion, or perhaps in the opinion of your colleague, do you think we would be able to do this as a Parliament, where the constitution says we are denying a fundamental right to everyone, perhaps NBC, New York, or ABC somewhere in the United States? Ms. Hardy: I think, Mr. Nystrom, that it is very important. I have served abroad for Canada in the Department of External Affairs, in the public affairs field, and I feel that it is very important that we develop a Canadian culture, that we develop an interest in things Canadian and a pride, and I grant that there are very good programs produced by the electronic media of other countries but I think we should be proud of our own heritage and be proud of what we can do. I have just been at a briefing on plans for CBC 2, Tele Deux, and I am very pleased that this is what may be coming along shortly and I would hope that we would not refuse all foreign media offers to assist us in our cultural development, but I think we should certainly give ourselves the chance to be first in the field and to welcome the opportunity and the pride in our own country and in what we can develop ourselves. This is a continuing subject of interest financially as well as culturally, naturally, and I would hope that the media club, which now covers the electronic media representatives as well as the press, would be in the forefront of assisting in developments if possible. Thank you. [Page 13] Mr. Nystrom: I wonder if you could possibly, if you have time to do a written brief to the Committee, to try and seek some advice on those questions, because I agree fully with you that we have to develop a Canadian culture and of course we need some input from other countries around the world because we are part of the global village, we have to have a Canadian identity and it is very important, and I would be very concerned if the way Section 2 is written that perhaps we could be denied through our constitution the right to develop fully the Canadian culture and pehaps you could look at that. I also wanted to ask your interpretation of a couple of other words in Section 2. I wanted to ask you what you think the interpretation in your opinion would be of other media of information. We have singled out here freedom of belief, opinion, expression, including the freedom of the press. I know what the press is, I think, but what would be the interpretation legally, in your opinion, of other media of information, what would that include? Ms. Hardy: I would expect that that would include the electronic journalism. The press is usually referred to as print media. Media is a very broad term that has had to be used because you cannot just refer to the press now because it covers a number of other representatives who inform, through one source or another, and I think the electronic media has an important place now in our culture because communications in this country is an aspect of helping unify the country, I think, by letting us get to know each other, not only through print but through electronic means.

Thank you, Mr. Joint Chairman, for giving the Media Club the opportunity to before this Special Joint Committee. As you will see from our submission, Media Club is concerned with the profession, therefore concern of members is with the proposed entrenchment in a charter of rights and freedoms of a new Canadian constitution, freedom of the press.

Mr. Hawkes: There is another conundrum inside your brief, and in contrast to the testimony we had the other day, They wanted to protect the rights of the fetus, your brief clearly says to us: protect the rights of the woman. There is another group involved in the abortion issue and that is medical personnel. Does your association have a position on their right to refuse to participate in any medical procedure, including the procedure of abortion? Dr. Waters: As far as I know, I am just trying to search my memory now, I think the Canadian Medical Association does have a clause in its Code of Ethics that allows physicians to withhold these services in terms of abortion. I do not think any physician can be expected to perform any act that he finds repugnant, and I am quite sure that, again, I am speaking from memory, that the Canadian Medical Association does respect that. Ms. Pelrine: That clause, however, goes on to say that should the physician, because of personal, moral, religious or ethical beliefs, be unable to perform a particular procedure, he or she is obligated to so inform the patient and to refer the patient to another physician who will perform the procedure. I am certainly prepared to accept that Code of the Canadian Medical Association. Mr. Hawkes: Would the freedom of conscience, which is also contained in this charter, be relevant to that issue? Mr. Kellermann: I think that a doctor might argue that he did not want to perform a particular operation or medical treatment of some kind on the basis of freedom of conscience, but that is fine, I do not think that in any way contradicts the position of CARAL, CARAL’s concern is that there be doctors available for the women who want to choose to have an abortion, and as long as that is guaranteed we are not in any way interested in forcing other doctors to involve themselves in that process. They just do not want other doctors standing in the way of women having that right. Ms. Pelrine: And who indeed would want to submit to any medical procedure performed by an unwilling physician?

In Section 2(b). that section gives the impression that the freedom of the press and the media is an individual right. Well, in fact, as we have already pointed out in our report, the freedom of the press is merely a mode by which the general freedom of expression is exercised, it is not a right of an individual as such.

Now, I put to you that no right is absolute; even the right of free speech is qualified in that perhaps for instance, under the Criminal Code you cannot cause a disturbance in a public place, for example, there are many restrictions to keep our society together without having it turn into anarchy or chaos. I suggest to you, because you are critical of the wording later on in general, that rather than deleted Section l, we might come back with a better worded Section I that meets the requirements of more inspiring wording, and meets the requirements that rights in here are more enshrined and less susceptible to court interpretation. Mr. Paisley: Our concern with Section 1 as written is that it would, in our opinion, completely over-ride the rest of the Charter. Without examining the given Section 1 which is envisaged, it is impossible to say whether our concern would be satisfied or not. We simply take the position that if it remains with the rest of the Charter, it would probably be of no effect at all. Mr. Irwin: Many groups have expressed the view which you are expressing, and some have come back and said that it should be made stronger and not so intrusive. I appreciate the difficulty in not having that here now. Mr. Paisley: May I add to what I have said further. We feel that even if there is no Section I, it does not mean to say that [Page 23] there are going to be unqualified or absolute rights. Experience elsewhere with unqualified rights shows that they are in fact qualified by the courts. There is the statement of the courts in the United States to the effect that the right of freedom of speech does not give a person the right to call “fire!” in a crowded theatre. We believe that if you have the right stated in an unqualified fashion it would be interpreted in a reasonable way by the court. That is the reason why we suggest it is unnecessary to have this sort of introductory limitation clause as proposed.

Senator Austin: Under section 2, where you see Subparagraph (b), reference to freedom of thought, including freedom of the press and other media of information, Minister, is it the intention to in any way enlarge the present rights as they are so indistinctly understood of the press and other media in Canada? Is it, for example, now open to argue as to protection of sources in the hands of journalists and press and electronic media people? [Page 79] Mr. Chrétien: I do not know how the Court will interpret that, but we are dealing here, we are formalizing the guarantee that exists traditionally in this society concerning the freedom of the press and other media. What will be the interpretation of the Court in terms of the sources of information and so on, it would not be for me, I do not know what the Court will decide or if there will be some different circumstances that will have to be analyzed by the Court before rendering a judgment. Senator Austin: Your attempt here was to be neutral? Mr. Chrétien: As tnuch as possible.

Mr. McGrath: I am saying that your charter is meaningless in the light of what is said in Section 1 of Schedule B when you make it subject to the reasonable limits as are generally accepted in a free and democratic society with a parliamentary system of government.

Surely that makes everything that follows redundant because a free and democratic society would have within it in a parliamentary system freedom of conscience and religion. Ours does; it operates under the practices and conventions and traditions of the British Parliamentary System. It seems to me that you have fallen into the same trap here as the Canadian Bill of Rights because you are going to exclude all the very commendable rights and freedoms that you have set out in Section 2 of Schedule B. It either means that they apply or they do not apply. What are the reasonable limits as are generally accepted in a free and democratic society.

I want to ask the Minister in particular about clause one of this proposed Charter of Rights and Freedoms because I suggest that in its present wording it is a gaping hole in the Charter which really makes the alleged rights and freedoms which are supposed to be protected completely illusory; and in fact if this section one is permitted in its present form that in many ways we will be in a worse position in this ggttntry than had this particular Charter not been implement- Mr. Minister, first of all with respect to clause one I would like to ask you who would determine what is generally accepted as a limitation on these rights and freedoms, and what test would they apply? Would it be a numerical test? Mr. Chrétien: It will be the court who will decide. The way I understand the courts to operate, the precedents will determine the next move. It will be the court because we are not giving them other tests than these. Mr. Robinson: How will it be determined what is generally accepted? Will that be in terms of numbers, if the majority of Canadians accept particular limitations? Would this be your understanding of that provision? Mr. Chrétien: I do not want to pass judgment for what the court will say but I do think there is some, as I explained earlier, there is some historical situation, trends in society, that they can measure; whether it be in terms of numbers and so on. Of course, we are putting a charter there for one reason, to protect the minorities against the abuses of the majority. We have improved fantastically over the past 50 or 75 years in Canada in terms of tolerance in our society and so on and they will have the test of what is reasonable in their minds in [Page 28] relation to those rights that are there. I do not see them turning back the clock; it will be in terms of progress and in terms of protection.

Mr. Tassé: That is the test that the Court would have to apply and that is the whole purpose of the Charter of Rights. In fact, when you entrench a charter of rights like this one you are saying that Parliament and the legislature will constrain themselves when they legislate.

we have a Charter of Rights but this text is a limit; it is an indication to the court how to interpret the charter in relation to the different legislation because if you do not put those words there it could lead to all sorts of change by the courts that will not give them any limits of interpretation. As said by my Deputy Minister there is some legislation that has been well established in the Canadian society that are recognized, and we have to make sure that the courts do not destroy all the previous work of the evolution of our society. Otherwise we will be in great legal difficulty, so they will have to apply the test of reasonableness in their decisions. I do think the Charter of Rights has its own limits, as you will find out when you are studying it, section by section.

Mr. Roger Tassé (Q.C., Deputy Minister): In effect, Mr. Chairman, that Section 1 is meant to bring forward the concept that these rights that are spelled out in the Charter, [Page 15] those you have mentioned and the others, Mr. McGrath, are not absolute rights. If you just take, for example, the freedom of expression, there are limits to the freedom of expression that already are spelled out in the Criminal Code and that will continue and should continue when a Charter of Rights like this is entrenched. What the Section is meant to do is to bring that concept not only to the legislatures but also to the judges because in effect the judges when they are faced with cases where government action or parliamentary action, legislative action is being tested and being challenged, in effect they have to decide whether limits, restrictions, that may have been imposed, because again these rights are not absolute, are reasonable ones. That is only what Section 1 is intended to do, that in effect the judges, when there are challenges brought before them, wherein effect people would claim that their rights have been unfairly or unreasonably restricted that in coming to a conclusion when they are so challenged that in effect the courts will have to take for granted that there are some limitations that may well be reasonable and legitimate in the kind of society in which we live.

One of the things that concerns me about our deliberation is our tendancy to look to the American experience, both in discussing jurisprudence, and it, concerns me a little because I think we are a unique country and our constitution has got to reflect our unique character. We have the built-in advantage, I think at this stage, as some members opposite have pointed out, of amending to some degree our constitution. We have the advantage of one hundred and some years of history, our own history not the American history, and it seems important to me that somehow we balance in this constitution the problems between individual rights and collective rights, such fundamental freedoms of association and religion.

Professor Magnet: But the jurisprudence in the United States to which you refer arises under a constitutional guarantee to nondiscrimination and also to a constitutional guarantee which prevents the establishment of religion. In this proposed resolution there is no antiestablishment clause, and therefore, it simply reflects the Canadian theory which has been true throughout the history of this country that the basic Confederation pact protects certain denominational reasons. Indeed, you might say establishes, but certainly we would not think an antiestablishment clause would be possible in Canada.

Do you think that in Section 2, taking Section 2(b), freedom of thought, belief, and opinion or Section 2(a) freedom of religion, will that protect parties in hospital who have been pressured into assisting an abortion if this is entrenched? Dr. DeVeber: I would hope not. I really cannot answer your question but I would think it is a genuine concern. Miss Campbell: Perhaps you did not quite understand. I was looking for a clause in the Bill of Rights or in the proposal that would allow persons to refuse to assist, and you may have misinterpreted it. Dr. DeVeber: I think that is an excellent idea. I would be in favour of putting that clause in. Miss Campbell: Particularly if Section 1 over-rode any statute. So you could see that freedom of religion perhaps being, or belief that the . . . Dr. DeVeber: I think belief is more important because there are more and more doctors I know who are against abortion on demand, not on religious grounds, but just because they believe it is wrong. So it would be beliefs of any kind. Mr. Cooper: May I make a comment here? When the present Criminal Code, the present abortion law was going through the Justice and Legal Affairs Committee [Page 42] there was an attempt made to insert a conscience clause. Now, the then Minister of Justice, Mr. John Turner, said that this would not be necessary. He could not conceive of any doctor or nurse being required to take part in an abortion. Experience has shown since then that he was dead wrong.

Mr. Black: It seems to me that the value of including freedom of conscience as well as freedom of religion is that it makes clear that people can have very deeply held beliefs that they might not call religious beliefs, but which are equally fundamental to them, and using the phrase “freedom of conscience” it gives them rights as well as people who deeply hold religious beliefs. It seems to me that the possibility that the Supreme Court of Canada or any other court would interpret that in a way which would hinder law enforcement is nonexistent. I cannot imagine the court giving it any such interpretation.

You have referred, as other witnesses have, to Section I, which has been pointed out would permit the proclamation of the War Measures Act in the same terms as in 1970, and will permit the internment of Canadians of Japanese origin and the confiscation of their property. Would it be fair to say you would agree with the suggestion of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association that if Section 1 is not rewritten and perhaps if there is not a remedies section—I believe those are the two sections you have pointed out as having perhaps the gratest weaknesses in the proposed charter—and indeed, we would perhaps be better off not giving the Canadian people the illusion that they have certain rights, but rather that we would be better off without this Charter, if those sections are not in fact amended? Mr. Black: The other way in which, perhaps, you could put it, is that if we do not amend the section, Section 1, we would not have an entrenched charter, even if we were to enact this document. Section 1 imposes such severe limitations on the whole concept of an entrenched charter of rights that it has to be removed to give any effective force to entrenchment.

Now, it is obvious there can be circumstances in which the rights listed in the Charter would have to give way. In times of serious crisis threatening the existence of the nation, such as invasion, insurrection, large scale natural disaster, a temporary emergency limitation on our fundamental rights might be necessary. This is obvious. In fact, it is so obvious and so widely agreed, that, given the difficulties in drafting an acceptable limitation clause, it might well be wiser to leave one out. We cannot now foresee all the situations that might justify temporary emergency limitations. It might therefore be best to let the courts decide in particular cases when the facts of an emergency are known. However, if there is to be a limitation clause, it must indicate clearly that most contingencies that face the nation are to be dealt with by ordinary means which respect the rights guaranteed in the Charter. It must indicate clearly that limitations are justified only in times of “public emergency which threatens the life of the nation”, and then only “to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation”. Here we use the language of the international Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 4, Section 1, to which Canada is a signatory. We recommend this language to you for your consideration. Further, if there is to be a limitation clause, it must clearly indicate that limitations on the Charter justified by public emergency are temporary. We would argue for the inclusion in a general limitation clause of four subsections, the first requiring prompt Parliamentary authorization of the invocation of special powers under emergency legislation, such as the War Measures Act. Second, requiring regular renewal of this authorization if the powers are not to lapse; Third, allowing a small number of members of either House to force review of the authorization; And fourth, allowing any innocent person damaged under the special powers to seek compensation in a special tribunal.

Section 1 of the proposed Charter has come under strong attack and quite deservedly so. At a previous hearing, someone called it the Mack Truck Section. We call it the bathtub section because it makes it much too easy for our leaders and lawmakers to pull the plug on human rights and freedoms and if it is included in the Charter the Charter itself will be worth very little. Section 1 at present says: . . . the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits as are generally accepted in a free and democractic society with a Parliamentary system of government. It will be hard to think of any statement more dangerously vague than this. What is meant by reasonable limits and how is this decided and which democractic society and Parliamentary system are we talking about. Such language opens the door to entrenched present injustices merely because they are widely accepted in supposedly free and democratic societies, and moreover ties Canadian law to the laws and customs of other countries over which Canadians have no control; and to me this is most ironic. We are talking about patriating our constitution and while we are doing this we are proposing to be tied to precedents, set in other countries. it is hard to see what this has to do with producing a Canadian constitution or a Canadian Charter.

Our next item deals with Section I which we call the Mack Truck clause because a person could drive one right through it. We do not intend to dwell at length on this section which creates such loopholes in the legislation. Suffice it to say that we join with the continents of the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women, the National Action Committee on the Status of Women, and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and other groups in condemning Section 1. I would just like to summarize a few of our objections. There are two main points. First, Section I applies at all times, it is not limited to emergency situations. Secondly, the standards of reasonable limits that are generally accepted in a democratic society appears to us to allow virtually any legislation passed by a majority in Parliament or a legislature. Apart from concerns regarding the basic rights and freedoms which we share with other groups, we are concerned that this clause may have the effect of completely negating the protection provided by Section 15 on equality of rights.