NB Government extends benefits to same sex couples

Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

N.B. government extends benefits to same-sex couples
Last Updated: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 | 2:53 PM AT Comments48Recommend31
CBC News

Almost a decade after a landmark Supreme Court of Canada ruling, the New Brunswick government is extending benefits and obligations to same-sex common-law couples.

Attorney General T.J. Burke will introduce the modernization of benefits and obligations act on Tuesday to adhere to the 1999 Supreme Court of Canada decision in M. vs. H. The omnibus bill will overhaul more than 30 acts and regulations.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2008/11/26/nb-samesex-benefits.html


Comments

remind
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 7289
Joined: Jun 25 2004

Perhaps they will start recognizing women's rights soon too!

___________________________________________________________ "watching the tide roll away"


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

I hope so but if not I'm sure the Supreme Court will force them, too.


Star Spangled C...
rabble-rouser-machine
Member: 16502
Joined: Sep 15 2008

remind wrote:

Perhaps they will start recognizing women's rights soon too!

___________________________________________________________ "watching the tide roll away"

What is that in reference to?


Unionist
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 12323
Joined: Dec 11 2005

This story is pathetic journalism. I've read it twice and I understand nothing.

What exactly will this new legislation provide that is not in place right now - other than gender-neutral language?

And what exactly did the Supreme Court rule in 1999 that NB has not been respecting?

 Listen to this:

Quote:
"In 1999 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that same-sex common-law couples should enjoy the same rights and privileges as those that are married. For several years the previous government did nothing to move on that legislation," Burke said.

Does that mean the Supreme Court ruled:

1. that same-sex common-law couples should enjoy the same rights and privileges as same-sex married couples (I didn't think there were any same-sex married couples before 2005)?

or

2. that same-sex common-law couples should enjoy the same rights and privileges as different-sex married couples?

or

3. that common-law couples should enjoy the same rights and privileges as married couples?

And which precise rights and privileges are they talking about?


Unionist
\,,/ rabble-rouser-l33t \,,/
Member: 12323
Joined: Dec 11 2005

Ok, here's a much clearer article:

Canadian Press

Now I don't have to read the whole 201-page 1999 Supreme Court decision!!


Caissa
rabble-rouser-for-life
Member: 13752
Joined: Jun 14 2006

SSC asked: What is that in reference to?

 

It is reference to the NB Government's refusal to pay fror abortions performed in the Fredericton Morgentaler clinic.


Login or register to post comments