Neither Smarter nor Stronger: Bill 161 is a Step Backwards for Access to Justice and Community-Based Legal Services in Ontario
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Schedule 16 of Bill 161, the Smarter and Stronger Justice Act, will replace, if passed, the Legal Aid Services Act, 1998 (LASA 1998) with a new Legal Aid Services Act, 2019 (LASA 2019).\nThe Bill, if passed, will have profoundly negative impacts on the clients and communities served by Ontario’s community legal clinics and community-driven boards. These clinics engage in “clinic law” through: a) the determination of their communities’ legal needs; b) the provision of individual and collective legal services to provide access to justice in numerous and intersecting areas of law; and c) the development and reform of the law as it systemically affects low-income and other disadvantaged communities. Bill 161 seriously weakens the ability of community legal clinics to engage in meaningful, sufficiently funded legal work to address the everyday violations of legal rights of low-income individuals and disadvantaged communities.\nMore particularly, if passed, LASA 2019 will: \n1. Significantly limit the scope of “clinic law” services in Ontario and thus fundamentally change the statutory mandate of community legal clinics;\n2. Dramatically alter community legal clinics’ ability to engage in systemic law reform and community organizing aimed at the roots of low-income people’s everyday legal issues;\n3. Weaken the ability of community legal clinics and their independent boards to adequately determine and respond to the needs of low-income and disadvantaged communities; and\n4. Diminish opportunities to educate future lawyers in community-based advocacy.\nFurthermore, there is reason to believe that additional restrictions on the structure and scope of community legal clinics would flow from the implementation of LASA 2019 given the provincial government’s recent cuts to the legal aid system, the limitations placed on law reform and community organizing work during Legal Aid Ontario (LAO)’s implementation of these cuts, and the stated goals of the ongoing (and confidential) “Legal Aid Modernization Project.” In particular, Schedule 15 of Bill 161 will cancel all existing funding agreements between community legal clinics and LAO, which must be renegotiated within six months of the Bill coming into force. There is serious concern that such high-pressure, behind-the-scenes negotiations will result in further restrictions on clinic practice, funding, and independence.\nIn summary, LASA 2019 will limit the capacity of legal clinics and their boards to properly assess and address community legal needs, and the government’s approach will deepen and extend poverty and marginalization in the province. We strongly recommend that the Ontario Legislature reject Schedules 15 and 16 of Bill 161 and instead engage in public, meaningful, and open consultations with low-income and marginalized communities and their clinics about needed reforms to the legal aid system in Ontario.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,020 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,048 | 0,007 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».