MLA Deborah Drever calls identical holiday message an ‘unfortunate error'

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

So, if (more like when) Drever's bill passes, it would make victims of domestic violence entitled to a return of their deposit. Wow, what an accomplishment.

Speaking to my social worker friends, breaking rental lease is not high on the list of domestic violence victims but how to get away from their abusive spouses. Follows by how to establish themselves financially and domestically.

The one thing this bill will do for them is not to have blemishes on their credit report should their landlord choose to report them plus potentially getting back their rental deposit like you've pointed out.

As a past landlord, I can't say reporting someone in that situation to the credit bureau is high on my list too.

Crowning achievement or not, it's all in the eye of the beholder. Personally I will say improve access or increase funding to the women's shelter will do more for the victims. But this bill got back the NDP one more seat, so what do I know.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

...

The fact that they'll be allowed to legally break their lease and get their damage deposit back at a time when money is probably a little tight, and they don't have to or want to break a lease illegally is neither here nor there. Who cares!

...

I understand your unabashed support for anything-NDP, but maybe get of your pedestal and try to look at the real substance here. Once passed, the proposed bill would do nothing. If a tenant can prove abuse, the lease is frustrated anyway and it can be broken and the deposit would be refundable anyway. You don't need a new law to say it.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by darklord700

...
The one thing this bill will do for them is not to have blemishes on their credit report should their landlord choose to report them ...

Damaging someone's credit is not an easy undertaking. To have a negative PPR record registered against someone, you need a judgement. Costs of getting a judgement are prohibitive most of the time.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

I understand your unabashed support for anything-NDP, but maybe get of your pedestal and try to look at the real substance here. Once passed, the proposed bill would do nothing. If a tenant can prove abuse, the lease is frustrated anyway and it can be broken and the deposit would be refundable anyway. You don't need a new law to say it.

Yeah, I'm sure you're an expert on how these things work.

I didn't vote for the NDP and I don't support them, so that weak shot misses the mark

I don't have to support them to recognize sad partisan whining. I mean jesus christ, you are willing to poo-poo something that helps victims of domestic violence get out of a bad situation because it came from someone on the other team.

The Wild Rose and Conservatives were fine with it, but you are so goddamn hellbent on attacking this woman that you'll take whatever you can get, no matter how obviously positive.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Yeah, I'm sure you're an expert on how these things work. ...

OK. Let's try to have it civilized without looking for motives and imagining things.

My view is that the proposed bill would not give any new legal powers to the victims of domestic abuse in addition to what is already available to them, legally, through the RTA and criminal justice system. You disagree. Please summarize these new powers.

[Krovikan]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I'm not saying there isn't a difference between $127k and $190k. I'm saying for the vast majority of the population, either number is "a lot of money", "A lot more than I make" and would get equal anger from populace.

Also do you honestly think she wrote the bill and wasn't spoonfed it? I don't know her so I can't say for sure, but lets not kid ourselves. This lady has zero experience in any related field prior to her appointment.

Do I think MLA's deserve 127k/year? yes, if we want to attract talent to these positions we need to have good wages.

What she elected by her constituents? yes, whatever their reasons good or bad, they decided the position went to her.

Does the average Albertan make less then her? yes

Should they complain? No, if they believe they can do a better job they can do what she did find a party to run under pay their entry fee and try to convince the people of this province they are a better option. If they are complaining about this holiday message, chances are they won't be able to though.

If anything this should show Albertans that if you truly have an issue with your government you can join and change it.

As for the bill, let's clarify something first, bills are not something one person writes. The person who brings it forward tends to be the champion of the bill, the person that made it continue going forward. It tends not to even be the champions idea. The champion tends to be someone to take a leadership role over the bill from start to finish, they engage and consult with all the stakeholders and work with others who want to assist with drafting the bill.

That being said, do I think she championed the bill? yes, she took some heavy lumps from her past and her sense of humor. She got a pretty public slap on the hand and marching orders on how to save face. So she worked with women's rights group and started with a bill that would be non-controversial and an easy stepping stone. Reached out to stake holders such as the minister of services, worked with the NDP, Wildrose and PCs to make sure that the bill would be able to pass and drafted the bill with many stakeholders. During this entire process their was probably a lot of help from more experiences politicians to assist in all sorts of areas like their would be for most new MLAs.

If she didn't and this was the NDP just stamping her name on the bill, we won't see much out of her and probably be exposed for doing nothing productive going forward. If she did we have the makings of a very productive MLA, as the speed of which this private member bill was drafted was quite impressive for a newbie in my opinion.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

OK. Let's try to have it civilized without looking for motives and imagining things.

My view is that the proposed bill would not give any new legal powers to the victims of domestic abuse in addition to what is already available to them, legally, through the RTA and criminal justice system. You disagree. Please summarize these new powers.

Ah yes, let's be civilized.

Here's the first paragraph of the Journal article on this subject when it came up. Digging deep!

"Drever’s Bill 204 would amend the Residential Tenancies Act to allow domestic violence victims to break a lease early and without penalty. If a person can demonstrate they or their children are in danger, they can receive a signed certificate from a list of professionals — such as a judge, nurse, police officer or social worker — compelling the landlord to terminate the lease. The law would also effectively allow a victim to remove an abuser’s name from a lease."

This is from a Herald editorial about the same time:

"The bill would alter the Residential Tenancies Act to allow victims of spousal abuse to break their leases and move out early. This would be permitted as long as the individual could prove, via a letter from a judge, police officer or other authorized official, that they or their children face danger if they stay. Drever’s bill would also allow the removal of an abuser’s name from the lease."

Sounds pretty good to me. It sure looks like there are some new legal powers, even though you've said there are no new legal powers. Were all those things there to begin with?

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

...Were all those things there to begin with?

In my opinion, yes. Residential Tenancy Act is a document skewed heavily towards tenant rights to begin with but that's beyond the point. There are general statements in the Act that give tenants rights to safe enjoyment of the rental premises. Domestic abuse is anything but "safe enjoyment", so the Act already affords them the opportunity to get out without penalty. If landlord objects to giving a deposit back, an RTDA panel would unequivocally side with the tenant on the issue of deposit refund, provided that the proof of abuse is presented (note, proof is required under the new bill too). The new bill will spell out that domestic abuse is also a reason for terminating tenancy. By analogy, it would be akin to amending "one shalt not murder" with "one shalt also not murder with the knife". The former was sufficient.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

I understand your unabashed support for anything-NDP, but maybe get of your pedestal and try to look at the real substance here.

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

OK. Let's try to have it civilized without looking for motives and imagining things. .

That's impressive hypocrisy.

[CaptainYooh]

Happy to impress you.

[darklord700]

As a former despicable gouging slumlord, I once let my tenant pay half the rent as her roommate had suddenly moved out. This going on for a few months until she moved out too way before the lease was supposed to end. I happily returned all her deposit, thank her for an amicable divorce.

Any landlord will tell you it is next to impossible to recover loss rents in AB. For tenants in difficult financial situation, I can guarantee you that all landlords will be glad to allow those tenants to break the lease and simply move out so we can go back to gouging the next tenant as quickly as possible. It could take easily six months to seek court approval to evict a non paying tenant and then hope for no damage to the rental property. And the landlord will hardly see a dim at the end as the Rental act gears heavily towards protecting the tenants.

[DownInFlames]

So what Yooh and darklord are saying is if you're a victim of abuse just skip out on your lease like a common deadbeat, forgoing your self-respect and probably your damage deposit. Sounds ideal.

[Minnie]

Jesus, did this woman murder infants in their buggies as their parents watched? Strangle puppies on 25th floor balcony then drop them over the edge only to land on unsuspecting people walking below, simply going about their day? Herd people into the Killing Fields? Take down the Twin Towers? Because that's about the size of what I'm reading from some people.

[corporatejay]

As someone who is pretty anti-NDP, anyone complaining about this woman at this point is nothing but a partisan hack.

Get rid of your faux outrage already and move on. If you're so sure she's a dumbass run against her next time and get her out.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

As someone who is pretty anti-NDP, anyone complaining about this woman at this point is nothing but a partisan hack.

Get rid of your faux outrage already and move on. If you're so sure she's a dumbass run against her next time and get her out.

Notwithstanding what the opposition is saying about being grassroots and listening to Albertans, I can say I've heard a grand total of ZERO normal, everyday Albertans say anything related to this issue.

There are so many more important issues to deal with that I wonder if they oppsition has lost energy, lost key people in the organization, or lost control of its caucus.

[woob]

Wow, I can be a stubborn person at times I know, but Yooh and darklord take it to a new level.

[PsYcNeT]

Pictured: a super sane group full of super sane people.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

So what Yooh and darklord are saying is if you're a victim of abuse just skip out on your lease like a common deadbeat, forgoing your self-respect and probably your damage deposit. Sounds ideal.

Where did I say that?

[Barnet Flame]

That facebook page....wow.