Jordan's Principle Timeline & Documents

Please also check the I am a Witness timeline & documents for additional submissions to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal that include Jordan's Principle.

Select View Block

2016

September 7, 2016: Caring Society motions for interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation v Canada

The Caring Society seeks interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit v Canada. The First Nation brought the complaint against the federal government for its alleged inadequate funding of special education for children who live on reserve. For background on the case, read this article on CBC News

September 7, 2016: Caring Society motions for interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation v Canada

The Caring Society seeks interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit v Canada. The First Nation brought the complaint against the federal government for its alleged inadequate funding of special education for children who live on reserve. For background on the case, read this article on CBC News

September 7, 2016: Caring Society motions for interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation v Canada

The Caring Society seeks interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit v Canada. The First Nation brought the complaint against the federal government for its alleged inadequate funding of special education for children who live on reserve. For background on the case, read this article on CBC News

July 14, 2016

Assembly of First Nations resolves to support the full and proper implementation of the historic Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decisions in the provision of child welfare services and Jordan’s Principle.

See resolution no. 62 in the final resolutions of AFN 2016 Annual General Assembly.

September 7, 2016: Caring Society motions for interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation v Canada

The Caring Society seeks interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit v Canada. The First Nation brought the complaint against the federal government for its alleged inadequate funding of special education for children who live on reserve. For background on the case, read this article on CBC News

September 7, 2016: Caring Society motions for interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation v Canada

The Caring Society seeks interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit v Canada. The First Nation brought the complaint against the federal government for its alleged inadequate funding of special education for children who live on reserve. For background on the case, read this article on CBC News

September 7, 2016: Caring Society motions for interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation v Canada

The Caring Society seeks interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit v Canada. The First Nation brought the complaint against the federal government for its alleged inadequate funding of special education for children who live on reserve. For background on the case, read this article on CBC News

September 7, 2016: Caring Society motions for interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation v Canada

The Caring Society seeks interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit v Canada. The First Nation brought the complaint against the federal government for its alleged inadequate funding of special education for children who live on reserve. For background on the case, read this article on CBC News

September 7, 2016: Caring Society motions for interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation v Canada

The Caring Society seeks interested party status in Mississaugas of the New Credit v Canada. The First Nation brought the complaint against the federal government for its alleged inadequate funding of special education for children who live on reserve. For background on the case, read this article on CBC News

PDF File(s):
July 6, 2016

The government submits another compliance report to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. In the submission, the government commits to invest up to $382 million to implement a broader application of Jordan's Principle, yet it continues to limit the principle's application to children living on reserve with a disability or short-term condition. Clarification is needed to understand: 1) what the funding announcement really means for children on the ground, 2) who the federal government is applying it to, and 3) how its proposed approach differs from the discriminatory approach it has used up until now.