The shift from 'free expression' to 'right to vote' means the notwithstanding clause no longer shields the legislation from judicial invalidation - but is the Court right?
Where in the Charter does it state that third parties have rights? I don't think that anyone can reasonably believe that every union member endorses the message for which a portion of their dues was used.
I don’t understand why it would lawful at 6 months, but not 12. It’s a principle, not an accounting question.
This seems to be a flaw in having fixed election dates. If you don’t have a fixed date, you don’t set a target for people to advertise against.
Where in the Charter does it state that third parties have rights? I don't think that anyone can reasonably believe that every union member endorses the message for which a portion of their dues was used.