I'm proposing a conversation between different branches of government. The courts are not always right. The Jordan decision was well-intentioned, but it's adding huge problems because courts of general jurisdiction, or trial courts, have to then give priority to criminal cases.
Many of those are being stayed because of this time limit, and then those judges are not available for family, civil and child protection cases, which are also very important, so we need to take a pause. The Parliament of Canada has the last word on that, not the Supreme Court of Canada, at least for a five-year timeout.
It should not be the preserve of the courts to make that policy decision, and the charter says as much, but somehow the notwithstanding clause gets a bad name. It should not. It's a fair, balanced conversation between branches of government on an important constitutional issue, and it's in the Constitution. It's in the charter. It's there to be rarely used, but appropriately used in a crisis before the courts, such as this.