CFN – Addressed to the four opposition Leaders who are asked to take action.
Once again this year the government has introduced the budget bill as an omnibus bill of which only the first two parts relate to the budget and fiscal measures. The rest of the bill, which has over 420 pages, modifies about 60 different laws, repeals six and adds three others, including a complete rewriting of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act which is 150 pages by itself.
Grouped together under the shorter title Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, the proposed legislation will have profound and lasting effects on society and democracy in Canada. The government does more than present a budget. It imposes changes on society without giving elected MPs and the citizens the opportunity to examine in depth the impact of these changes and to discuss them. This shows a profound contempt for democracy, Parliament and the citizens. In a real democracy, there can’t be the consent of elected MPs and citizens unless they have all relevant information and an open and enlightened debate. The government’s attempt to push through Bill C-38 is equivalent to an attempted rape of Canadian democracy.
You represent more than 60% of the Canadians who gave you the mandate to defend their interests and the common good of our country. In the past, for electoral or partisan reasons, you, each in turn, helped the neoconservative government to undermine the foundation of Canadian democracy. The time has come for you to accept that the current government has changed the ground rules and you have to act accordingly.
As representatives of the progressive forces in Canadian society, you have the duty to work together and ask the government to split Bill C-38 so that each part can be debated and adopted individually. If the government refuses, you have the duty and the moral obligation to walk out of Parliament and refuse to sit as long as the government does not respect democracy and the institution that is the Canadian Parliament. Explain to the people, in few words and without partisanship, the reason for your action. Without the representatives of 60% of the population, the adoption of Bill C-38 is totally illegitimate. If you do not do so, you become complicit in the government’s action and, even if you vote against the bill, your presence in the House means that you will have become helpless witnesses and accomplices in the rape of Canadian democracy. If you betray the 60% of the population who gave you the mandate to act for them, who will they be able to trust in the future?
On behalf of democracy, act now!
Corneliu Kirjan- Free-thinking citizen
Cornwall, Ontario
(Comments and opinions of Editorials, Letters to the Editor, and comments from readers are purely their own and don’t necessarily reflect those of the owners of this site, their staff, or sponsors.)
It would be useful to have some examples of changes in this bill that you’re claiming “will have profound and lasting effects on society and democracy in Canada” Now I suppose i could go and read the whole bill, but I’m hoping that in writing this you have already done that and could refer me to the relevant parts…
Hi Nate,
Usually I don’t respond to people who are very ideological and aggressive. Your interrogation is very comprehensible, so I have decided to give you more information. First of all, even if CFN was the first informed about this letter, I sent the same letter to many others national newspapers and to all the opposition MPs. Generally speaking the newspapers limit the letters to the Editor to 300 words and the MPs are all aware of the content of the bill. So my letter is more or less a manifest pushing the MPs to act.
Bill-38 would enact numerous changes that will limit the ability of Canadians and MPs to hold government accountable, with a broad attack on government transparency which was not present in the budget 2012-2013 speech. These changes (a few examples) include weakening the Canadian Environment Assessment Act and undermining the authority of the National Energy Board, increasing Cabinet discretion and ministerial power over a broad range of issues (that have nothing to do with the budget) from immigration to food safety to approving pipelines, eliminating the Auditor General’s oversight over many agencies and reducing reporting requirements to Parliament.
In the same Bill—38 the government raises the age of eligibility for Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement from 65 to 67 even if it is not proved that is necessary. Many other laws are included in this bill. To finish I would like to quote Andrew Coyne, generally known as a conservative journalist (not of the Reform or Alliance orientation, who are extreme right conservatives or social and economic conservatives)
….the practice has been to throw together all manner of bills involving wholly different responsibilities of government in one all-purpose “budget implementation” bill, and force MPs to vote up or down on the lot. While the 2012 budget implementation bill is hardly the first in this tradition, the scale and scope is on a level not previously seen, or tolerated…. It makes it impossible to know what Parliament really intended by any of it. We’ve no idea whether MPs supported or opposed any particular bill in the bunch, only that they voted for the legislation that contained them. There is no common thread that runs between them, no overarching principle; they represent not a single act of policy, but a sort of compulsory buffet.
CK
IN YOUR OWN WORDS: It makes it impossible to know what Parliament really intended by any of it. We’ve no idea whether MPs supported or opposed any particular bill in the bunch, only that they voted for the legislation that contained them. There is no common thread that runs between them, no overarching principle; they represent not a single act of policy, but a sort of compulsory buffet.
HOW CAN YOU BE CRITICAL OF SOMETHING INTENDED TO PROTECT THE COUNTRY WHEN YOU ADMIT THAT ” they represent not a single act of policy, but a sort of compulsory buffet” but still refuse to elaborate about something you know not.
Also how dare you set yourself above any man who chooses to speak from his heart in your beginning statement you sound rather aristocratic and place your self above all else and others esp. with a contemptuous remark such as “Usually I don’t respond to people who are very ideological and aggressive. Your interrogation is very comprehensible.” Would you have such free speakers as him horsewhipped to challenge you?
Good question Nate.
F.Y.I. @Nate & @Dave, more information can be found here.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/opposition-fumes-as-tories-limit-debate-on-sweeping-budget-bill/article2421287/?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=Referrer%3A+Social+Network+%2F+Media&utm_content=2421287&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links
Hi Dave,
I’m going to make the mistake of answering you, even if you are aggressive. All I want to tell you is that you need to learn to read before you react. Those are not my words, but a quote from Andrew Coyne and that’s very clear. In the future, please be more careful before jumping to conclusions.
CK
I must applaud your rambling, delusional writing about the crime bill. Your concern must be heartfelt being a member of a minority group, the criminally insane, which may be placed in all the superjails the bogeyman is building. You might get thrown in jail for life if you smell like pot as well. And you know those Bilderberg’s are all reptillians bent on turning us into agro-slaves and putting chip in our heads.
Take off the tinfoil hat and go for a walk.
Wow,
You too need to learn to read before you react. My writing has nothing to do with the crime bill, it’s about the budget. My apologies for your ignorance.
CK
I have read it again. Now I think you’re really a nutty rambler. That article makes no sense at all.
Kirjan the complainer: ! agree with Wow! I think the article is absolute drivel. Corneliu, it’s about time for you to replace the tinfoil inside your hat otherwise you won’t be receiving any further messages from the mothership.
Good work, Corneliu. Excellent exposé of the latest deception perpetrated by the Contempt(ible) Party of Canada.
I think the reason Kirpins message is lost is that he thinks everyone who challenges him is aggressive when in fact the way he presents himself is obviously aggrssive and from the looser side of the fence. Yes, tinfoil might be right afterall. Ok, lets give the minority a break and actually let them run the country.
Agree? No, okay then lets get on board and allow this government to actually have its day and conduct its business without such rude skulldugery. Next time the in the rise of the under doggy, they can break it all down, or up again. Isn’t that the way of a democracy, or is it the day of the tale wagging th doggy Kirjan. Oh, you don’t havr to tell me, or anyone else they are aggressive. I can not talk for others but, I,m juat getting warmed up.