Bill C-6 Discussion

[Hux]

On behalf of Stephen Harper:

"keep voting your issues boys, and thanks for your support - the kids love Harrington Lake!"

http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/story.html?id=2386891

[phishtaper]

The Economist just slammed Harper as well in not one but two articles.

[nibbler]

Hux,

Droves of Conservative voters would abandon the united right if they knew about the SPP and understood its implications.

The article says:

"Any "hidden agenda" was swept away in the rush to build a government-friendly base."

The author overlooks the hidden agenda about transforming Canada into the 52nd state. What convenient bullshit.

Businesses fold when the red ink continually obscures the black. Not so for the National Post. They have a "hidden agenda" as a newspaper, and wealthy backers who don't care about how much it costs to get their version of "reality" printed.

Like FZ Said:

"Politics is the entertainment branch of industry."

[SaggyBalls]

The author overlooks the hidden agenda about transforming Canada into the 52nd state. What convenient bullshit.

This is far bigger than it being a case of a larger USA, nibbler.

European Union, African Union, North American Union, South American Union...they will all answer to the same authorities, none of which are the people they intend to impose their rule upon.

harmonized statutes and standards are a must for this to happen, which is really scary about C-6 (for anyone who forgot and thinks it's really about consumer goods)

[nibbler]

Of course its a bigger issue- when you take a big step back.

I was pointing out that the Nazi Post story tells many small truths with the hope that the reader will swallow the BIG LIE. (or big omission in this case)

[nibbler]

[Hux]

I dunno, I suppose I'm part of the machine, but where is the line drawn between globalization and this stuff which whiffs of bogus conspiracy BS anyways (sorry).

And while you worry about this and vote NDP which generally favours the Conservatives electorally, Rome burns, ie. Harper re-shapes the justice system (mandatory minimums etc.) and all kinds of other things into his neo-con ideas...I dunno, I think you have to pick your battles and this is at the 30 thousand foot level while there's a lot more going on that would be a better focus for attention.

[SaggyBalls]

Hux, the reason this is a necessary focus for attention is that it's a distortion of Democracy using the democratic process.

While there's a chance that C-6 wouldn't be used nefariously,

there is so much potential for awful things to come from it.

The values that our forefathers fought for are not supported with this bill.

It's easy and sometimes necessary to focus on partisan politics when looking at who's formed the bill and others,

but continually coming back to that as your main argument suggests that you're only acting as a part of the machine.

I've got to give it to you though - you're patient and persistent.

While it seems to be 'bogus conspiracy theory' every statute that passes to favour globalization lobbied by big interests...

...validates conspiracy theory.

While there IS a corporatocracy and it drives world politics,

any actual conspiracy is involved remains to be proven,

and I personally think should be secondary to the issue that

there is a corporatocracy that drives world politics.

Just because many political agendas are driven by special interests,

that doesn't necessarily put it all into a crazy plot,

and dispelling these issues by clinging to an unhealthy and shortsighted combination

of the conspiracy theory and the reality of special interests

(and the political reactions in their favour) is unfair and unjustified.

Look at C-6 as a perversion of process or look at it as an unnecessary knee-jerk reaction

that takes important time and resources from bigger issues (environment, social issues, employment, economic recovery, etc.)

or of course you can take it at the face value that it's been positioned under,

but dismissing the concerns of concerned citizens (of which there are fewer and fewer as the days go on)

as bogus based on an arguably (literally) ignorant perspective does nothing to solve anything.

...And just because there are bigger issues than this to focus on doesn't mean that they're being approached by our Government,

nor will those issues necessarily be solved sufficiently when the time comes.

And of course, these issues are mostly popular and have quite a bit of attention already - of which C-6 had none.

So while it's easy to go off about climate change and the economy,

the issue of a perverted political system and the bills it produces is most definitely MORE important,

as it addresses both the waste of government resources and the good faith of the public's interest.

It ain't just Harper wasting our time and money and piddling away our respect.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Guest
edit to add...

[nibbler]

We're all a part of the machine.

[SaggyBalls]

I hope any cold tone in a letter to my MP isn't going to get me questioned by police...

Mr. Brown,

I am very concerned about the upcoming year for our MPs and Senators, as I have found some alarming information about bill C-6, among other things.

Though the safety of Canadians should be a priority to those able to intervene when circumstances are dire, this legislation would " allow the federal government to make documents prepared by foreign governments or bodies law in Canada by simply passing a regulation incorporating the document."

http://nhppa.org/?page_id=70#29 (see extended footnote below)

I would like some reassurance that after Prorogue, this section will be amended to ensure that Canada and Canadians retain their autonomy and personal rights, respectively.

Though I am not a member of the Conservative Party of Canada, I am impressed that Prime Minister Harper has that balls to prorogue Parliament while facing a potentially unfavourable vote. Typically, leaders would let democratic process seal their fate in office, and if this Economic Action Plan is really working as the CPC says then this may not be unfavourable in the long term.

Understanding that there are 32 bills that have died a premature death due to this prorogue, ( http://leedsgrenvillegreens.ca/2010/01/10/»-legislation-that-will-die-due-to-prorogation/ ) I need a definite assurance that they will remain dead, as recalling them to be voted upon and processed on the Hill is an extreme misuse of taxpayers' monies. If you will not vote to this aim, I need a definite assurance that the Regulations (not Acts) that were killed in C-6 remain dead, as they specifically outline and allow for gross corruption of the Parliamentary system and a misuse of both taxpayers' monies and confidence in our elected representatives and officials.

You seem to have brought Leeds-Grenville some prosperity in your tenure on the Hill.

Without assurances to your constituents that you will uphold the strength of our Government and Country, faith, trust, and goodwill wither and fade.

As long as you improve upon that and ensure that this country retains the dignity that our forebears fought and died for, you will help to ensure that we don't see a similar fate.

We shouldn't have to police our own officials, as we already have enough on our plates. The moment that our political and personal effectiveness dies, any efforts you've made to help your constituents and career will (most likely) die with it. Canadians don't forget these things quite so easily. That's not the sort of top of mind you and your other party members ever need.

We want to be able to cheer for you and the prosperity you're bringing to us rather than regret we ever trusted you.

Regards,

.r.

[SaggyBalls]

Trading the Rule of Law for Safety - a Dangerous Game

The Senate is about to vote on Bill C-6, the Consumer Product Safety Act. As I mentioned in the Senate hearing, Bill C-6 represents Health Canada’s attempt to circumvent the rule of law in the name of safety. The problem is that circumventing the rule of law is never “safeâ€. Bill C-6 represents a fundamental change in the power dynamic between the citizen and the state that I am concerned about passing onto our children.

Under the rule of law the state cannot take control of persons or property without the supervision of independent courts. Without the rule of law the state can imprison citizens or seize property without court supervision. I do not want our children being subjected to state control of their persons or property without court supervision. I side with political philosophers who warn of the dangers of sacrificing the rule of law.

Some might think it is ironic that we are being asked to sacrifice a fundamental freedom that protects us against the state so that we can be “safeâ€. I don’t find it ironic at all. Whenever citizens are asked to sacrifice their freedom, it is in the name of safety. One only has to review the laws enacted in the U.S. following 9-11 to see this mechanism in action.

The impetus of trading freedom for safety is difficult to resist. What lawmaker can vote against safety? Citizens demand to be “protected†and governments acquiesce by passing laws that erode our freedoms. I am not against safety. Nor am I against improving our consumer safety legislation. My position is that we can structure consumer protection laws to protect Canadians against unsafe products while at the same time safeguarding our fundamental freedoms. Consumer products are not suddenly so dangerous that we need to sacrifice fundamental protections. Bill C-6 threatens our property rights and our right to private enjoyment of property.

Under Bill C-6, inspectors can seize property connected to the manufacture, distribution and sale of consumer products. This seizure can occur without court supervision. There is no limit to the amount of property that can be seized. There does not have to be a “safety†risk to justify the seizure. There are no defined time limits limiting the length of the seizure. If you are charged with an administrative offence, you cannot have a court hearing. The Minister decides if you are guilty. The same Minister can keep any seized property if he/she determines that you are guilty.

Bill C-6 also abolishes the law of trespass. Inspectors can enter onto any property or into any place except a private home without a warrant. They are exempted from the law of trespass. We do not give the regular police, who investigate much more serious matters, this exemption. Are consumer products suddenly so dangerous that we need to sacrifice the right to enjoy our property without the incursion of state agents?

This generation is responsible for protecting the rights of our children. Do we think our children will be safer in a Canada without the rule of law? Will they be safer in a Canada where the state can take their property without court supervision? Will they be safer in a Canada where they can no longer require state agents to leave their private property? These are fundamental questions that must be answered.

Consumer safety is an emotional issue. We are told we need to protect our children from defective cribs and lead in their toys. I agree. We can, however, protect our children from these dangers with court supervision and the rule of law. We can protect our children from the dangers of consumer products without giving the state free range over our private property. We can protect our children without surrendering freedoms previous generations ensured were passed onto us.

I expect that Bill C-6 will pass through the Senate. I expect that Bill C-6 will later be viewed as a major turning point in favour of state control. I expect that many will eventually regret the fundamental changes that we will bequeath to our children.

Shawn P. Buckley