Bill C-38Twisted but not broken?

How much is parliamentary procedure, how much is politics?

Un côté écrit en roche, et l’autre artistique et créatif, avec plusieurs “flaps” et autres choses.Parliamentary procedure écrit très droit et formel, politics écrit très flou.Un extrait du projet de loi.

“... If the Minister considers that doing so is necessary to ensure the free passage of fish or to prevent harm to fish, the owner or person who has the charge, management or control of an obstruction or any other thing that is harmful to fish shall, on the Minister’s request and within the period specified by the Minister, conduct studies, analyses, samplings and evaluations, and provide the Minister with any document or other information relating to them, to the obstruction or thing or to the fish or fish habitat that is affected or is likely to be affected by the obstruction or thing. ...”

Introduction

Bill C-38 is an example of our democracy. Rules have been made so that governing is fair, and the parties twist these rules to fit their own needs. But they make sure not to break them so they don’t get into trouble.

Politics Parliamentary procedure

House of CommonsWriting the Bill The sponsor writes the bill with the help of their party, law clerks

and the library researchers.

First Reading The bill is read for the first time.

Second Reading The bill is read for a second time and mps debate.

Committee The committee, made up of mps, propose amendments.

Report Stage The committee presents the report and the mps propose amendments.

Third Reading The bill is read a third time and mps vote if it passes or not.

SenateFirst Reading The bill is read for the first time.

Second Reading The bill is read for a second time and senators debate.

Committee The committee, made up of senators, propose amendments.

Report Stage The committee presents the report and the senators propose amendments.

Third Reading The bill is read a third time and senators vote if it passes or not.

ApprovalBill Becomes law The governor general approves the bill.

Comment est-ce que cela aurait était différent si c’était un contexte minoritaire?

L’une des seules raisons que le gouvernement Harper a pu s’en sortir avec le projet de loi omnibus est qu’il est un gouvernement majoritaire. Cela veut dire que même si toute l’opposition vote contre le gouvernement, le parti majoritaire gagnera quand même et pourra passer n’importe quoi. La situation est la même au le sénat.

Les Conservateurs ont raccourci le temps.

Une autre torsion que le gouvernement a faite est qu’au lieu d’accorder beaucoup de temps, il a donné un montant minimal de temps à l’opposition pour lire et étudier le projet loi omnibus qui contient plus de 450 pages. Pour cette raison, il était presque impossible de lire le texte, et encore moins de produire des amendements.

L’Opposition a créé des centaines d’amendements.

Parce que les membres de l’opposition n’avaient pas beaucoup de temps et de toute façon ne pouvaient faire aucun changement au projet de loi , ils ont décidé de faire de l’obstruction ou filibustering en anglais. Cela veut dire qu’ils gaspillent le temps de tout le monde en parlant de n’importe quoi. Dans ce contexte, ils ont créé des centaines d’amendements, dont la plupart n’étaient pas sérieux. Par conséquent, la chambre a pris 22 heures pour voter sans aucun but. Par contre, cela a attiré l’attention des média et de la population canadienne, ce qui était favorable pour lesmembres

Les Conservateurs ont mis beaucoup de petites lois dans un énorme document.

L’une des choses les plus controversées de ce projet de loi est comment le gouvernement l’a introduit. Il était sensé être un projet de loi d'exécution du budget. Par contre, Harper a fait un projet de loi omnibus et a inclus 70 différentes lois («protection de l'environnement, l'assurance-emploi, la sécurité des frontières, l'immigration, les retraites, l'exploitation de parcs nationaux, l'aide étrangère1») dans cet énorme document de plus que 450 pages.

1  http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/ 2012/05/03/federal_budget_2012_tories_criticized_for_using_majority_to_limit_debate_on_omnibus_budget_bill.html

de l’opposition.

La situation était un triple whip, alors tout un parti vote d’une façon. Pour cette raison, les MP et les sénateurs conservateurs ont toujours gagné les votes.

Les whips de tous les partis ont dit que c’était une condition «triple whip», qui veut dire que les membres de chaque parti doivent voter d’une certaine façon, et sinon, ils perdront leur poste comme ministre ou membre d’un comité et peut-être même le soutien de leur parti. Les projets de loi d'exécution du budget sont toujours une situation «triple whip», mais celle-ci l’était spécialement, important avec tous les amendements.

Written on the scissors:

Straight and just as parliamentary procedure,

Deadly and messy as politics.

Médiagraphiehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_C-38_Jobs,_Growth_and_Long-term_Prosperity_Act

http://rabble.ca/news/2012/06/ten-reasons-oppose-conservatives-bill-c-38

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Docid=5697420&file=4

http://openparliament.ca/bills/41-1/C-38/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_C-38_Jobs,_Growth_and_Long-term_Prosperity_Act

http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Mode=1&billId=5514128&Language=E

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2012/05/03/federal_budget_2012_tories_criticized_for_using_majority_to_limit_debate_on_omnibus_budget_bill.html

Reflection on Bill C-38Bill C-38 is, although perhaps a bit exaggerated, good representation of our

“democratic” government. as mentioned in the title, it shows how the bones and structure of the canadian government is the parliamentary procedure, the different steps and traditions, but the actual interesting parts are the politics and the political strategies. That part is where everyone tries to twist and bend the rules to fit their own needs and use any loopholes they can find. I find that this is a deficient part of our ruling system, and that in a perfect world where people did things for the good of everybody, we wouldn’t waste time trying to remove the loopholes and instead work on the important matters.

Our government is made up of hundreds of people, three hundred and eight of those being MPs. These elected officials are in place so that it’s not an anarchy, and that the population is properly represented. Unfortunately, if there is a majority, “142 of the 308 parliamentarians2” hardly have an influence. Even if they all vote the same way, they are still outnumbered and sixty percent of Canada’s population are shut out. It would be better if we had some sort of census, where the result is for the good of all.

These problems are especially important in the process of this bill, Bill C-38, because of its status, a budget bill. This means that it is responsible for the government spendings for the whole year. For this reason a lot of time should be dedicated to work on it and improve it as much as possible. But instead, the Conservatives only dedicated a limited amount of time to it, and then they took advantage of this and made it a 426 page long omnibus bill, cramming over 70 other bills inside of it. To get back at the government for this, all of the opposition wasted almost 24 hours filibustering to no real outcome.

All in all, I think that “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried3.” The concept is good, where everyone is equal and ruling is just, except that it is always twisted to some people’s wants and too much time is wasted. If people could just step away and look at the bigger picture, the world would be all the better for it.

2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_House_members_of_the_41st_Parliament_of_Canada3 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu164161.html