 |
| Wednesday, Parliament will begin a marathon voting session to consider opposition amendments to the 425-page budget bill, which, as presented, would rewrite about 70 different pieces of legislation, ranging from protection of fisheries to employment insurance and Old Age Security. Photograph by: CHRIS WATTIE , REUTERS |
Editorial: The Frankenbill follies
Opposition deserves credit for challenging federal budget bill
Calgary Herald
June 13, 2012
The Harper government’s mammoth federal budget legislation, Bill C-38, also known as the omnibus bill and nicknamed the Frankenbill, the End of Democracy As We Know It Act and the Harper Hammer, will finally get some much-needed scrutiny, even if it is little more than a symbolic protest in the face of the Tory majority juggernaut.
Today, Parliament will begin a marathon voting session to consider opposition amendments to the 425-page bill, which, as presented, would rewrite about 70 different pieces of legislation, ranging from protection of fisheries to employment insurance and Old Age Security. Although many of the changes are needed and long overdue, there are some that demand debate. Among these are the heavily criticized changes to the Fisheries Act, which received all of 14 hours debate at a parliamentary subcommittee.
Even though many of the proposed changes do away with or streamline outdated relics of legislation from bygone eras, Bill C-38 has come to symbolize the abusive power of the government and its disregard for parliamentary scrutiny. Last month, four former federal fisheries ministers, including two Conservatives, Tom Siddon and John Fraser, criticized the omnibus bill as an affront to democracy and an abdication of ministerial responsibility.
“In the old days, whether we were Progressive Conservative, or Liberal, or environmentalists, or Greens, we had the heart and soul — the values of Canada — at the top of our agenda. Whereas this government seems to place the pocketbook at the top of their agenda,” Siddon complained. “The real scary part of this is that the one minister in Canada who has the constitutional duty to protect the fishery, which includes habitat, is the fisheries minister, and these amendments essentially parcel out and water down his fiduciary responsibility, to the point that . . . he can delegate his responsibility to private-sector interests and individuals,” Siddon said.
Fraser said omnibus bills should only be used in national emergencies. “I don’t think an omnibus bill is appropriate procedurally. The point (is) ... you’ve got to vote either for the whole thing or against it. That’s bad democracy.”
It’s debatable whether many of the changes in Bill C-38 are even related to the federal budget, but it’s difficult to know.
An omnibus bill this large denies Canadians the ability to fully comprehend the proposed changes.
Democracy is messy, cumbersome and inconvenient, but eliminating proper study and scrutiny only fosters mistrust and anxiety.
The Harper government is already perceived as an environmental laggard. A longer period of debate could work to the government’s advantage, giving it time to explain changes more fully. Instead, Bill C-38 reinforces the argument that this government will pursue its agenda no matter the cost.
The opposition deserves credit for attempting to hold the government to account on Bill C-38, even if it turns out to be futile.
Note: All bolding is ours
No comments:
Post a Comment