“Urgent ACTION Required! Canadians Must Say NO to BILL C-16!”

Canadian Action Party/Parti action canadienne (CAP/PAC) 916 W Broadway, # 385, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1K7 THE POSITION OF CAP/PAC RESPECTING BILL C-16, An Act to Amend the Canada Elections Act September 28, 2006 Clerk Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs Room 630, 180 Wellington Street, House of Commons Ottawa, Canada K1A 0A9 Re: Bill C-16 “No election until 2009 will render Canada meaningless,” Connie Fogal, Leader Dear Sirs and Mesdames: The Canadian Action Party/Parti action canadienne is entirely opposed to this Bill! We have grave concerns that the impact of this Bill will profoundly affect the constitutional entitlement of Canadians to a sovereign, independent Canada. In addition to our concurrence with all the Arguments Against Fixed Election Dates, which arguments are set out in the Backgrounder respecting this Bill C-16 located on the government website (some of which are reprinted below) we see this Bill as a mechanism to further facilitate the de-structuring and de-stabilization of Canada to effect an integration of Canada, the USA and Mexico into a North American Entity dominated by the USA and ruled by a corporate, military, industrial, financial elite. Well under way is the bureaucratic implementation of a North American Union with its own surrounding perimeter and an elimination of borders within it, along with the harmonization of all policies respecting all the significant areas of national business that makes an independent sovereign nation. You are aware of the various unconstitutional agreements that drive this agenda; for example, the Security and Prosperity Partnership Agreement signed by Presidents Bush and Fox and Prime Minister Paul Martin (L), in March 2005, which was affirmed in March of 2006 by the two Presidents and Prime Minister Harper (C), as well as the Smart Border Plan of December 2001, and many others. The Prime Minister’s Office already exercises an excessive and arbitrary power contrary to the interest of Canadians. You have Mr. Harper’s institutionalization of rule by unelected, unaccountable forces of the military/industrial/financial elite by his creation of the Competitiveness Council (arising out of the aforesaid agreements) so that their representatives can guide his government. You have secret meetings occurring between such people along with present and former members of government including Deputy Prime Ministers, and Deputy Ministers, Cabinet Ministers, and senior officials, such as occurred this September 2006 at Banff, AB, Canada, all for the purpose of planning, reporting on, and agreeing to ways to hasten this process. That power must be clipped, not augmented. Bill C-16 comes into play here because the North American Agenda calls for full integration and unity by 2010. Bill C-16 would prevent any election before 2009. That time frame would stifle and prevent the only democratic way of stopping this Union – an election to unseat all those MP’s who are complicit in the Betrayal of Canada. Further, we have grave concerns that Bill C-16 will eliminate or frustrate the “confidence convention” referred to in the Backgrounder. We concur that this convention “goes to the very root of parliamentary democracy”. It is crucial to our democracy that government must possess the confidence of the parliament, and that the “confidence convention” principle must remain protected as a basic tenet, untarnished and unviolated. Elections restricted to once every four years would undermine this principle, and would cripple the power of minority governments to reflect the will of the people to activate the power inherent in non-confidence motions. We quote from the Backgrounder, “Under the confidence convention, the executive, or ministry, must have the confidence of the majority in the legislature. A government that is defeated on a vote of confidence is expected to resign or seek a dissolution. A new government must meet the House, and demonstrate that it has the confidence, or support, of the majority. What is involved is a convention, one that does not appear in the text of the Constitution (though, arguably, it forms part of the Constitution), in a statute, or the Standing Orders of the House, but which goes to the very root of parliamentary democracy.” For your ready reference, we repeat the arguments against a fixed election date as set out in the backgrounder. http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?lang=E&ls=c16&source=library_prb&Parl=39&Ses=1 Arguments Against Fixed Election Dates … opponents cite various disadvantages associated with setting fixed election dates. These include the following: Fixed election dates and fixed terms are inconsistent with a parliamentary form of government, in which the executive must retain the confidence of the legislature. Governments would be able to do anything they wanted after an election, knowing that they would not have to face the next election for a specified period of time – there would be no requirement or incentive for governments to retain the confidence of a majority of the House of Commons, and they would be insulated from public opinion. It would make it harder than at present to remove an unpopular government between elections. It would not accommodate circumstances where governments may need, or want, to go to the people with an election; for instance, if a major issue or change of platform arose, or if the House of Commons was at an impasse. The calling of elections is an important and legitimate tool for a government: the threat of dissolution allows governments to keep their members in line, and the opposition off balance. Much of the impetus for fixed election dates comes from the mistaken notion that governments are elected; governments, in fact, are appointed, and are responsible to the House of Commons; an election is the election of individuals to serve in the House of Commons. With respect to the argument that fixed terms would lead to stability and to the opportunity for the government to carry through its policies and legislative program, it has been pointed out that stability and accountability are often inherently in conflict, and that security for governments should not take precedence over accountability. Fixed election dates or fixed terms would remove from individual Members the power – seldom exercised – to withdraw their support, and cause the downfall of the government. Thus, the status or independence of individual Members, whether government or opposition, would arguably be no better off under such a system. Further, we concur with this observation and statement: “Opponents of fixed election dates argue that they are inconsistent with parliamentary traditions and interfere with the effective functioning of Parliament. It is argued that the Prime Minister must have the flexibility and freedom to seek the dissolution of Parliament at any time – whether because of a loss of confidence or because of a need or desire for a renewed mandate from the electorate. Major policy initiatives, on which the government believes an election should be held, can arise outside of an election period. Fixed election dates could lead to paralysis if the House is unable to function, and if the situation cannot be resolved in the usual way by calling an election. Fixed election dates also raise the prospect of an American-style campaign that stretches over months or years, rather than a short period. It would also be possible for a government to forestall a fixed election date by engineering its own defeat on a motion of confidence. In addition, it is not correct to say that the existing system, where the Prime Minister determines the date of the election, always works to the advantage of the governing party, as many governments have been defeated at the polls. It is also debatable whether a fixed election date would in fact loosen party discipline.” http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?lang=E&ls=c16&source=library_prb&Parl=39&Ses=1 This Bill is contrary to the best interest of Canadians and should not be passed. Thank you for your consideration of our position. We look forward to the defeat of this Bill. Yours truly Constance Fogal, Leader Canadian Action Party/ Parti Action Canadienne Contact info: Canadian Action Party/ Parti Action Canadienne Leader, Constance (Connie) Fogal Telephone (604) 872 2128 home; Fax: (604) 872 1504 E-mail: conniefogal@telus.net #385- 916 West Broadway, Vancouver B.C. V5Z1K7 Tel: (604) 708-3372;Fax: (604) 872 1504; e- mail: info@canadianactionparty.ca www.canadianactionparty.ca [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on September 29, 2006]

Note: www.parl.gc.ca http://www.parl.gc.ca/c... http://www.parl.gc.ca/c... www.canadianactionparty.ca

Options

“Urgent ACTION Required! Canadians Must Say NO To BILL C-16!”

Contributed By

Topic

Article Rating

Options

Latest Editorials

Your Voice