Agenda
of
the
Harper
Government
Parliament Opens Revealing Deceitful, Corrupt and
Abusive Nature of Harper Government
Parliament opened on September 19 with a tribute from
each of the parties in the House of Commons to former leader of the NDP
Jack Layton who passed away on
August 22, 2011 from cancer. In his tribute to Layton, Prime Minister
Stephen Harper invoked values of "civility" and referred to the House
of Commons as a place to
"take stock of all potential solutions and decide which path to take."
The deceitful nature of his government was promptly revealed when its
first order of business was to
give notice that it would be tabling back-to-work legislation against
the Air
Canada flight attendants should they go on strike to defend their
demands for wages and working conditions
commensurate with the service they provide.
Debate then took place on the government's Bill C-4 Preventing
Human
Smugglers
from
Abusing
Canada's
Immigration
System
Act
and
the newly tabled omnibus crime bill, C-10, the Safe
Streets
and Communities Act. The government also tabled a new piece of
legislation from the Senate, Bill S-204 An Act to establish a
national strategy for chronic
cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI).
During debate on Bill C-4
it became clear that the
legislation has nothing to do with stopping human smugglers. It's aim
is to provide new arbitrary powers to the Minister of
Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, presently Jason Kenney,
permitting him to designate refugees of his
choosing as "irregular arrivals" leading to
their incarceration for up to one year. It was also revealed
that the legislation will apply retroactively so that the Minister can
designate "irregular arrivals" from March 31,
2009.
On September 21 the heinous nature of the omnibus
crime bill was overshadowed by the explosive revelation that the Harper
government has spent $19.8 million --
what amounts to $90,000 a day -- to hire consulting firm Deloitte Inc.
to
advise it on how to direct its cuts to government spending. The
revelation led to questions as to why
the Harper government is not relying on the government's own civil
servants to do their jobs and instead is wasting vast sums of money
paying
consultants to direct government
decisions.
The fact that the Harper government is quite prepared to
pay such funds from the state treasury to pander to its own
self-serving agenda and present it with a justification
reveals just how corrupt it is and that the values it claims to
represent are nothing but justifications for rampant corruption. This
has already been seen with the vast sums
spent on the G8 meetings under the hoax of showcasing Canada and
providing security. In that case, $50 million of public funds went
straight into the hands of the man
overseeing the cuts to government spending -- current Treasury Board
President Tony Clement and his buddies in his riding -- by-passing all
proper accounting procedures. This is
to say nothing about the Harper government's notions of accountability
and transparency which are in shambles. Meanwhile internationally it
demands accountability and
transparency from other governments as pretexts to not only interfere
in their internal affairs but launch wars of aggression and occupation.
Actions of the Harper
Government in Foreign Affairs
While Canada continues its
aggression against Libya, the
UN General Assembly opened its 66th
session on September 20 and met under the theme: "the role of mediation
in the settlement of disputes by peaceful means." It is reported that
Foreign Minister John Baird,
notorious for signing a Canadian bomb dropped on Libyans, addressed
the Assembly on the theme.
Meanwhile, also on September 20, Prime Minister Harper
attended a
high-level UN meeting on Libya, following which he announced Canada's
support for a new UN "reconstruction"
mission in Libya. Despite his government being increasingly exposed as
corrupt with a self-declared "mandate" for its anti-democratic,
anti-social, war-mongering agenda,
Harper shamelessly declared that "Canada will continue to support the
people of Libya, standing ready to promote effective governance and
institutions, a secure environment
founded on the rule of law, economic development and prosperity, and
respect for human rights."
Just a day later, Harper was busy furthering his drive
to annex Canada into a United States of the North American Monopolies.
Harper held meetings in New York with
U.S. monopoly finance capitalists regarding the importance of
"strengthening commercial relations" between Canada and the U.S.
In related news, the Harper
government has also been
actively pursuing its agenda of supporting Zionist reaction by
criminalizing any criticism of the Israeli occupation of
Palestinian lands, in Canada or abroad. It also opposed a high-level UN
meeting held on September 22 commemorating the 10th anniversary of the
Durban World Conference
against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia. Just prior to this
meeting, Canada launched the Ottawa Protocol on
"Combating Anti-Semitism"
on September 19, where Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism
Minister Jason Kenney and Foreign Affairs Minister Baird were present.
"Signing the Ottawa Protocol
signals our continued commitment to leading a coordinated global effort
to fight anti-Semitism. Just as Canada is moving ahead to develop and
build a National Holocaust
Monument in the National Capital Region, we also plan to take our
commitment to parliamentarians around the world and suggest that they
join us in signing the Protocol,"
Baird stated.
What to Expect in the
Coming Week
On Monday, September 26 the Parliament will vote on the
following motion tabled by the Harper government to extend
Canada's criminal aggression against Libya and to demand the
unconditional allegiance of Parliament to Canada's military:
"That, standing in solidarity with those seeking freedom
in Libya, the House adopted Government motions on March 21 and June 14,
2011, authorizing all necessary
measures, including the use of the Canadian Armed Forces and military
assets in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolution
1973; that given the current
military situation and the success of National Transitional Council
(NTC) and anti-Gaddafi forces to date, the House supports an extension
of up to three months of the
involvement of the Canadian Armed Forces operating with NATO in
accordance with the legal mandate from the UNSC Resolution 1973; that
the House continues to support
Canada's engagement in all spheres in the rebuilding of a new Libya,
including human rights, democratic development and the rule of law;
that the House deplores the
violence committed by the previous regime against the Libyan people,
including the alleged use of rape as a weapon of war; that the House of
Commons Standing Committee
on Foreign Affairs and International Development and the Standing
Committee on National Defence shall remain seized of Canada's
activities under UNSC Resolution 1973
and in the rebuilding of the new Libya; and that the House continues to
offer its wholehearted and unconditional support to the brave men and
women of the Canadian Armed
Forces, who stand on guard for all of us, and continue to protect
Libyan civilians from the risks still posed by the Gaddafi regime."
Showing what a fraud the Harper
government's notion of
democracy is, Prime Minister Harper announced the vote after declaring
the mission will continue no matter
what Parliament says: "we will participate in the mission until armed
threats from Gadhafi forces are eliminated from the country. We will
ask Parliament to extend the
mission by three months, but I'm going to be frank with you in saying
I'm pretty optimistic we'll achieve our objectives well before that
timeline." Revealing the urgent
necessity for the Workers' Opposition to oppose all conciliation with
Harper's war-mongering, NDP Foreign Affairs Critic Paul Dewar
essentially echoed Harper's stand
about the need for the use of force to settle differences in
international affairs and the need to now get on with bringing Canadian
democracy to Libya: "We think the military
contribution that we've made has been enough and we think that the next
steps obviously is rebuilding Libya and helping them ... really get on
with the next phase in terms
of its development both democratically and also in terms of rebuilding
the infrastructure."
Showing clearly the kind of democracy and human rights
Harper wants for the workers of Libya, immediately after the vote on
the NATO mission, debate will begin
on the Harper government's back-to-work legislation against Air Canada
flight attendants.
TML Weekly Information Project will continue to
keep you abreast of these important developments and encourages you to
contribute to this work by
elaborating CPC(M-L)'s nation-building project as an alternative to the
wrecking of the Harper government and the monopolies it represents.
In the Parliament
Bill C-4
Attempt to Criminalize Immigration,
Attack Rights and
Divide the People
- Philip Fernandez -
The Harper government's Bill C-4, An
Act
to
amend
the
Immigration
and
Refugee
Protection
Act,
the
Balanced Refugee Reform
Act and the Marine Transportation
Security Act was one of the first pieces of legislation discussed
when Parliament reconvened on September 19. Also
known as the Preventing
Human Smugglers from Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act, it
was initially tabled by Minister of Public Safety Vic Toews as Bill
C-49 in October 2010 at
which time it faced widespread opposition by the people and
parliamentary opposition. Armed with a majority government, the Harper
government reintroduced
this draft legislation as Bill C-4 with the aim of pushing through its
overall retrogressive "law and order" agenda under the hoax of
protecting "the safety and security of
Canadians." It constitutes a serious racist setback to Canada's
immigration system.
Speaking to the bill at second reading on September 19,
Minister Toews
justified these racist measures on the basis of the spurious "mandate"
the Conservatives claim by virtue
of a majority government. In this way, Bill C-4 and other measures are
imposed in the most arbitrary and undemocratic fashion to serve a
narrow anti-social agenda. What
kind of government claims a mandate for carrying out criminal policies
that violate human rights and international humanitarian law under any
circumstance? It must not
pass!
In the name of opposing "human smuggling," the bill
attacks rights and violates international humanitarian law. Like
security certificates, which are also part of
immigration legislation, this legislation will undermine rights by
singling out refugees and immigrants as potential criminals or
terrorists. It continues the trend of putting
more and more arbitrary power in the hands of the Immigration Minister
or closed tribunals to deem certain people undesirable, with little or
no recourse to appeal.
Immigration
Minister Jason Kenney, in addressing the bill on September 19, piously
stated that Parliament "needs to take
action to put an end to the activities of
human smugglers who have chosen Canada as a destination for their
business, which is the dreadful exploitation of human beings." The
truth is that the Harper government
actually supports the exploitation of refugees and immigrants with its
temporary foreign worker and live-in caregiver programs and by
encouraging brain drain from less
developed countries, as well as participating in wars of aggression and
occupation that give rise to refugees to be used as cheap labour. Thus,
the matter of "human smuggling"
is a diversion from the fact that such a law will not accomplish its
ostensible purpose and will be used to further undermine the rights of
all.
Canada's immigration system already
turns the social
matter of immigration into a law and order problem on a racist basis.
Bill C-49, the previous incarnation
of Bill C-4, was introduced in the wake of the arrival of a total of
600 Tamil immigrants and refugees on two vessels, the MV Ocean Lady
in October 2009
and MV Sun Sea in the summer of 2010. The arrival of this
group of immigrants and refugees including children and elderly, was
then used by the racist Canadian
state, with the help of the monopoly media and other backward elements,
to whip up racist hysteria and justify jailing these refugees and to
split the political unity of the
Canadian people and attack the rights of all.
The narrow political agenda of racist Bill C-4 is
essentially no different than the Asian exclusion laws of the early
20th century at the time of the Komagata
Maru incident in 1914, for which the Harper government grudgingly
issued an apology in 2008.
For the Harper government to term certain immigration
issues as a problem of "human smuggling" covers up that the government
itself is involved in trafficking
workers from overseas and facilitating immigration of a questionable
nature, which undermines the rights and working conditions of all
Canadian workers by circumventing
labour practices and laws. The government brings in cheap labour to
serve the monopolies through its temporary foreign worker program and
takes advantage of countries
that export their citizens as cheap labour, as in the case of the
live-in caregiver program. Many of these workers are modern day slaves
who are brought in as expendable
indentured labour, forced to stay in dangerous working conditions and
impoverished living conditions, without any rights worthy of the name.
The Harper government presents regulation of
immigration as necessary to hold back invading hordes seeking to
undermine Canadian values or who may even
be terrorists. Minister Kenney, in his intervention in the Parliament
concerning Bill C-4, had the gall to suggest that it is necessary to
imprison and deny immigrants and
refugees who come to Canada by unconventional means their rights in
order to
"discourage" them from arriving in Canada in this way.
This is also to spread disinformation
that Canadians want to keep out immigrants and refugees "who jump the
queue" and that his government is to responding this demand by the
Canadian people!
Nothing could be further from the truth. The Canadian
people have always opposed the Canadian state for its racist
immigration policy and have always stood
for a just and humane immigration policy that recognizes the
fundamental rights of immigrants and refugees.
Contrary to the government presenting itself as taking
the moral high ground to exclude immigrants, Canada has in many cases a
profound responsibility for the
well-being of those forced into poverty and migration. Canadian mining
firms are notorious the world over for their destruction of the social
and natural environments that
displace people by the tens of thousands. In 2004, Canada was an active
participant in the coup in Haiti that disempowered the Haitian people,
resulting in dire and
deteriorating conditions from then to the present. Canada participated
in the Korean War, the 78-day NATO bombing of Yugoslavia and is
participating in the military
occupation of Afghanistan. Most recently Canada has spawned a refugee
crisis in Libya by its illegal war against and bombing of that
country. Far from labelling those who
take desperate measures to seek asylum in Canada as criminals and
terrorists, it is the Harper government which carries out criminal and
terrorist acts at home and abroad
which lead to more and more people being displaced around the world.
In order for Canada to provide justice for those harmed
by these actions, it must end these relations based on exploitation and
aggression. Only by all nations
and peoples having the right to be without outside interference in
their domestic social, economic and political affairs can the social
problem of the international refugee
crisis be addressed. Furthermore, Canada has an obligation to provide
for the well-being of those harmed either through reparations to allow
people to remain in their home
countries or to facilitate their immigration to Canada where they
should be accorded full rights.
Canadians come from all nations of the world and the
country itself was founded on the ongoing dispossession of the First
Nations. A modern discussion on the
question of immigration must be based on these considerations and
others while ensuring that rights, which belong to people by virtue of
their being human, are provided
with a guarantee. Laws such as Bill C-4, which are an abomination of
these
principles, are only meant to stir the pot, incite racism and division
of the polity and undermine the
rights of all. Bill C-4 must be vigorously opposed and withdrawn!
Overview of Immigration Bill
Bill C-4, with the short name Preventing Human
Smugglers from
Abusing Canada's Immigration System Act, is an Act to amend the Immigration
and
Refugee
Protection Act, the Balanced Refugee Reform Act and the Marine
Transportation
Security
Act (with the short name ) was tabled in the House
of Commons on June
16, 2011. Speaking to the bill on June 21, Minister of Public Safety
Vic Toews stated in part:
"Bill C-4 would, first and foremost, crack down on those
criminals who would abuse our generous immigration system and endanger
the safety and security of our
Canadian communities. We are providing a strong deterrent to those who
are organizing human smuggling operations to jump the queue into Canada
and we are ensuring
the integrity and fairness of Canada's immigration system for years to
come."
According to government information, Bill C-4 among
other things:
"Authorizes the Minister, in certain circumstances, to
designate as an irregular arrival, the arrival in Canada of a group of
persons, the result of which is that some of
the foreign nationals in the group become designated foreign nationals;
"Authorizes an officer or the Minister to refuse to
consider an application for permanent residence;
"Provides that a person may not become a permanent
resident as long as an application by the Minister for cessation of
that person's refugee protection is pending;
"And as grounds for detention [for up to 12 months or
more] of a permanent resident or foreign national, the existence of
reasonable grounds to suspect that the person
concerned is inadmissible on grounds of serious criminality,
criminality or organized criminality;
"Provide that certain designated foreign nationals may
not apply to become permanent residents until the expiry of a certain
period and that the processing of any pending
applications for permanent residence is suspended for a certain period;
"Extend the time for instituting proceeding by way of
summary conviction from six months to five years;
"Authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations
respecting the reporting requirements imposed on certain designated
foreign nationals;
"...amends the Balanced
Refugee
Reform Act to provide
that a refugee protection claimant who claim is rejected is not
prevented from applying for protection earlier
than 12 months after the day on which the claim was rejected;
"...amends the Marine
Transportation Security Act to
increase the penalties for persons who fail to provide information
required to be reported before a vessel enters
Canadian waters or to comply with ministerial directions and for
persons who provide false or misleading information. It creates a new
offence for vessels that fail to comply
with ministerial directions."
Despite the ostensible aim of Bill C-4 to target "human
smugglers" the proposed legislation creates a new category of refugee
claimants -- "designated foreign nationals"
-- which is defined broadly enough to justify criminalizing most people
who come to Canada as refugees. It also violates a fundamental
provision of the UN Refugee
Convention (Article 31) which says that governments must not impose
penalties on refugees for unconventional entry. Bill C-4, not only
imprisons "designated foreign
nationals," it also deprives them of their legal and social
rights.
Those "designated foreign nations" as defined by the
Minister of Public Safety or his or her officials, are automatically
jailed and cannot appeal their detention for twelve
months, and every six months after that, pending a review of their
application, except under what is termed "special circumstances." What
these "special circumstances" are
is not defined, but left for the Minister or his or her officials to
decide. This condition of jailing "designated foreign nationals" a
minimum of 12 months without review is
a retrogressive step. Currently, refugees who are detained are required
to have a review within 48 hours, then after a week and then every
month.
Bill C-4 also violates the rights of refugees in that
even after being granted refugee status, they cannot apply to be
landed-immigrants nor will they be allowed to sponsor
their families, nor be permitted to travel outside Canada. These are
all arbitrary measures that humiliate people.
Bill C-4 also requires that children deemed "designated
foreign nationals" be taken into custody in violation of the UN
Convention on the Rights of A Child which states
under Article 3: "The best interests of children must be the primary
concern in making decisions that may affect them. All adults should do
what is best for children. When
adults make decisions, they should think about how their decisions will
affect children. This particularly applies to budget, policy and law
makers." Under the provisions
of Bill C-4, children who are "designated foreign nationals" can be
deported from Canada without consideration of their best interests.
Furthermore, children as well as adults
who are "designated foreign nationals" are unable to apply for status
on "humanitarian and compassionate grounds" until five years have
lapsed, keeping them in a state of
anguish and turmoil.
Bill C-4 imposes mandatory reporting provisions on all
"designated" refugee claimants who have been accepted as refugees --
they have to report to an immigration officer
as required by regulations, answer all questions and be vulnerable to
exploitation as informants by immigration officials or face not
being granted permanent status.
Bill-C 4 is also in contempt of the Canadian
Charter
of
Rights
and
Freedoms and international laws such as the
UN Refugee Convention and the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Bill C-10
Omnibus Crime Bill Fails to
Identify the Real Criminals
- Enver Villamizar -
On September 20, Minister of Justice and Attorney
General of Canada Rob Nicholson introduced into Parliament Bill C-10, The
Safe Streets and
Communities Act. The bill combines nine separate bills that the
Conservatives could not pass while a minority government. During the
federal election Harper
promised to pass an omnibus crime bill within 100 days of being
elected. What would be in that bill and its significance was not
discussed. Now, armed with a majority,
Harper claims his government has a mandate to ram the bill through
Parliament without discussion to bring out its significance.
Tabling the bill, Justice Minister and Attorney General
Nicholson stated: "The bill [...] fulfils the commitment in the
June 2011 Speech from the Throne to quickly
reintroduce law and order legislation to combat crime and terrorism.
This commitment, in turn, reflects the strong mandate that Canadians
have given us to protect society
and to hold criminals accountable. We have bundled together crime bills
that died on the Order Paper in the last Parliament into a
comprehensive piece of legislation and
it is our plan to pass it within the first 100 sitting days of
Parliament."
Addressing concerns about the use of an omnibus bill,
rather than dealing with each bill individually, Nicholson added: "Some
may say that this comprehensive bill makes
it difficult to understand. In response I would note that these reforms
should be very familiar to members of Parliament, indeed all Canadians,
given that these reforms were
before the previous Parliament when they died on the Order Paper with
the dissolution of that Parliament. Many of these reforms have been
previously debated, studied and
even passed by at least one of the two chambers of Parliament. For the
most part, the comprehensive legislation reintroduces these reforms in
the same form they were in
previously, with technical changes that were needed to be able to
reintroduce them in this Parliament in one bill."
Both the NDP and the Liberals raised opposition to the
bill from the standpoint that: 1) the tougher sentencing rules would
increase the number of people in prisons;
2) that this would impose burdensome costs onto the government, and
that these costs should be made public; and 3) that statistics show the
rate
of crime is falling, which shows
there is no need for this approach to fighting crime. It is reported
that the Liberals have also tabled a "reasoned amendment" to try to
delay passage of the bill. Liberal
MP Sean Casey has proposed an amendment that would delete every page in
the bill and replace it with a vow not to pass it on to the next stage
in Parliament. This measure
would mean that the debate on the amendment will continue until no more
MPs want to debate it.
Responding to criticism about the costs of the bill,
Justice Minister Nicholson stated: "it is a priority for the
Conservative Party that 83% of that cost is borne by the
victims of crime. They are the ones who pay the price. I would hope
that at some point in time those members will stand up and say that
they are worried about costs and
have become fiscal conservatives and they are worried about spending
every dime, but they realize that most of the cost continues to be
borne by victims in this country,
who are the ones we have to stand up for." Addressing statistics which
show a trend of dropping crime rates he is reported to have stated:
"We're not governing on the basis
of the latest statistics; we're governing on the basis of what's right
to better protect victims and law-abiding Canadians."
Canadians should keep in mind the following points as
the debate on the Harper government's omnibus crime bill begins in the
Parliament and monopoly-owned
media:
1. The crime bills do not
identify the real criminals in
this country -- the parasites who suck the blood of the working people
and leave their lives a shambles of insecurity,
both during their working lives and in retirement. These criminals are
selling out the country's resources, destroying its manufacturing,
taking away pensions and benefits
and leaving all members of the polity to fend for themselves, including
workers injured on the job who created the wealth these parasites are
using to pay themselves
handsome bonuses. A good example was the back-to-work legislation
imposed on postal workers, which CPC(M-L) pointed out: "is clearly
intended to impose Canada Post's
'Modern Post' which will not only destroy the public Post Office but
imposes unacceptable working conditions on postal workers. These
working conditions are unacceptable
precisely because they are unsustainable. The level of injuries the
postal workers are sustaining is a blatant abuse of power on the part
of Canada Post and must be deemed
a criminal offence. It is a real degeneration of the role of government
to impose such plans of the monopolies on the workers."
The crime bills do not address these crimes.
2. Two- and three-tiered
justice is no justice at all.
The same government that claims to be so interested in protecting
society from criminals refuses to right historical
wrongs against the First Nations, and does not even sort out the
problem of the "missing women," or provide adequate housing and health
care for Canada's First Nations.
It also fails to provide all families with adequate affordable housing,
child care, health care, education and jobs and suitable recreation for
Canada's youth or jobs. A society
that is not based on prevention and rehabilitation, but crime and
punishment can be called anything, but not modern.
3. Finally, beware of omnibus bills. They are Harper's
great discovery of the American way of hiding things in between one
sentence and another so as to railroad
decisions through by accusations of betrayal, treason and moral
turpitude thrown at opponents so that nobody can think. In this light,
the omnibus bill introduces very
significant precedents to criminalize Canadians' right to conscience
and put in place measures to strip Canadians of their rights, all in
the name of "fighting terrorism." The
bill establishes a Canadian list of "terrorist states" or "states that
support terrorism" -- something which is currently in place in the
United States but not in Canada. Canada
currently has a list of terrorist entities, not states. The U.S. lists
Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria as state sponsors of terrorism. The new
Canadian list is supposedly part of
provisions to permit Canadian courts to hear lawsuits from "victims of
terrorism" against "listed states."
The bill also includes
changes to laws relating to the International
Transfer of Offenders Act that give the Minister of Public Safety
new arbitrary powers
to deny a Canadian charged with a crime in another country repatriaton.
This is likely related to an arrangement between the
Canadian and U.S. government made
in 2010 which is set to see Canadian Omar Khadr, currently being held
by the U.S. at its torture camp in Guantanamo Bay, transferred to
Canada on November 1, 2011
as part of his plea agreement with U.S. authorities. Is the Harper
government now planning to block the transfer using this measure?
Overview of Crime Bill
Bill C-10, the omnibus crime bill is divided into 5
parts:
Part 1: Justice for Victims of Terrorism
Part 2: Sentencing
Part 3: Post-Sentencing
Part 4: Youth Criminal Justice
Part 5: Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
Part 1: Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act
This part brings forward Bill S-7 from the last
Parliament and would establish a new act that "creates a cause of
action that allows victims of terrorism to sue perpetrators
of terrorism and their supporters." This new Act would have the
Minister of Public Safety establish within six months of
passage, a list of states which the Canadian
government labelled terrorist which could be sued by so-called
victims of terrorism in Canada. It would amend the State Immunity
Act to lift immunity of those states that the government has
listed "for support of terrorism."
In addition, the new law would permit the Canadian government to take
the assets in Canada of a listed
state in the event a law suit brought against it was successful. This
appears to be an attempt to make legal in Canadian law the theft of
monies from states targeted by Canada
and the U.S. as was done in the case of Libya by the Harper government
as part of the sanctions it imposed. One difficulty the Harper
government reportedly had
with Libya was finding ways to legally "unfreeze" Libyan assets in
Canada to hand over to the so-called rebels.
Part 2: Sentencing
This part brings forward four bills from the previous
Parliament:
C-5: Gives the Minister of Public Safety arbitrary
powers to deny the transfer of a Canadian citizen back to Canada to
serve the remainder of a sentence.
C-16: Ends house arrest as an option for judges for
"serious crimes," including sexual assault.
C-54: Imposes mandatory jail time for sexual offences
against children.
S-10: Creates mandatory minimum sentences for drug
crimes including labelling anyone in possession of as few as six
marijuana plants as a trafficker and imposing a
minimum 6-month jail sentence.
Part 3: Post-Sentencing
C-39: Imposes new regulations in the parole system that
make it harder to obtain parole.
C-23B: Eliminates pardons for certain criminals and
establishes a new, more difficult system for clearing one's criminal
record
entitled "record suspension." The name implies
that it is only a temporary clearing of a person's record.
Part 4: Youth Criminal Justice
C-4: Establishes new principles for the Youth
Criminal Justice Act emphasizing punishment rather than
prevention of youth crime. It allows judges to publicly
identify young offenders, adds new definitions and categories of
"serious offences" and "violent offences" in line with new
principles, which include making it a violent
offence to "threaten to commit" a violent offence. It also makes
changes regarding how and when an adult sentence will be imposed on a
young offender.
Part 5: Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
Bill C-56: Amends the Immigration and
Refugee Protection Act to authorize immigration officers to
refuse work permits to immigrant or migrant
workers if: "they are at risk of humiliating or degrading treatment,
including sexual exploitation or human trafficking." In other words,
instead of dealing with employers
who violate labour laws and the rights of immigrant or migrant
workers, the victims are made the problem and new powers are given to
immigration officials to refuse entry
to certain people at their discretion, all in the name of "protecting
them." The Minister of Justice put it this way: [the provisions of the
bill] "include
immigration reforms to better protect
vulnerable foreign workers against abuse and exploitation, including
through human trafficking."
Bills from Previous
Parliament Not Included
C-50 and C-51: Both bills would make it easier for law
enforcement to monitor telephone and electronic
communications to "prevent crime and terrorist acts."
C-17: Would change Canada's terrorism laws to bring back
some clauses of the 2001 Anti-Terror
Act that expired in 2007 and would
allow for preventive arrest and
investigative hearings that force someone to disclose information
related to possible terrorism. Prime Minister Harper recently indicated
that this legislation would be brought
forward.
Canadian
Wheat Board
Understanding Freedom: When the Liberal Conception of
Freedom Turns into a
Self-Serving Justification for a Fascist Regime
- Dougal MacDonald -
A September 14 editorial in
the private monopoly
newspaper the National Post declares that the key issue
regarding Harper's plan to forcibly destroy the
Canadian Wheat Board, no matter what the farmers, workers and others
say, is "freedom of choice." The editorial states that a public
monopoly like the CWB, which is run
by the grain farmers and which uses its marketing power to operate in
the best interests of the farmers and the Canadian people instead of
filling the pockets of the owners
of private grain monopolies, is "incompatible with democratic rights."
The editorial goes on to mouth empty phrases like "It's a free
country," "there is no moral and ethical
justification," and "the only authority to impose a (public) grain
(marketing) monopoly is ‘brute force'." The editorial ends with the
"ringing" conclusion that "no matter how
many farmers had voted for the monopoly, as Agriculture Minister
(Gerry) Ritz said, there is no democratic authority that can trump the
individual right of farmers to market
their own grain."
The first thing to note is that the editorial launches
its attack by trying to turn into an abstraction the very practical
question of how to market our farmers' grain at the
best possible price to the farmers, while maintaining control of our
own food supply. The practical solution of the farmers for decades has
been to overwhelmingly support
the public monopoly of the CWB. The old Progressive Conservative party
first passed the Canadian Wheat
Board Act in 1935, with overwhelming
support from the Western
provinces. The Act contained the single desk provision which was
proclaimed in 1942, and the single desk was voted on every five years
until it was made permanent in
1967. With the exception of seven eastern MPs in 1947, all those votes
were unanimous. The single desk means that as the sole marketer of the
high quality wheat and
barley grown in western Canada, the CWB is able to provide marketing
clout to individual farmers who benefit from higher returns. By selling
together, western Canadian
farmers are able to exert more power in the global marketplace than
they could if they were competing against each other. Such a situation
is obviously in the interests of
the farmers and of the rest of the Canadian people, which is why the
farmers have continued to support it.
To state that the CWB should be wrecked because Canada
is a "free country" fools no one because in Canada only the private
monopolies are "free." To give just one
example, the foreign private monopoly U.S. Steel is using its power to
dictate to active members of USW Local 1005 in Hamilton to vote to
change the agreed-upon pension
arrangement for themselves, new hires, and those already retired. The
Ontario and federal governments are fully aware of U.S. Steel's abuse
of power to extort changes
to the pension arrangements yet they have not intervened to restrict
the use of monopoly right to crush the public right of Canadian
workers. The actual experience of the
farmers, steelworkers and others has long demonstrated to them
that Canada is not a "free country" in terms of fostering the public
right of the people to advance what
is in their interests but it is a country where the monopolies, with
the full support of the state, are free to do whatever they want to
maximize their private profits, at the
expense of everyone else. This is why Harper is clearing the ground for
Viterra, Cargill, Richardson and other private monopolies to seize
control of Canadian grain
marketing.
The National Post editorial is crammed with
disinformation. For example, neither the National Post nor
the Harperites actually believe one iota
in "freedom" of choice for anyone except the monopolies. (Harper, of
course, freely chose long ago to be a slave to the monopolies!) As
journalist Abbott Liebling famously
remarked in 1960, "Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who
own one," and this is why the monopoly National Post is able
to spout its
disinformation in support of Harper's plans. Similarly, freedom to
market grain outside of a public monopoly belongs only to those who own
a private grain marketing
company, such as Viterra, Cargill and Richardson. Under any system
where such private agri-monopolies control grain marketing, as was the
case prior to the advent of
the CWB and the single desk, the farmers clearly have no freedom of
choice at all but must take whatever the private monopolies force on
them, including bankruptcy. In
contrast, a public monopoly is compatible with the democratic rights of
the farmers because it works in the interests of individual farmers, in
the collective interests of the
farmers and in the collective interests of the Canadian people as a
whole.
It is ludicrous that the National Post editorial states
that "the only authority to impose a (public) grain (marketing)
monopoly is ‘brute force'." In fact, the reality is that
the only authority to impose a private grain marketing monopoly is
brute force and this is exactly what Harper has to do because of the
numerous militant actions of the
farmers and their many supporters to defend the CWB single desk. The
Harper government has already spent a great deal of the Canadian
people's money trying to illegally
influence the results of farmer votes regarding retention of the single
desk. This includes giving three options on a ballot and then adding
the
results of two of the options together
to get the answer the government wanted, issuing "gag orders" against
CWB directors and staff, firing CWB president Adrian Measner, changing
voting lists to eliminate
pro-CWB voters, banning the secret ballot, not restricting third party
spending on campaigns against the CWB and so on. But no matter what
dirty tricks they have tried,
the Harperites have failed because the Canadian farmers and people have
time and again shown their democratic support for the CWB, which is why
Harper now must resort
to using brute force to destroy the CWB. Then his masters in Viterra,
Cargill and Richardson can reimpose their private monopoly, as they
have already done, for example,
in Australia.
It is important to note that it is normal for
arch-reactionaries such as the National Post and Harper to
invoke the call of "freedom" to justify the most heinous
crimes against the people. In such situations the liberal conception of
freedom turns into a self-serving justification for a fascist regime.
The U.S. imperialist aggression which
killed over a million Vietnamese people was justified as a crusade to
"free" the Vietnamese people. In 1987, the infamous U.S. President
Ronald Reagan stated "The (Berlin)
wall cannot withstand freedom," then "freely" fired 11,345 striking air
traffic controllers, after having already drawn world-wide condemnation
in
1985 when he honored the Nazi and
SS troops buried in Berlin's Bitberg Cemetery. Similarly, Harper stated
on March 18 that, "One either believes in freedom, or one just says one
believes in freedom," when
he argued for the participation of the Canadian military in the war
crime of the illegal bombing of the Libyan people in support of U.S.
imperialism. The Canadian people
are not fooled by these self-serving declarations and are resolutely
opposed to fascist maneuvers like destroying the CWB which merely
constitute nation-wrecking to enrich
the monopolies. As Hardial Bains has so aptly stated, "Freedom, in
whose name so many dirty deeds have been committed, will take its
revenge in the victory of those who
are seeking the real solution to the real problems."[1]
Note
1. Bains, Hardial (1991). Communism
1989-91.
Ideological Studies Centre.
September 24, 2011 Bulletin • Return to Index • Write to: editor@cpcml.ca
|