It's his usual MO and will be as long as he has a majority. Unfortunately, it also sets a precedent that I fully expect either Trudeau or Mulcair will be happy to follow if they get into power. Chretien certainly flirted with it at times.

I no longer regard Harper as the villain in our system. The system itself is f**ked up badly and all the players are gaming it to their advantage whenever possible. Harper would not be possible if the system was fixed so focussing on him instead of broader problems in the system will fix nothing. Trudeau has given me no reason to believe he will be any better if he has a majority behind him. More of a demogogue, perhaps, but that's not the same thing as a democrat.

Mendalla

I find it so rich that the bill is hiding a change that permits money launderers more time with their lawyers. 

I betch Tony Clemente suggested that one...

And this in a "Budget" bill.

There is certainly an appalling lack of any moral framework in the Liberals and the Conservatives and, to put it kindly, a decline of such a framework in the NDP.

The Greens do have such a framework, but oh, it's hopelessly narrow.

As to Trudeau, I quite agree there's nothing to look forward to in him. More sadly, the whole Liberal party  has become a sad lot.

Trudeau has alienated alot of his fan base by getting behind Keystone XL. I guess they forgot he was a Liberal & not Green or NDP. Strange - he's always stated that position on his website right from the start. Seems not too many check such things...

What is really sad is that thoughtful and educated Canadians cannot stop the government process; we can see an omnibus bill coming down the pipe, understand its dangers and still not stop it from passing, and becoming law.

We all will all be screwed.  Tories do not care about "working class" or "middle class". Bill C-4 will prove this assertion.

We ar living  a very quiet tea party.

I am bumping this because everyone should be aware of Bill C-4.  There is great harm embedded in this Bill.

Hi redhead,

According to The House of Commons Projected Order of Business Bill C-4 starts a 4th sitting at noon today.  Two sitting days will remain after today.  So while it is most likely too late to organize a protest at this point in time there will be at least time in question period.

Bill C-4 is available online at:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=6263082

I guess I can understand the rationale behind wanting to include financial implications in a budget bill.  I have never been a fan of omnibus bills.  If the legislation isn't strong enough to stand on its own it has no place being discussed in Parliament.

I note that with respect ot the Public Sector Labour Relations Act the move appears to be pushing certain unions toward arbitration.  This is a bit of a head scratcher because most "conservatives" vocalize a hatred for arbitration since it, as a process, tends to rule in favour of the employee rather than the employer.

Oh well, that's taxpayer money who cares.

The fact that the Feds will not release details about who gets affected by this legislation until after it passes strikes me as bad governance.  How can an informed decision be made when information is deliberately withheld.

That would be like appointing Senators to represent Provinces you know they don't live in and then freaking out when they start billing you for expenses tied to residences that they never use.  Who would be stun enough to stumble into that minefield?

The text of the bill doesn't suggest anything overtly nefarious.  In fact, they seem pretty normative.

Most amendments to the National Research Council Act revolve around the definition of Chairperson and the power of the Minister to appoint individuals to the position of President and/or chairperson if either position becomes vacant or either individual currently sitting in those positions is unable to act or is absent from meetings.

I presume the Minister so referenced is the Minister of Industry (currently James Moore).

None of the proposed changes to the National Research Council Act included in C-4 touch on funding.

Which leads one to wonder why it is being included in an omnibus bill designed to implement certain provisions of the Budget tabled in Parliament on March 13, 2013.

Bill C-4 does not, as far as I can determine plan any amendments to the Indian Act.

The Table of Contents link below outlines which acts will be amended through this Bill:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=6263082

contains absolutely no mention of the Indian Act.  If any changes were being planned they would have to show in the Table of Contents.

Grace and peace to you.

John

 Dear RevJohn,

 Thank you for your response.

 I direct attention to section 211 of Bill C-4.  Big trouble.  And it includes research funding, OAS and CPP.

Hi redhead,

My reading of section 211 of Bill C-4 is that it amends by adding section 70.1 to what was the Department of Human Resources and Skills Act and will now be known as "An Act respecting the Department of Employment and Social Development."

So I note a change to the name of an act and the name of the Ministry that Act pertains to.

If I am understanding the convention properly all underlined material is material which is being added to the various acts.

Section 70.1 is an addition to "An Act respecting the Department of Employment and Social Development."

So all of the various acts listed in section 70.1 of the mentioned Act (not Bill C-4) become in section 71 of the mentioned Act the responsibility of the Minister of Employment and Social Development.  Regulation is still in play which limits the Minister of Employment and Social Development with respect to the administration and electronic enforcement of the Act.

As an aside who needs omnibus Bills when legislation is written in such an arcane manner.  In the United Church we tend to produce a document with a side by side comparison of the way a particular by-law is currently worded and what the amended by-law would look like.

Discussion around OAS and CPP is a long time coming.  When both were established the time spent between retirement and death was much shorter than it is now.  I have never heard of anyone exhausting their CPP contributions and being cut off because future pay-out would exceed contribution to the program.

I'm not sure about the best way to deal with that.  I'm reasonably certain that it is an issue that needs to be addressed.  I suspect that OAS is suffering from a similar change in life expectency.

I certainly do not expect that either will suddenly become more generous.

And while I am not a fan of the current government, previous governments did not act with anything approaching forethought with respect to either OAS or CPP with respect to changes in life expectency other than to remove mandatory retirement.

If you don't fix a small leak it is certain you will eventually have to fix a large one.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Basic research will be crushed by Bill C-4. While this might not seem important in a day to day existence (basic research educates many and does lead to patents, new technologies and jobs), Healthcare and education are also combined in this omnibus.  Not to mention weakining the Labour Code: so tell me, how does that affect the "working middle class" in a positive way?

An omnibus bill is purely an exercise in obfuscation; ironically led by a prime minister who continually proclaims that transparency is so important, in fact essential, to the parliamentary process.

Hi redhead,

I disagree.  I do not see anything in Bill C-4 that automatically revokes or limits funding for anything.

The word from the Government is "details to follow after the bill is passed."

If research is to be crushed it will most likely be crushed in an actual budget.

On that score while I did not read the whole of the Bill I have not seen anything in proposed changes to existing legislation which actually stipulated how tax dollars would be spent.  There are some places where there is implication of dollars spent as I point out in the change of departments determined Essential Services there will be an automatic move to arbitration which I suspect will not lead to a saving in tax dollars.

But needing to go to arbitration isn't something you budget for unless you intend to bargain in bad faith and if that is the case you will never win arbitration.

I would never take the position that a reduction in money allocated to research is a positive move.  I still don't see how the Bill actually states that it will reduce the budget.

It is only in a budget where individuals will see what monies are allocated to which line item.

Nothing like that shows in the Bill at least nothing like that shows in what I have read so far.  If you have seen changes or amendments which do bring in actual budget numbers I would appreciate you pointing it out to me.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hi redhead,

No argument from me on that point.

I think it would only constitute irony if the Prime Minister actually had a reputation for being transparent.  If such a reputation exists it is a closely guarded secret as to where it exists.

If the PM actually thinks that he is being transparent then perhaps irony is applicable.  Though I think tragic is more to the point.

I don't believe that the PM actually thinks that he is being transparent so a better descriptor than ironic is hypocritical.

Of course all three words could be applied in roughly equal measure.

Grace and peace to you.

John

This Bill is going to rain down havoc on the "average" Canadian.  Middle class will be further eroded.

Reseach, education, healthcare and social safety nets do not at all matter to the Harper government.  Nor does the Harper government care about environment or the concerns and reality of aborginal peoples.

And so, this post is somewhat like an omnibus:  but it it is an omnibus driven in the sense of warning.  Tories want to exploit northern resources and people (also referred to as a resource) because Tories are completely aligned with private corportations.

This is very shameful, and in time, will be seen as such.  It is sad that we will have to await a historic telling to see and hear the truth.

Dear RevJohn,

Thank you for your comments.

Bill C-4 provides loans for research.  No grants, no more CFI. Tories do not want to support the Tri-Council (NSERC, SSHRC, CIHR)  A huge problem not only with bench research, but also post-secondary education.  And this attitude flows into haelthcare and long term care issues.

I know, factually, that the grant sytem worked and works well.  The loan system will crush research.  Researchers will not be able to repay loans.  Research Institutes attached to Universties cannot support research studies by donation alone.

It is clear: Tories do not like libraries, librarians, post secondary educated people and research/researchers.

Watch out: The Harper government is targeting the NRC and is going to take it down.

And the CBC.

By the way, the CPP is a very viable program and not at risk of not being able to pay retirees. I am not a fan of this model but, several years ago, the government put CPP into a market-driven system, which is managed by the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. Their website is http://www.cppib.com/en/home.html.