And if it doesn't I'd like to see how the Members of Parliament for the Liberal Party of Canada are going to explain to their constituents why we didn't stand up for new Canadians.
Never mind trying to sell the Carbon Tax. Try explaining why the party of Multi-Culturalism and Immigration has just subjected future generations of new immigrants to the sole discretion of a Minister.
Remember how Stephen Harper was wondering how to win seats in Ontario and Vancouver and Montreal? Well, my friends, this is one way. Not to mention the seats that the NDP get to keep, and perhaps even gain, by a lack of conviction by the Liberal Party of Canada.
I'm wondering how our immigrant MPs currently sitting in the House of Commons today can idly stand by while this stale, scandalous Conservative government stomps on the rights of their family and friends currently waiting to gain entry in this country.
I ASK YOU LIBERALS, HOW IS IT THAT WE CAN SIT ON OUR HANDS FOR A BILL THAT OFFENDS EVERY IMMIGRANT MEMBER OF THIS PARTY AND EVERY IMMIGRANT CANADIAN THAT HAS EVER SET FOOT ON OUR SOIL???
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
James: I know how passionate you are about your party and how deeply you feel about this issue and I would like to set aside partisanship (at least briefly) and offer my sympathies. I know how difficult it is when you feel your party has turned away from a key principle. I felt the same way with the provincial NDP under Rae when they badly bungled Bill 167 (LGBT rights legislation). So for today, no jabs or pokes, just best wishes to you. You are in the right even though your party might make the wrong choice today.
Here's to you keeping your promise with regards to sitting on your hands in the next election campaign. I hope the vote on War Resisters tomorrow will help you change your mind somewhat. Not that I am encouraging you.
Please provide the Grits who voted against in your blog ASAP. I would love to know this so the Grit MPs need to be accountable.
Seems like Jay Hill does not have to work overtime given our Grit tactics. No need to call Con MPs away from Parliament that are tending to illnesses, community events etc. We Grits sure prefer S&M rather than whipping our caucus for key votes.
This is Stephane's response to you
http://www.liberal.ca/story_14028_e.aspx
James, I concur. I think, however, that since this change is not permanent our collective "brain trust" is betting that we can win an election, then "undo" the changes after we're in power.
I think what they forget, is that we actually need to WIN THE ELECTION FIRST.
Right now is high time to defeat the Cons. There's enough hanging over their heads to do them in. Just enough of a question mark...
James,
Let me save you the trouble.
Looks like your party is abandoning you, but I'm here to help.
What's your address?
I'll drop you an NDP membership in the mail.
"The budget-implementation bill - including the immigration changes - would not become law tonight; it would need to survive a final vote in the Commons, and then be adopted by the Senate."
Dion said Liberals will vote against Bill C-50 in a speech today, which is linked above. I don't think you can just call an election Canadians aren't expecting when it's not 100% neccessary. This is the path the leader has chosen.
"As you said in your motion adopted yesterday, we must be disturbed by the unchecked power that C-50 puts into the hands of the Immigration Minister. Also, like you, I believe that the government has abused the legislative process by including these provisions in a budget bill. When a government proposes such sweeping changes which almost everyone acknowledges could have negative consequences, the Government owes it to Canadians not to play these kinds of games.
For these reasons, our party will vote against Bill C-50. However, unlike the other opposition leaders, I have a greater responsibility than simply expressing disagreement with a bill. I have the duty to work towards replacing the Government. That’s why we will carefully choose the timing of the next election. And when it will come, if Canadians elect a Liberal government, they have my word that we will bring in legislation that would undo these regressive immigration measures.'
- ------------------------------
In other words, we're abondoning our principals to avoid an election, even though the Conservatives are on their heels with scandal after scandal and changes in the PMO.
No, IN OTHER WORDS we're not worrying about bringing down the government before it's neccessary. Compromise is a Liberal principle too. You can't spring an election on Canadians when they're not expecting it, and when it's not neccessary.
"The budget-implementation bill - including the immigration changes - would not become law tonight; it would need to survive a final vote in the Commons"
Perhaps it's the right time to bring down the government for electoral reasons, but the principle argument makes little sense to me.
Dan: "but the principle argument makes little sense to me" -- you and Stephane both, then.
Dan, are you nuts? What polls are you reading? The Canadian public is fully expecting an election.
If the principle arguement makes not sense to you, you better go back and start reading the history of the Liberal party.
You better start by thinking about all the members you know in this party and how many of them come from immigrant families. Heck, take a look at immigrant Liberal MPs and then talk to me about your ridiculous principle.
Here, let me start you off, Ratansi, Dhalla, Bains, Telegdi, Alghabra, Volpe, Bevilacqua, Timelkovski, Dosanjj, Fry, Stronach, a daughter of an immigrant, etc. etc. ...feel free to continue.
I have a hard time believing Canadians wouldn't be wondering what the hell was going on if they woke up tommorow and Harper and Dion were out crisscrossing the country. Right or wrong letting this parliament last is the course Dion has chosen. So I couldn't imagine him deciding to part with that strategy on a vote that won't even change the legislation yet, or received only a shred of media attention.
No media attention? Are living under a rock? It's in the Star and Globe today. It's been panned by every immigrant group and legal voice in the country including the law society.
Sheesh, sure can get treated harshly for trusting the leadership. If the bill were to become law then it would be a big story. I take Dion at his word that the Liberals will vote against C-50, if the bill is eventually allowed to become law then I'll agree with you.
It's sad when the leadership on this is Andrew Talegdi. That's sad. Bill C-50 becomes law Dan when the budget implementation bill passes. It's really that simple Dan. The Committee has finished their report and the Bill now prodeeds as part of the budget for a vote. Voting against it with 11 MPs means sweet Fuck All.
Have fun with the leadership campaigning in our urban strongholds trying to explain our abstinance on this bill. Especially in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver.
There's thousands like me Dan. Thousands.
http://www.ndp.ca/page/6476
I'd say it's pretty offensive that we put out mailers against the immigration bill if we do allow it to become law.
Ya think?
Post a Comment