Roundup: Final debate on the amendments

Posted on by

While the Commons is not sitting this week, the Senate is, with several bills now on their Order Paper for consideration, most especially the assisted dying bill, which is under a court-imposed deadline (that has already been extended thrice). At issue are the amendments that the government accepted, rejected, and otherwise modified from what the Senate sent back to the Commons a few weeks ago (where the Conservatives then held it up).

The Government Leader in the Senate, Senator Marc Gold, is taking the line that this is a “historic example” of collaboration between the two Chambers that has resulted in better legislation, but I’m not sure just how historic that is, and by “better legislation,” it’s a fairly marginal case because the government reduced the attempt to render this legislation fully compliant with the constitution with one of its famous half-measures that means that people’s suffering will be prolonged as a result, and yet more others will need to embark on yet more court challenges in order to fully access what should be guaranteed rights.

Ultimately it does look like this will pass without sending it back to the Commons again, as most senators are taking the line that the House has had their say, and because they’re democratically elected, it can go ahead now (though there have been instances where the Senate made a second insistence on certain bills in order to make a point – though I’m not sure that will be the case here), and that it could pass and get royal assent before the court deadline. Nevertheless, the amount of time this has taken for something that had court-imposed timelines is a sense of just how vulnerable the parliamentary calendar really is when you had determined opposition to bills, and it’s not over yet because the proposed changes in this legislation will impose a two-year timeline for more consultations on aspects of the law that currently remain prohibited (where that prohibition remains unconstitutional), but that the government is dragging its feet for the sake of politics. Ultimately, nobody comes out of this exercise looking particularly good.

Good reads:

  • During an announcement, in Montreal, Justin Trudeau said that the Canada-US border will open “eventually,” but there are concerns that there are no plans yet.
  • Trudeau also offered assurances that the AstraZeneca vaccine is safe, as some European countries are suspending its use for extremely rare blood clot issues.
  • It sounds like the National Advisory Committee on Immunization is going to allow the AstraZeneca to be used on people over 65 in light of new clinical data.
  • Documents show that the military carried out a secret investigation into one of its reservists who had joined a far-right terror group, before he fled the country.
  • Rogers has offered to buy out Shaw, which is going to trigger the Competition Bureau, CRTC, and Industry Canada – because we love oligopolies in this country.
  • The Kielburger brothers re-appeared before the ethics committee, and there were some testy exchanges, especially between the Liberals and the brothers.
  • Kevin Carmichael warns that complacency and poor policy decisions could mean Canada will cease being an attractive tech innovator going forward.
  • Jen Gerson explores how this pandemic has exacerbated the kinds of class issues that we don’t like to talk about in Canada, particularly when it comes to housing.
  • Susan Delacourt posits that while the government may be squeamish about “vaccine passports,” it is likely that businesses will start to require them regardless.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

One thought on “Roundup: Final debate on the amendments”

  1. I’m more interested in actual policy and legislation than the repetitive nonsense surrounding the WeGhazi “issue.” Even a NatPo columnist said there was nothing new revealed and most of it wasn’t even about Trudeau. It was a complete waste of time and resources spent exhuming a long-dead horse. I hope when election time finally does come around that the majority of Canadians agree, the government spent more time focusing on actual substantive issues that matter to Canadians, while the Cons (Pierre the pigeon) and their copycat little brother the NDP (Charlie the tuna) spent most of the pandemic chasing conspiracy theories about emails, speaking fees, and charity foundations. Hillary Rodham Trudeau. They should just have a merger and call themselves the QAnon Party of Canada.

Comments are closed.