Second reading of ‘draconian’ Bill C-6 adjourned again
September 21, 2009 by ShuNews
Filed under Canada law, Canada news, Food, Freedom, Health, Medicine, Safety
by Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom –
A tremendous victory for sanity in a world gone crazy happened in the Canadian Senate yesterday.
Liberal Senator Joseph Day from New Brunswick came through for the protection of the unalienable rights, freedoms and liberties of all Canadians during yesterday’s resumed second reading debate on one of the worst federal Canadian bills in history -– Bill C-6, the so-called Consumer Protection Act.
Also our special thanks to another Liberal Senator, Senator Banks for adjourning the debate.
Where are the Conservatives, NDP and Bloc on these issues?
It is really encouraging that someone in power in one of the parties is prepared to slow down really bad legislation that the Clerk of the Privy Council, Deputy Minister of Justice and Health Canada bureaucrats are so relentlessly trying to force onto the unwilling Canadian People.
It was the Liberal Senator Sharon Carstair from Manitoba that adjourned the initial second reading in the Senate on June 23, 2009. Thank goodness.
Our Power to the People grassroots email campaign is working. As Senator Day reports in the minutes attached below, over 600 emails have been received by each Senator.
In addition, our E-Protest Big Red Stop sign email system has sent the same emails to all 308 MPs. Right now we need all of you to go and send this e-protest email. Click on www.canadiancoalitionforhealthfreedom.ca and on top right of home page click on the BIG RED STOP sign to send your Stop Bill C-6 email to over 400 MPs and Senators.
Our GIA Freedom E-Protest system has already sent over 250,000 emails and we need hundreds of thousands more immediately.
The Liberal Senators have the power to stop Bill C-6 ever becoming into force.
We must also get the Joint Committee of the House and Senate, called Regs in the House and Scrutiny in the Senate, to give us witness days to challenge the constitutional, jurisdictional and public-interest validity of Schedule F, DIN Numbers and the Natural Health Product Regulations. None of these draconian manipulations of federal criminal empowered regulations has ever been reviewed by Parliament and the Senate.
How can bureaucrats make criminal offenses without legislation?
One has to ask oneself, who do Health Canada bureaucrats really work for?
As you can see by Senator Day’s comments our concerns are being listened to by the Liberal Senators, unlike all the MPs from all parties who allowed this terrible BIG PHARMA dream bill to get through the House of Commons.
Allowing this terrible bill through the House of Commons so quickly is one of the greatest betrayals of the MPs’ God-given political stewardship trust that I have ever experienced since I started battling federal rogue criminal empowered regulators in 1972.
Please circulate this as widely as possible.
Ottawa
September 16, 2009
TrueMan Tuck
Canadian Coalition for Health Freedom
See next page for Hansard transcript.
I suggest you re-write this article to include at the beginning what C-6 the Consumer Protection Act is all about and a few points on why it is not a good policy change right at the beginning.
Thanks,
Kensky
I suggest you re-read the actual text of the bill, where it will become blatantly obvious that bill C-6 has nothing to do with Natural Health Products, but rather, is merely a re-introduction of a much improved Hazardous Products Act… which deals with consumer products ONLY.
Anonymous, I suggest that YOU read the entire text of Bill C-6 where you will (if you are looking) see that it would set constitutional precedents on a scale similar to the British North America Act or Trudeau’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
In effect Bill C-6 establishes (some might say extends) a parallel system of government that is not accountable to the parliamentary system now in place. It extinguishes a number of basic common law principles — which is pretty fundamental when you consider that our entire legal system is based (except Quebec) on common law.
Don’t be fooled by the mask of ‘consumer protection’. Wherever you see the word protection it ought to be a big red flag, and this is no exception.