Harper government wimps out in free speech fight

[Frankie]

I could vote for the CHP and walk out with a clear conscience.

I want to work for the CPC candidate in my riding because I respect him immensely, but if Harper is going to gag his MPs on this issue, I will actively campaign against them.

If MPs are playing politics with our freedom, I don't really care if their ties are blue or red.

That's my dilemma. I like the guy but I'm not willing to compromise on this issue as much as the people who I've voted for in the past. Like you, I will not support a party that can't take a stand majority or not. I too will actively campaign against them. They loved it when I was on their side. They'll hate to see me actively working for the other team. We know the game plan. This issue can't be swept away. Too bad so sad.

In areas where the Liberals won't suffer a backlash for opposing the government the CPC has to pick their battles with great care.

Thanks Grig

[Rohan01]

Grig, I think we disagree with the definition of power. One who is correct has power, is the way I see it. Those who have more latitude because they took the oath of office, that looks to be the way you see it. For, I am speaking from my perspective.

One who is correct has power to convince others perhaps, but being correct by itself doesn't give power to change laws or dismantle government bodies, if it did how did we wind up with SSM?

The veracity of truth does not depend on who receives it, or more importantly, does not receive it.

We wound up with SSM because of people voting for it who closed their senses and conscience when it came to what is there that is tangible to communicate social conservatism.

They dare not venture to territory that looks like this: any reasonable person when given the assignment to communicate the reality that men and women are different, and they could use any orientation they want as long as it is homosexuality - reasonable people would ask for an alternative.

[leewgrant]

"The document is entitled <a href=http://www.noapologies.ca/CHRC%20Talking%20Points.doc>'Talking points re: CHRA & CHRC', </a> and it basically instructs MP's to keep a very low profile on any discussion surrounding Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

I've just had a chance to read it and I am thoroughly disgusted.

It's a slimy document full of red herrings like coverage of aboriginals (what the hell has that to do with Section 13?) and telling MPs to hide behind the fact that cases on point are being adjudicated so as to avoid talking about free speech.

It is as clear as hell that the Harperites do not support free speech. They have moved so far to the left they are going after the same pointy-headed liberal vote that the Libs and the Dippers are.

[Heartofsong83]

I think what we have is a PMO that is out of touch with its party and its membership. It is definitely time for a house-cleaning, and maybe a new leader or a new party. When they cancelled the convention, that was definitely a terrible sign that they were trying to hijack the party.

[Grig]

"The document is entitled <a href=http://www.noapologies.ca/CHRC%20Talking%20Points.doc>'Talking points re: CHRA & CHRC', </a> and it basically instructs MP's to keep a very low profile on any discussion surrounding Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

I've just had a chance to read it and I am thoroughly disgusted.

And what part of 'The Government of Canada is committed to the protection and promotion of human rights' was hard to understand?

What part of "The Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal are independent agencies that administer the Canadian Human Rights Act, according to procedures specified by the law, without interference from the government." was unclear to you?

If it came out and blew a raspberry at M-446 and defended section 13, then you would have a legitimate beef, but this is typcial keep-the-cards-close-to-the-vest stuff and you are reading a lot into it that isn't even there it seems.

[cinyc]

I would note that these are only PROPOSED talking points, which might mean there is still time for things to change. The party may be trying to gauge Conservative reaction to their position.

How often do MP's talking points get leaked?

I can understand why the sitting government wouldn't want to discuss an ongoing case (for fear of giving the appearance that it is pre-judging it). But I don't understand why it ought to be quiet on a potentially upcoming motion.

With the Globe and Mail, National Post and Winnipeg Free Press, among others on board, the political climate can't possibly get any better for repealing Section 13(1).

[Connie Fournier]

What part of 'we have to hide in Panama from the Harper government's commission' is hard for you to understand, Grig?

[Dacre]

It's hard to find a comeback for that one Connie.

[doggedlyright]

How often do MP's talking points get leaked?

The fact that the talking points was leaked is an indication that there is a divide in the house. An MP or group of MPs must be sufficiently peeved with this latest gag order on such a fundamental freedom.

When you attempt to dam the debate as Harper and the controllers have, sooner or later a leak comes about. They will attempt to plug the leak but more will appear. MPs must be feeling the heat from the people and if the heat is turning up they will do everything they can possibly do to indidcate to the people that they the MPS are working for the people on this issue.

Just think of what this letter displays .... it is ok for a group to effectively attempt to shut down a national icon Macleans because some people feel they have hurt feelings.

Onto top of using the HRC and Canadian taxpayer to commit the witchhunt, they have effectively been able to scare the PM and its party into acquiescing to the terror attack on freedom of the press and freedom of speech.

[Faramir]

Am I naive or missing something? The talking points say they ARE looking at amending the CHRC section limiting freedom of speech, no?

[Ted Hewlett]

In discussing the very real iniquities of human rights commissions and tribunals, it should be pointed out that other government-empowered bodies are also guilty of trampling on our rights. In this connection if they have not already done so defenders of liberty should familiarize themselves with the ongoing harassment of <b>Dr. Chris Kempling</b>. Issues of free speech, freedom of religion, and political freeeom are all involved. Chris has spoken out in his own time, and without hatred or rancour, on matters of public interest. For this he is being persecutied. For more information please go to www.socialconservatives.ca and http://www.bcptl.org/rights.htm#summaryupdate .

[cinyc]

How often do MP's talking points get leaked?

The fact that the talking points was leaked is an indication that there is a divide in the house. An MP or group of MPs must be sufficiently peeved with this latest gag order on such a fundamental freedom.

When you attempt to dam the debate as Harper and the controllers have, sooner or later a leak comes about. They will attempt to plug the leak but more will appear. MPs must be feeling the heat from the people and if the heat is turning up they will do everything they can possibly do to indidcate to the people that they the MPS are working for the people on this issue.

Just think of what this letter displays .... it is ok for a group to effectively attempt to shut down a national icon Macleans because some people feel they have hurt feelings.

Onto top of using the HRC and Canadian taxpayer to commit the witchhunt, they have effectively been able to scare the PM and its party into acquiescing to the terror attack on freedom of the press and freedom of speech.

Again, I point out that these are called PROPOSED talking points, not final talking points. There still may be time for the talking points to change.

[inottawa]

I would note that these are only PROPOSED talking points, which might mean there is still time for things to change. The party may be trying to gauge Conservative reaction to their position.

All government talking points are labelled "proposed." It means these are the lines the government (meaning minister or PMO) recommends.

[doggedlyright]

cinyc;

It is irrelevant whether the talking points are draft or final. The issue is they were leaked. When was the last time something like this has been leaked by a CPC?

MP. Harper and the controllers have been able to keep the door shut very tightly. This leaking is a clear indication that this issue has lit up the phones and the emails of the MPS and this gag order is not sitting well.

The MPs must be nervous!!!!


remember this action by a few is a terror attack on freedom of the press and freedom of speech. Harper is backing away from protecting the citizens from an attack from within.

[inottawa]

cinyc;

It is irrelevant whether the talking points are draft or final. The issue is they were leaked. When was the last time something like this has been leaked by a CPC?

MP. Harper and the controllers have been able to keep the door shut very tightly. This leaking is a clear indication that this issue has lit up the phones and the emails of the MPS and this gag order is not sitting well.

The MPs must be nervous!!!!

You're right.
The last time there was a leak of this importance that came from an MP was Jay Hill's book on disrupting committees.