Bill C-391 Is A Government Bill

With all of the shenanigans going on around the "Private Member's Bill" C-391 An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Firearms Act (repeal of long-gun registry), I think it's time to examine the government's actions more carefully.

Theoretically, as a Private Member's Bill, C-391 doesn't represent the government's official policy or direction. However, there's an old saying about actions speaking louder than words.

This article is a veritable compendium of how Harper has mobilized his front bench to garner support for this bill. (I'd put good odds that the upcoming vote will be a whipped vote on Conservative benches - and we all know what happens to MPs who defy Dear Leader's orders ...) The amount of money the HarperCon$ are spending on attack ads to slag MPs that they want to bully into voting for C-391 is also telling.

If this is "just a private member's bill", then we might just want to ask Mr. Harper and his goons why they are acting as if it is in fact a government bill?

The point here is not just that this is a government bill, but that Harper is throwing the entire weight of the government front benches behind it. This is not new for Harper. Every time there's an issue that is in the least bit controversial, he has his back bench MPs introduce it through the Private Member's bill. Then, mysteriously, the vast majority of Harper's caucus votes for it ... in particular the front benches. This has happened with other private member's bills, and I'll put money that a careful review of Hansard votes will show that every time a TheoCon "private member's" bill is tabled, the front benches of Harper's team voted for it.

Back bench bills, like prorogation, are part of Harper's bag of tricks - because he knows damn good and well that if he tabled this legislation as government bills, he'd find himself losing a confidence vote rather quickly.

As for the opposition parties - if you haven't figured this out yet, it's time that you got the message and start kicking the HarperCon$ out of Ottawa.

[Update 17/09/10]
Just how much are the HarperCon$ wasting on a supposedly "private members bill"?

Oh yes, as Ms. Taber points out Harper hails from Toronto himself in the first place ... a good point to consider when parsing Baird's asinine comment about "Toronto elites". I wonder what he'd make of the fact that this writer is blogging from the CPoC stronghold of Alberta (and is mysteriously opposed to Bill C-391)?
[/Update]

Slouching Towards An Election

The HarperCon$ are busily putting their election machinery into high gear, setting the stage for what I expect will be a fall election.

While the Rahim Jaffer affair continues to grow legs, arms and tentacles, and distracts public attention from the real game that is afoot.

Harper is moving to replace Governor General Michaelle Jean, no doubt he will choose someone whose conservative credentials are impeccable - in the hopes that the next GG won't sign legislation into force, no doubt.

Mysteriously, I received a rare propaganda page from my otherwise missing in action MP a few days ago - and it was considerably larger than the usual pamphlets I see from his office. All of it carefully worded "feel good" nonsense intended to soothe anxious SoCon radicals that the Con$ are working in their best interests.

The legislative game is very interesting. The HarperCon$ have routinely used an array of Private Member's bills to play dog whistle politics with their base. Interestingly, as we discovered with the closer inspection of parliamentary procedure last time Harper prorogued parliament, Private Member's bills survive prorogation - which saves the HarperCon$ a certain amount of public discomfort when the same bill, for the same stupidity is reintroduced time after time - reigniting debate over issues that are generally inflammatory.

Consider the following. The Con$ have long railed against the long gun registry program, but Bill C-391 is a private member's bill. The Conservatives know that passing it as a Government bill would split wide open the rural/urban voter divide, and likely would cost them a significant number of urban seats in centers like Toronto. But, by allowing their "backbenchers" to put it forward, they can claim that they "tried" to make it happen, but the evil opposition wouldn't let them.

Then we have Rod Bruinooge's bill C-510, the "coerced into an abortion" anti-abortion bill. This is a blatant case of dog-whistle politics. It's intended to appeal to the ultra conservative base of Reformatories with their roots firmly in Alberta's Bible Belt. The law itself is fundamentally unnecessary, and legislates something which needs no legislation - and presumes that a pregnant woman can't make an intelligent decision on her own.

Bruinooge's brand of misogyny could almost be shrugged off as a wingnut politician's ravings - except for the G8 'women's health initiative' that has been bubbling around:

The Bloc pressed the Conservatives as to whether they would put aside ideology and include abortion as part of their family planning measures. No way, the government said.

“Canada’s contribution to maternal and child health may include family planning however Canada’s contribution will not include funding abortions,” Jim Abbott, the parliamentary secretary to the International Co-operation Minister, asserted.

Now the extremist misogyny of the Federal Conservatives is coming from the front benches - loud and clear. This can only mean that the Con$ are busy trying to shore up their "base" support before the summer recess - when they will no doubt run all over the country announcing all sorts of "feel good" spending.