Bill C-36, an act respecting consumer product safety, in committee already!

from Chaotic Fate by qew

http://canadianactionparty.ca/news-articles/letters-to-share/398-bill-c-36-senate-standing-committee-on-social-affairs-science-and-technology

Dear Members of the Senate Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. I see that you are moving at the speed of light to get this Bill C-36 through and into law as only two committee meetings are scheduled on Wednesday and Thursday of this week including the clause by clause, and that you have so few witnesses, drawn only from those who have already presented to the other place. It is my fear that the result is already a foregone conclusion for you to be moving so fast, and that sober second thought will no longer be present in your deliberations. Or maybe you are trying to better the other place's time of 2 hours and 50 minutes of careful committee consideration. Whilst I do see that some of your amendments from last year have been incorporated in this new slightly improved Bill C-36 which has so frightened the members of the other place into submission, I also see that the major problems that I and many, many others still see with this Bill have not been addressed. I urge any one of you to question the Minister when she appears tomorrow to tell you why it is necessary for foreign governments (eg: Denmark) and sub governments (eg: Utah) or bodies of foreign states such as the WHO, WTO, IMF, or even FAO should have the right to regulate our law; actually in the wording of this bill foreign governments "must or shall" have their regulations incorporated into our law without ratification or even presentation to either the other place or yourselves. Interpretations : "government" (e) & (f) Regulations 37 (2) (c) Is there a reason why we cannot make those regulations for ourselves? The other questions I would like one of you to please ask the Minister is why the rule of law has been changed to be guilty until proven innocent and why there is no "offender's" right to a court of law in this Act? or supervision by a court of any confiscated thing? Also why a prosecution for an offence under this Act may be instituted, heard and determined, in a place of business instead of a court of law: Section 45, (a), (b), and (c). I appreciate that there is little time for even this letter, and at the same time I do not appreciate that these matters are being pushed through so fast after 4 years of fooling around. It is way too late for the so called "Christmas Protection" as stores are stocking up already and the regulations haven't even been announced yet, and thus will not have time to be published twice in the Gazette. Unless there are plans for yet another proroguing of parliament, I fail to understand the lack of time available for due diligence on your part, and the calling of more witnesses. Please take care in considering that this Bill C-36 is not yet in the best interests of the Canadian People. Thank you Jeremy Arney 6254a Springlea Rd., Victoria BC V8Z 6Z4