The NDP has been vocal and active in opposition to the legislation; immigration critic Olivia Chow will introduce an amendment to the budget bill today calling for the immigration section to be removed because it lacks fairness and transparency.Ouch. Today's Liberal Party. As strong as Dion is popular. Recommend this Post
However, the amendment is doomed because the Liberals will once again sit on their hands. Most Liberals would like to follow their consciences on the vote but, as in so many recent instances, they can't because their consciences are not going in the same direction as they are.
Friday, April 04, 2008
Meanwhile On The Immigration Front
The Tories are set to pass their Immigration law, which will give the minister more power to decide which ethnic groups are worthy. What about the opposition you ask? I will let John Ivision tell you:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Fester, another way of looking at it is that the liberals are the only thing standing between the NDP and another tory government.
ReplyDeleteFile that under "Cold Comfort". And by standing between, you mean enabling.
ReplyDeleteEnabling takes many forms, Fester. A national daycare program and the Kelowna Accord both fell by the wayside on the faint chance of starting the NPD on a microscopically incremental movement to official opposition status. Cold comfort, indeed.
ReplyDeleteDon't fall for Liberal spin, ace. The voters kicked the Liberals to the curb. The NDP just made it happen three months earlier than it would have anyway. Martin was a loser and deserved his fate. Canada on the other hand deserves better than Stephen Harper.
ReplyDelete"immigration critic Olivia Chow will introduce an amendment to the budget bill today calling for the immigration section to be removed because it lacks fairness and transparency"
ReplyDeleteNot true; here's the actual motion from her web site:
"That the motion be amended by deleting all the words after the word “That” and substituting the following:
this House declines to give second reading to Bill C-50, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 26, 2008 and to enact provisions to preserve the fiscal plan set out in that budget, since the principles of the Bill relating to immigration fail to recognize that all immigration applicants should be treated fairly and transparently, and it also fails to recognize that family re-unification builds economically vibrant, inclusive and healthy communities and therefore should be an essential priority in all immigration matters."
In other words, it's a non-confidence motion in the budget. Why have NONE of the opposition parties asked the Speaker to rule
on whether the Conservative tactic is acceptable parliamentary procedure?