---

The Political Fiasco Which Led to the Passage of C-250 Despite Massive Public Opposition

It would never have gone through all the stages without Liberal government’s full support

OTTAWA, April 28, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Brian Rushfeldt, Executive Director of the Canada Family Action Coalition, has noted the “unscrupulous and undemocratic manner” in which homosexual hate crime bill C-250 was processed through the legislative system.” Gwen Landolt, Vice President of REAL Women Canada concurred and told LifeSiteNews.com that without the support of the Liberal Government homosexual activist NDP MP Svend Robinson’s bill could never have become law.

Originally called Bill C-415, it was introduced three years ago by Robinson as a private member’s bill. It was manipulated into a May 29, 2002 second reading with only about 17 MPs out of 301 present in the House. Landolt was present in the House gallery that day and told LifeSiteNews.com that most Members were absent since very few realized the importance of Robinson’s bill, and unless a matter is urgent most MPs absent themselves from the hour of parliament when private members bills are brought forward.

In September of 2003, MP Tom Wappel expressed dismay to LifeSiteNews.com that as of May of 2002 the government's clear policy was to attempt to "kill the bill" but the government completely reversed its policy.

Rushfeldt notes that at the next stage of the process - the Parliamentary Justice Committee hearings - undemocratic tactics were again employed. The Committee "hand picked" four persons who supported the bill to testify, and four who opposed it to testify. But at least 45 other individuals opposing the bill wanted to testify before the Committee. The author of the bill was allowed to speak at great length and provided dubious testimony about the legislation's intent. Those four who opposed the Bill were allowed 10 minutes each for their testimony.

The Liberal chair of the committee, Andy Scott, permitted Robinson to filibuster the committee which prevented the committee members from voting for a motion that the House not proceed further with the bill. A House of Commons rule says that when the time expires for a bill’s consideration by the committee, if the committee has not voted on it or amended it, the bill is returned to the house without amendment as if approved.

Landolt told LifeSiteNews.com that the one amendment that was passed, that of Liberal Derek Lee to protect “religious texts” is “so narrow as to be virtually useless.” And that too was used as a tactic by Robinson to pretend that religious freedom would be protected.

Liberals were ordered to debate during the bill's third reading which was again limited by procedural tactics. Despite the fact that it was a private member’s bill, the Liberal Justice Minister ordered Liberals MPs to support it. However, some 40 Liberals still opposed the bill but could not defeat it since, apart from the Canadian Alliance, the other opposition parties voted for C-250.

After it moved on to the Senate C-250 should have died since the House prorogued, but the Liberal government saw to it that the bill survived. Even though not a House of Commons bill at that stage, House of Commons rules were used to reinstate the bill after prorogation of Parliament. The move required a vote of the House for approval but conveniently, most members were not in the House, but at a reception for the Throne Speech when the vote was cast.

After passing second reading in the Senate, the bill went to a Senate Committee for study, which included public hearings. The Senate Committee has an obligation to hear the concerns of Canadians at these hearings, but only about 24 of the 100 or more who applied were heard. LifeSiteNews.com, after repeated requests, was not even granted a reply to its application to present its concerns.

The first four to testify were "hand picked" supporters of the bill. Of those four, Robinson once again was given more time than most other presenters to state his case. Most presenters opposing the bill were given a ridiculously limited five minutes for such a complex and critical subject. Included in Robinson’s testimony to the Senate were statements now known to be inaccurate and dishonest, including the repeated assertion that no major religions opposed the legislation.

Senate debate was illegally terminated by the unprecedented acceptance of a motion of closure from an independent Conservative Senator.

“It would never have gone through without the Liberal push,” said Landolt. “The Liberals wanted the legislation but did not want to pay the political price for it, this way they can blame the NDP.”

“From start to finish, the parliamentary process has been manipulated with undemocratic and dictatorial tactics to push through legislation that could criminalize Canadians who express an opinion opposing homosexual behavior for any reason - including religious faith, moral convictions, medical consequences or humanitarian concerns,” concluded Rushfeldt.

During the various stages of the bill’s advancement mainstream media coverage was often and conveniently almost non-existent, especially while C-250 was being considered in the Senate. Opponents of the bill had to constantly rely on alternative news media such as LifeSiteNews.com to find out what was happening.

The vast majority of Canadians who would have opposed the legislation had no idea what was taking place in the Senate on the issue and no idea of the serious implication of C-250 for freedom of expression and freedom of religion. Hence, they were denied the opportunity to oppose the passage of the Liberal /Svend Robinson change to Canada’s hate crime law.

MP Wappel Blames Passage of "terribly dangerous" C-250 on Liberal Party Flip-Flop
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2003/sep/03092004.html

Homosexual Activist MP Filibusters Committee on Hate Crimes Bill
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2003/may/03051504.html

Bill To Add 'Sexual Orientation' To Canadian Hate Crimes Legislation Passes Committee
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2003/may/030527a.html

Homosexual Hate Crime Bill May be Resurrected in Canada
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/jan/04012305.html

 Back to Top

---

MORE NEWS: LifeSiteNews.com Home Page  Last 10 Days   Archives   Special Reports

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.