Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Canada Is Trudeau's tyranny about to be fulfilled?

Let's be clear on a few things. It's not only westerners who oppose it. I live in Ontario and I oppose it. Easterners did not propose the legislation, and no Eastern MPs in Parliament voted for it. No one knows how many people actually oppose this because of the way it was done.

For US citizens and some Canadians as well, the government used what is called an Order in Council.

An OIC is an order issued by the Governor General on the advice and consent of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada (a group of personal consultants to the monarch of Canada on state and constitutional affairs)*. It is proposed by the governing Cabinet, or a committee of Cabinet and formally approved by the governor general. About a third of the OICs are legislative, forming part of the law and enforceable by the courts.

- Orders in Council, Parliament, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/order-in-council
* Privy Council, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen%27s_Privy_Council_for_Canada

What this means, in simple terms, is legislation is drawn up, signed off by the Governor General (the Queen's representative in Canada) and made into law. This is done without being discussed or voted on by the House of Commons.

Passed by OIC, none of the elected representatives in Canada is allowed to debate or question it. The Liberals did it this way to stop any discussion. They have a minority government and this legislation WOULD NOT HAVE PASSED in the House. It would have been political suicide to bring this bill into the House in the usual way. When the MPs voted, the government bill would have been defeated, a no-confidence vote raised and the government would have been defeated. That would have spawned an election.

Why was it done? Well, that will keep the law professors busy for a while. The short of it is, they can pass a law without any discussion, and it takes people's minds off COVID-19. To repeat, the Liberals have a minority govt, so proposing gun legislation would have been political suicide. Doing it this way makes it law with no discussion. I personally oppose using OIC is this fashion.

Firearms are a hot button issue. It distracts voters away from COVID onto firearms legislation. In my opinion, ALL bills, regardless of type, or the party that presents them, should be debated.

Trudeau says feds banning 1,500 types of 'military -style' guns - the order takes effect immediately

Little Commie Trudeau did it on May Day aka International Workers' Day. Canadians, since this was done through OIC, this is your Lexington and Concord, and I pray you can achieve freedom from the Crown without bloodshed.

If it wasn't for the GTA area and Quebec we wouldn't be in this mess right now.
We really do need a different political system as our's is broke

Steve;
Good afternoon to you sir, I very much appreciate your post and agree with most everything you've said.

Hopefully I never implied there was no opposition in the East to this bill or the way it was introduced.

I'm with you 100% on OIC - they should be banned in my view as they're much too easily abused.

Again, I hope and pray that this will wake up enough Canadians, not just gun owners exclusively, that the government is now seizing legally owned private property under the guise of it being "for the greater good"

As I posted on the CCFR face plant group - none of us NEEDS a power boat, motorcycle which exceeds 100km/hr, an RV or many other things we aspire to own. For that matter, not one of us NEEDS to have a standard of living higher than a typical resident of China or India and if it's "for the greater good" of the world climate, shouldn't we all capitulate "for the greater good".

Anyway Steve, I think on most issues you and I are on the same page or close enough we could have a rational and civil discussion over a coffee or Cariboo lager.

If you're ever out this way Steve, either one is on me.

All the best to you all back east sir.

Dwayne

What makes this doubley frustrating is we have seen the tyranny before and Canadians elected another Trudeau. I/ we work like crazy to get P.E.T out of office.
Canadians had better stand up and be counted . What is next? Perhaps they will seize something else for our own good
.Dangerous precedent.

My concern is, regardless of the issue, OICs can be used to circumvent the democratic process. This is the case here. Once it starts, you cannot close Pandora's box. I would add that left unchecked, any party can use this in the future.

For me at least, this isn't just about firearms. It's about abusing a parliamentary process.

Steve;
You are spot on in your assessment of this issue sir.

It's a frightening precedent and should be made illegal in my view.

Best to you all sir.

Dwayne

A number of us were discussing this (digitally) yesterday and we all had the same conclusion / concern. This is an abuse of the parliamentary process and once done will be followed in the future by the Liberals for other pet agendas and then there is the potential for abuse by other governing parties should an election change the results.

Further slime on this is the back room dealings with the NDP and Bloc that had to occur. Neither party is protesting this. Had this been debated in Parliament both parties would have had to step forward to show their intentions and faced backlash in some areas.

Unfortunately our MP is the only NDP elected in Alberta - Heather McPherson (useless and missing in action --- will not respond to email or letters). She has correspondence from a number of people in this riding that are pointed and questioning her position particularly to the the petition that is in place --- zero response. So you know a deal was made.

I am not sure what if anything will be done to get rid of Socks and his gang of incompetent thieves when he has support from the Maritimes, Quebec and urban Ontario. He just needs enough support to continue to broker deals with the Bloc and NDP who both are lapping at the edges of the throne of power for their little piece of the action. Just totally frustrating.

This.

This brazen action by Trudeau pushes Westerners even further toward the conclusion that our interests are continually trampled by "The East", and that separation is the only solution.

I also believe that the way this was handled by the current government is offensive to anyone with any sense of freedom and liberty, and is the action of an authoritarian and dictator.

This has nothing to do with West vs East. It is about a parliamentary abuse. All of Canada suffers because of this. The Liberals circumvented Parliament and have dishonoured the democratic process. It was done by a minority government using an opportunity to further their agenda without debate.

Just being a devil's advocate --- So the abuse occurred and the Idiot in Charge is further dividing the country with his actions. So what can we the average voter do or say? Nothing.

This is a minority government propped up by two groups that make back room deals. Neither the NDP or Bloc want an election. It would take one of those two parties to agree that this is an abuse of parliamentary privilege and call for a vote of non-confidence. This is not going to happen especially over this. Totally frustrating. It will be interesting to see what powers they try to give municipal governments that would go around the power of the provinces. This would be a fire storm in Alberta. Not sure what would happen in Toronto with the Mayor that is there now.

There cannot be a vote of no-confidence because the government used an OIC. A no-confidence vote comes after a government proposes legislation, but the majority of MPs vote against it. A no-confidence vote is called, and if the majority votes "no-confidence", the government is dissolved and an election is called.

I have argued for years that we do not have a democracy in Canada. This is just more proof.

Steve,

In this case I agree with everything you have said. But from the perspective of The West, the question “how did Trudeau and the Liberals get elected into power in the first place?” is the true root of the problem, since none of this would be happening if a conservative party had been elected instead. The answer to that question is that the interests of Manitoba westward were trampled by Ontario eastward, as usual.

Again, this has nothing to with who is in power or how they got there. The problem is that OICs in their present form still exist. Conservatives can use this same procedure to advance their own agenda. It is not democratic. It isn't East vs West, or who voted for who. Orders in council are a flawed methodology.

No offence to you Super, your one of the few good ones. As a former maritimer who left 40 years ago and finally returned for a visit 40 years later I was shocked at how attitudes have changed there. The majority of small town redneck kids who I grew up and went to school with with have done a full 360. Some still have heads on their shoulders but the majority have succumbed to left wing social engineering hook line and sinker. It was depressingly hard to fathom. The Maritimes might as well be a bedroom community of Toronto. The brain drain people speak about that has happened there with so many of the best and brightest leaving for greener pastures in the west over the decades has certainly had an effect. It has become a cloistered federally dependent enclave who have no intention of ever being weaned from the tit of federal gov't handouts..

Both issues are real problems, IMO.

I dont think you are understanding Jordan Smith correctly, I think he is saying he doesn't give a fook about an order in council, or how we got to where we are. It doe's matter who is in power, and because the east elects our federal government, and I think they have 2 MP's in the entire west...it is an east west thing.

I understood what he said. What he didn't understand, and you don't understand is that OIC, in their present form, can be misused by any government in power. If the Conservatives formed the government, they can misuse it.

In simple terms, legislation is drawn up, given to, and signed off by the Governor General. It is then law.

This can be done by any sitting government without being debated or voted on in the House of Commons. You cannot say that Conservatives wouldn't use it. They can, if they formed the government. This flaw has nothing to do with the West vs the East. It has everything to do with how OIC are drafted and used.

In this latest case, the Liberals are a minority government. They cannot ram legislation through because they do not have the majority of seats. Had they proposed gun ban legislation the regular way, the bill would be read in the HofC and debated in Parliament by all our MPs. The legislation would have been voted on by all MPs. If the bill did not pass, it could have resulted in a no-confidence vote. I believe that they did not want to take that chance.

If the majority of MPs vote no confidence, the sitting government may be dissolved and an election is called. Another option is a coalition of other parties. For example, the Cons and the NDP (or the Bloc) could be asked to form a government.

By using orders in council, the House of Commons is not consulted. There are no readings. There is no debate. Nothing. The government goes to the Governor General's office, telling him the legislation is necessary, has been discussed by the Privy Council and it needs to be law. The GG will then sign it off and it becomes law. Done.

If the Conservatives were the government, they could do it. If the NDP were the government, they could do it. The flaw is with OIC and the abbreviated process to get something made into law. There is no democratic process. There is no discussion. It is, in effect, dictatorial.

Whether the East elects the government or not, is not the problem here. OIC, as they are presently used, are the problem.

Steve,

I understand the problems with using an OIC to get things done, and I said as much. But unfortunately you refuse to recognize that more than one problem exists. The method used by the Liberals to introduce new firearms law (using an OIC) is one problem, and the fact that they are even in a governing position to push authoritarian firearms law is the other.