AN OPEN LETTER: FCHC’s Brief to the Senate Hearings on C-6

[Guest guest]

AN OPEN LETTER: FCHC's Brief to the Senate Hearings on C-6

 

Posted by Dee Nicholson in Bill C-6, General, Uncategorized. Tagged: Activism,

Bill C-6, Canada, Canadians, constitution, due process, freedom, justice. Leave

a Comment | Edit

 

FREEDOM IN CANADIAN HEALTH CARE

National Office

 

November 24th, 2009

 

TO: The Honorable Members of

the Senate Standing Committee for Social Affairs,

Parliament, Ottawa, ON

 

Senators:

 

Re: Bill C-6 – The Canada Consumer Protection Act

The Concerns of Canadians have not been heard by this Committee

 

It is with dismay that we received a note from Ms. Keli Hogan, Clerk of the

Senate, informing us that our organization would not be welcome to give viva

voce testimony to this Committee, but that we might instead send a written

brief. We were further distressed that while the Committee would indeed hear

from Mr. Shawn Buckley, his was the only citizen voice to be heard in actual

representation of what Canadians have to say about this egregious bill.

 

Our own organization at least received the courtesy of a reply; however,

Canadians for Health Freedom, which is an umbrella group of several large

grass-roots organizations (including this one), thereby representing a great

many Canadian citizens, was completely ignored, and did not even receive an

invitation to submit a brief! This situation was echoed throughout the hearings:

those opposed to C-6 were not invited to appear.

 

Since there are other matters in which the Senate Committees have allowed many,

many witnesses to appear before them, we are struggling to understand why it is

that in the matter of Bill C-6, which contains several blatant abrogations of

rights enshrined in the Constitution Act, and the Quasi-Constitutional acts

which, together, form the basis of Canada's Rule of Law, citizen voices have

been SILENCED.

 

We do not feel we have to enlighten this Committee as to the majority of

Constitutional concerns, as we are confident that Mr. Buckley's testimony will

in fact alert you all to most of them. That said, we state for the record that

we are of one mind with Mr. Buckley in the matter of how Bill C-6 extends

unreasonable, unwarranted and worrisome powers to Health Canada, which is, by

mandate, merely an ADVISORY agency, not a regulatory one, and which, without the

benefits of permissions granted by Bill C-6, is ALREADY violating the rights of

ordinary Canadians on its " mission " to " protect " Canadians from " dangerous "

health products, namely vitamins, minerals, and essential nutrients: witness the

case of Dr. Eldon Dahl, of Alberta, whose family was HELD AT GUNPOINT, while

officers ransacked their home, on this same " mission " . You have all read about

him in other submissions. Can you, in all honesty, proclaim that these actions

are acceptable in a free society? Is this what government agencies are set up to

do? And is Health Canada to be trusted not to abuse such powers, when they are

abusing them already, before they are even granted?

 

Our concern goes even deeper than these issues, because at least, we have the

ability to issue Constitutional challenges to the application of Bill C-6,

should the Senate be foolish enough to pass this Bill as it stands, challenges

which we, and our advisors, are assured will succeed in a court of law.

 

But there is one clause in Section 2 of the Bill which we feel has been left

largely unaddressed, except in passing, and it is the most egregious of all the

clauses that concern us with respect to our Constitutional rights, and in fact

has the ability to override our national sovereignty, irrevocably and

irretrievably. This is the analysis made by Shawn Buckley on this particular

section, to which we refer in hopes the Committee will recognize exactly what

sort of damage this clause can do:

 

EXCERPT FROM: http://nhppa.org/?page_id=70#29

 

Section 2 includes following definition of " government " :

" `Government' means any of the following or their institutions:

(a) the federal government;

(b) a corporation named in Schedule III of the Financial Administration Act,

© A provincial government or a public body established under an Act of the

legislature of a province,

(d) an aboriginal government as defined in subsection 13(3) of the Access to

Information Act,

(e) a government of a foreign state or of a subdivision of a foreign state, or

(f) an international organization of states.

(emphasis added)

Defining " government " to include foreign states or international organizations

of states such as the United Nations, is important because subsection 36(2) adds

the following to the regulation making power of the federal government:

36(2) A regulation made under this Act may incorporate by reference documents

produced by a person or body other than the Minister including by

(a) an organization established for the purpose of writing standards, including

an organization accredited by the Standards Council of Canada;

(b) an industrial or trade organization; or

© a government.

36(4) A regulation made under this Act may incorporate by reference documents

that the Minister produces jointly with another government for the purpose of

harmonizing the regulation with other laws.

These additions allow the federal government to make documents prepared by

foreign governments or bodies (of) law in Canada by simply passing a regulation

incorporating the document.

 

END EXCERPT

 

PARLIAMENT DOES NOT HAVE SCRUTINY OVER REGULATIONS. That means, should the

Senate pass Bill C-6 without removing this, and other clauses which offend the

Constitution, Canadians will have no ability to defend their sovereignty against

intrusion from foreign bodies. This flies in the face of the concept of a

" sovereign nation " , and changes forever the description of Canada as a free

democracy.

 

We point out to you, Honorable Members, that there are rules which this august

body of Senators must follow in order to secure the Constitutional rights and

freedoms of all, or it fails in its duty and its mandate to serve and protect

all Canadians. Among them, we refer to these passages from the " Law-making

Framework " guiding your deliberations:

 

" The Constitution is the most fundamental law. If another law is inconsistent

with the Constitution, it has no force. The second group of laws is called

quasi-constitutional because they too express fundamental values and they

generally override other inconsistent laws. However, they are not subject to the

rules for amending the Constitution since they can be amended by another Act of

Parliament. The third and fourth groups include Acts and other rules of law that

generally apply, unless another Act clearly says otherwise. "

 

AND:

 

" The Canadian Bill of Rights provides that every law of Canada is to be

interpreted so as not to infringe the recognized rights or freedoms, unless it

expressly says otherwise. The only explicit derogation from the Canadian Bill of

Rights took place during the October Crisis. It was included in the Public Order

(Temporary Measures) Act, 1970, which replaced the regulations made in 1970

under the War Measures Act. "

 

(http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/index.asp?lang=eng & page=information & sub=publications & d\

oc=legislation/chap1.2-eng.htm)

 

Canadians are not so naïve as not to be able to see the danger of the

Constitutional offences, ladies and gentlemen, nor are they pleased to see their

government, in plain view of the nation, altering, abridging, and abrogating the

rights they were born with, the rights they enjoy as members of Canadian

society, and the freedoms of living in a democratic country.

 

We call upon your HONOUR, as Canadians, and as Senators. You have the right and

the ability either to protect these freedoms, or to ignore the pleas of great

numbers of Canadians who wait upon your deliberations but are denied the

opportunity of speaking to them. If you are honorable people, you will respect

the Rule of Law in this nation, and your conclusions will echo our own; if you

are not, you will be, in our minds, committing an offence against those you are

privileged to serve, and in whose largesse you will share, for life.

 

We do not believe, ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, that you are foolish

people. We do not believe that you would deliberately alter our Canadian way of

life, the tenets of our justice system, or the provisions of our treasured

Constitution. However, we do believe that there are political interests which

are bringing pressure to bear upon you to make decisions which ultimately can

negatively affect those whom you directly serve, your constituents, the citizens

of Canada (witness the fast-tracking of this " routine bill " , in that Bill C6 and

its regulations are exempted from the requirements of the Statutory Instruments

Act, as per Sec. 64: General provisions & sect. 37 Interim orders ). We do

believe that vested interests are capable of swaying things to their own

benefit, and that you, and only you, stand in the way of such vested interests

being able to achieve hegemony over our nation and our laws.

 

Again, we call upon your honour and your conscience. We ask that you be

Canadians FIRST and legislators SECOND. We ask that you refuse to give short

shrift to matters of concern to your compatriots, and in so doing, refuse to

pass Bill C-6 in any form which alters, amends, abrogates, or otherwise removes

or diminishes the rights of ordinary Canadians in a bill which promises to use a

cannon to kill flies.

 

We call upon you to REJECT BILL C-6. None of us is opposed to protection from

hazardous products, and never were. However, we demand, with the force of

Canadian law behind us, that you FIND ANOTHER WAY, and make Health Canada, and

any other agency of the Canadian government, adhere to the Rule of Law, the

Constitution, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in any activity they

undertake under the rubric of the " protection of Canadians " .

 

Thank you for your time and attention to this most critical matter, which can

alter the very fabric of the nation we all love.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Dee Nicholson

 

National Director of Communications,

Freedom in Canadian Health Care,

Charter Group Member of

Canadians for Health Freedom

www.canadiansforhealthfreedom.org