CPC(M-L) HOME TML Daily Archive Le Marxiste-Léniniste quotidien

October 31, 2014 - No. 89

150th Anniversary Commemoration of
Martyrdom of Tsilhqot'in Chiefs

Historic Ceremony Receives Exoneration and Apology from BC Government

Quesnel, BC, October 26, 2014

150th Anniversary Commemoration of Martyrdom of Tsilhqot'in Chiefs
Historic Ceremony Receives Exoneration and Apology from BC Government
- Charles Boylan

In the Parliament
Bill C-43, Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2
Omnibus Budget Implementation Bill Includes Many Anti-Social Measures
- K.C. Adams 

Bill C-586, Reform Act 2014
More Changes to the Elections Act - Anna Di Carlo

Bill C-18, Agricultural Growth Act
Escalating Attacks on Farmers and the Agricultural System - Dougal MacDonald 

Bill C-377, Act to Amend the Income Tax Act
Private Member's Bill Which Attacks Workers and Unions Reintroduced

150th Anniversary Commemoration of Martyrdom of Tsilhqot'in Chiefs

Historic Ceremony Receives Exoneration and Apology from BC Government

Chief Roger William opens 150th commemoration of hanging of Tsilhqot'in chiefs in Quesnel, October 26, 2014, with other Tsilhquot'in chiefs standing behind.

On October 26, the Tsilhqot'in National Government commemorated the 150th anniversary of the six Tsilhqot'in Chiefs who heroically fought for the Tsilhquot'in people and their land and were wrongfully hanged on by the colonial government of British Columbia headed by Governor Seymour. The ceremony was held, as it has been for many years, at a site next to the GR Baker Memorial Hospital in Quesnel, where archeologists believe the hanged chiefs were buried.

The ceremony this year was significantly different. John Rustad, Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, presented, on behalf of the Government of British Columbia, a large framed copy of the Premier's exoneration of the hanged chiefs, acknowledging their wrongful hanging for defending their people and land, and an apology. The Premier made the statement October 23 to the BC Legislature. She was scheduled to be present, but her flight was cancelled due to inclement weather.

About 250 people assembled at the site where a modest commemoration plaque is planted. Elders were provided protection from the cold and rain under a large tent, while others, indigenous and non-indigenous, stood outside as the ceremony unfolded.

Master of ceremony, Executive Director Crystal Verhaeghe, introduced Chief Roger William, Xeni' Gwetin, Vice-Chair Tsilhqot'in National Government (TNG), who opened the ceremony with a song. Chief William's 24-year litigation to establish land title over a 1,700 square kilometre piece of the Nation's territory belonging to his tribe Xeni'Gwetin, resulted in the Supreme Court of Canada decision of June 26, 2014 granting land title for the first time in Canadian history. This victory over the BC government's effort to limit title to reservations and a few other spots led to a meeting of the Premier with TNG representatives in their territory last summer. Among other things it was agreed the Premier would exonerate the martyred chiefs and set the historical record straight on the "Chilcotin War" (1862-64).

TNG Tribal Chairman Chief Joe Alphonse, Tl'etinqox, spoke next. All the other tribal chiefs, Chief Percy Guichon, Tsi Deldel; Chief Frances Laceese, Tl'esqox; Chief Bernie Mack, ?Esdilagh; and Chief Russell Ross Myers, Yunesit'in, stood behind the podium throughout, and one by one made short statements. All of them opened by speaking in their national language, still spoken as the first language among a large number of the older generation. In English they paid tribute to the martyred chiefs, stories of whom have been embedded in the memory of generation after generation of Tshilhquot'in people, saying their sacrifices of 150 years ago inspired their own struggle, especially during the long legal case launched by Chief William. Without their struggle the chiefs emphasized they would not have had the strength to meet the devastation of their population, which declined from about 9,000 to 500 from the small pox epidemic planted by the colonialists. Nor the other crimes committed over the past 150 years, such as the residential schools and reserve system imposed by the federal department of Indian Affairs.

BC Aboriginal Affairs & Reconiliation Minister John Rustad presents framed statement of exoneration of Tsilhqot'in Chiefs to Chief Joe Alphonse at 150th commemoration ceremony in Quesnel, October 26, 2014.

Indeed a theme running through the chiefs' speeches was the absence of the Canadian government in the event. "It's time Canada came to the table," emphasized Chief Joe Alphonse. While Canada was absent, many indigenous nations from around BC were present. Chief Alphonse thanked the Nuu-chah-nulth nation for their gift of the carved eagle mask which adorned the front of the podium and the tapestry which provided a background for the assembled chiefs and guests. Later a beautiful carved silver tray was presented by the Squamish Salish nation. Many other nations sent delegates to participate. Grand Chief Ed John, Hereditary Chief of Tl'azt'en Nation from Nak'al Bun (Stuart Lake Carrier), and head of the First Nations Summit brought greetings and saluted the Tsilhqot'in on their historic victory. Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, Okanagan Nation and President, Union of BC Indian Chiefs, also congratulated the Tsilhqot'in nation on the historic occasion of the exoneration of the martyred chiefs. He noted the chiefs had made the "ultimate sacrifice" in defence of their people and territory. He called the statement of exoneration by the BC government in the context of the Supreme Court decision in the William case an important step toward reconciliation between the BC government and the Tsilhqot'in nation.

John Rustad, BC Minister Aboriginal Relations & Reconciliation (second from left), exchanges gifts with Chief Joe Alphonse, Tribal Chair, Tsilhqot'in National Government (right).

John Rustad, Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, after handing over the framed speech of Premier Clark, read it in full to the assembly. He then exchanged gifts with the chiefs. Quesnel Mayor Mary Sjostrom spoke briefly welcoming the changing framework with First Nations and thanking the Tsilhquot'in for their hard work. Williams Lake Mayor Kerry Cook confessed to having first heard the story of the Chilcotin War only six years ago, and said to applause that the Williams Lake school district will include this important story in its curriculum. She thanked the Tsilhqot'in chiefs saying, it's not every day you spend time with history makers and that "June 26 marks a day in history that marks a change in all of our lives." True reconciliation she said comes from acknowledging our history and working together for a path forward, and that "together we can and will shape our future."

A number of other councilors and MLAs, including Leader of the Opposition John Horigan, were also present. Also attending were local workers including a retired representative of northern sawmill workers. Noticeable by their absence, aside from any representative from Harper's government, was the monopoly media, including the CBC. The only media present were reporters from the Canadian Press and TML.

The outdoor commemoration ceremony ended with more traditional drumming and songs. It then moved indoors to the atrium of the joint College of New Caledonia/University of Northern BC campus building. Some 400 people gathered there for a traditional lunch of bannock bread, moose stew, salad and coffee. During lunch the silver platter was presented, and a moving speech in both Tsilhqot'in and English was made by a 17-year-old grade 12 youth who spoke about the importance of his generation keeping the language and culture of their nation alive. The final presentation was a half-hour talk by Tom Swanky, researcher and author of The True Story of Canada's 'War' of Extermination on the Pacific, summarizing how the spreading of small pox by land-thieving road builders and government officials provoked the Tsilhqot'in government and war chiefs to declare war to defend their country from mass killers and intruders.

(Photos: TML, UBCIC, S. Swanky)

Return to top

In the Parliament
Bill C-43, Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2

Omnibus Budget Implementation Bill Includes
Many Anti-Social Measures

The day after Corporal Nathan Cirillo was shot in Ottawa, the Harper dictatorship tabled yet another mammoth budget implementation bill. While the mass media diverted the attention of the country with non-stop coverage of the criminal act of a lone gunman, Harper introduced a 458-page omnibus budget implementation bill, Bill C-43, Economic Action Plan 2014 Act, No. 2, that includes measures on scores of issues. These include matters of extreme importance to the people, which should be broadly debated in their own right not hidden within a huge bill that Harper dictates must be voted either up or down in its entirety.

In the coming weeks, TML will address some of the contentious issues Harper is sneaking into law like a masked man who uses the cover of darkness to hide his anti-social deeds. These include amongst other matters the following:

- Revisions to the Investment Canada Act.

- Changes to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program.

- Changes to the funding of Employment Insurance. The government's own employees in the Public Service Alliance call these changes problematic with a planned result to starve the EI program of necessary funds.

- Legislation to restrict the ability of refugee claimants to apply for social assistance. This discriminatory measure follows the government's decision to limit refugee claimants' access to universal, public health care. Federal Court Judge Anne Mactavish struck down this measure saying it constitutes "cruel and unusual" treatment, puts lives at risk, and "outrages Canadian standards of decency." The government is currently appealing her ruling.

- Changes to the Public Health Agency of Canada.

- A broadening of the scope of the national DNA bank.

- Legislation to create a new research station to replace the closed Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) in Eureka, Nunavut and to repeal the act that created the Canadian Polar Commission, an agency of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development that has been responsible for monitoring Polar Regions and recommending science policy since 1991. Debi Daviau, President of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada said the proposed new Canadian High Arctic Research Station in Cambridge Bay, Nunavut (69°07'02"N) is an inadequate attempt to replace Canada's northernmost research lab PEARL. Daviau's union joined other critics of the government's decision to shut down the High Arctic station, which was located at a latitude of 79°59'20"N. PEARL had been tracking climate change, air quality and other factors such as ozone depletion since 2005. Scientists argue the new station in Cambridge Bay, Nunavut is not in the High Arctic and in addition, researchers will have gaps in data collection and key scientific measurements by the time it is up and running in 2017. The government has already lost the expertise of the scientists who worked in PEARL.

- No legislation, some hoped would be included, to reverse the Harper dictatorship's muzzling of scientists who are presently unable to share publicly or talk about their research, or collaborate with other scientists.

- No mention of an inquiry into the hundreds of missing and murdered Aboriginal women or any movement to deal with that pressing concern.

Return to top

Bill C-586, Reform Act 2014

More Changes to the Elections Canada Act

On September 24, Private Member's Bill C-586, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and the Parliament of Canada Act (candidacy and caucus reforms), short titled the Reform Act, 2014, passed second reading by a vote of 253 to 17. The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs (PROC) started its review of the legislation on Thursday, October 30 with its mover, Conservative MP Michael Chong (Wellington-Halton Hills), scheduled as the first witness.

Chong first tabled his legislation in December 2013 in a slightly different version (Bill C-559, Reform Act, 2013), describing it as "an effort to strengthen Canada's democracy by restoring the role of elected Members of Parliament in the House of Commons." The legislation will change the section of the electoral law that requires a party candidate to be endorsed by the party's leader. It will amend the Parliament of Canada Act to give legal definition to "party caucus" and establish rules regarding the removal and re-admission of caucus members, election of the caucus chairs, and how caucus members can challenge party leaders, including subjecting them to a review, removing them and electing an interim replacement.

Bill C-586 has gone to Committee with somewhat unique features. On September 11, in anticipation of second reading vote, Chong issued a public statement calling on members of PROC to make specific amendments to the legislation before returning it to the House. (Amendments, with few exceptions, are not allowed at second reading.) Secondly, Chong has stated that he reserves the right to not move the bill at third reading if PROC "makes changes that are not acceptable."

Chong's press release was described as "a response to consultations held over the summer and to build support for the bill at its first vote, scheduled for Wednesday, September 24th, 2014" and explains that the consultations with all parties revealed two main critiques: "The first is that the nomination process set out in the bill is too prescriptive, making it difficult to meet diversity targets for party candidates or impeding parties from establishing uniform rules across the country for party nominations. The second is that the bill imposes a one-size-fits-all solution on all party caucuses, overlooking the unique circumstance of each caucus and preventing flexibility to deal with special situations."

Candidate Selection

The current text of the Reform Act, 2014 calls for the transfer of the authority to endorse a party candidate from the party leader to a nomination officer who would be elected by secret ballot by the executive officers of the party riding associations in each province. It stipulates that nomination contests for party candidates must be held by riding associations according to rules set by the local riding associations themselves. The candidate who wins the race would then be endorsed by the provincial nomination officer. In his arguments for these changes, Chong stated that they "would allow parties to restore greater local control over the selection of local party candidates. By restoring control to electoral district associations to nominate candidates, power is effectively restored to Canadians, since it becomes a local decision as to who gets to represent the party in an election."

In his September 11 proposed amendments to PROC, the changes outlined above would all be rescinded. Instead, the amendment to the provision in the Canada Elections Act on party endorsement would replace "party leader" with "a person to be designated by each registered political party."

Parliamentary Party Caucus Rules

In its current version, Bill C-586 would establish rules in the Parliament of Canada Act for relations amongst members of the parliamentary party caucus. Members of caucus could only be expelled if there is written notice signed by 20 per cent of the members of the caucus requesting that the member's membership be reviewed; and the actual expulsion would only take place if it is approved by secret ballot by a majority of all caucus members. Similar rules would apply to the election and removal of the caucus chair.

A leader who has lost the confidence of the members of the caucus could be subjected to a leadership review with written notice signed by at least 20 per cent of the members. The chair of the caucus would then order a secret ballot vote be taken among the members of the caucus to conduct a leadership review. The chair of the caucus would also be required to make the notice of leadership review public. If a majority votes to replace the leader of the party, the chair of the caucus would call for a second vote to appoint a person to serve as the interim leader of the party until a new leader has been duly elected by the party. This procedure would also apply in the event of the death, incapacity or resignation of the leader.

In his September 11 amendments, Chong calls on PROC to make the rules that he is proposing to include the Parliament of Canada Act option. It would only be compulsory for a party caucus to conduct a vote as to whether or not it wants to follow the rules, and the vote itself would not have to be made public. Chong writes, that his Bill C-586 should be amended to:

"Require that each House of Commons caucus, after every general election, as its first item of business and in a recorded manner, vote on each of the following four rules:

a. The review and removal of the party leader,
b. The election of the interim leader,
c. The election and removal of the caucus chair and
d. The expulsion and re-admission of a caucus member"

Chong has been an MP since 2004, when he ran as a Progressive Conservative Party candidate. He ran for re-election in 2006 for the Conservative Party of Canada and was appointed Minister of Inter-Governmental Affairs in the first Harper minority government resulting from that election. He quit cabinet in November 2006 because he could not support Harper's motion that the Québécois formed a nation within a united Canada. Although his portfolio would have necessarily involved relations between the federal government and Quebec, Chong had not been consulted prior to the motion being tabled. Since that time he has served as a backbencher.

Chong's private member's bill does nothing to empower either MPs or party members despite claims which purport otherwise. Nowadays the political parties in the Parliament no longer need members to operate and use state funds to cover up that they no longer serve as primary organizations which link the citizenry to the government in some way. Similarly, MPs have no say over the direction of government policy or decisions taken at any level. In the case of the omnibus bills, they do not even get to read the legislation, let alone study it and debate it. As for the Electoral Act, the more it is reformed, the more it loses any coherence it once may have had and the more this contributes to the crisis in which the system of representative democracy is mired. It is obvious that the first draft of this bill was very uninformed since the state of the riding associations it appealed to is dismal and a majority of parties could not have performed the task the bill was assigning them to perform. A majority of parties that do not even have riding associations would have been blown out of the water, which would have raised a ruckus even the Harper government could only have considered a diversion at this time. As for the second draft, measures that transfer the power to select candidates from the party leader to a surrogate do not change the fact that it is not Canadians who select the candidates that stand for election, and that so long as they do not control the selection of candidates, the choice of who they can elect is not under their control either. It is all a diversion from the serious problems the polity and democracy face.

Return to top

Bill C-18, Agricultural Growth Act

Escalating Attacks on Farmers and
the Agricultural System

On October 7, federal Minister of Agriculture Gerry Ritz appeared before the House of Commons' Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food to spread more disinformation about the Harper dictatorship's pending anti-farmer Bill C-18, the Agricultural Growth Act. Ritz and Harper are trying to sell the bill to the Canadian farmers and people as promising a "bright future" for farmers by modernizing regulations; providing greater access to new crop varieties, financial programs, and trade opportunities; more efficiently preventing plant pests; and making agricultural products safer.

A most insidious aspect of Bill C-18 is that it will "allow Canada to adopt and implement measures from the 1991 International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plant (UPOV 91) Convention." While Ritz brags about this, the reality is that UPOV 91 serves the interests, not of the farmers, but of the monopolies that patent seeds, such as Monsanto. UPOV 91 favours agribusiness over farmers and private interests over the public interest. Its promotion of patents for plant varieties jeopardizes farmers' seed-saving, wrongly encourages monoculture over biodiversity, makes poor farmers more dependent on expensive inputs and more indebted, and skews agriculture toward export rather than local needs. The UPOV also keeps its meetings and documents secret and refuses to give observer status to farmers' organizations.

In contrast to Ritz's phony cheerleading, the farmers' own organization in Canada, the National Farmers Union (NFU), states that their careful analysis shows that Bill C-18 will "increase farmers' costs, reduce farmers' autonomy and compromise Canadian sovereignty while providing substantially increased revenue and more power and control to multi-national agri-business corporations." The NFU presented their dissenting views at the House of Commons Agriculture Committee hearings on Bill C-18 on October 9.

In an October 8 NFU news release, Terry Boehm, Chair of the NFU Seed and Trade Committee stated: "Earlier generations of Canadian farmers developed institutions to rebalance power between the individual farmer and larger entities such as the grain companies, banks and railroads that were taking more than their fair share of the wealth farmers produced. They never imagined that a system would come along to take away the farmers' control of seed -- yet this is exactly what Bill C-18 does through its amendments to the Plant Breeders' Rights Act... Bill C-18 is bad enough on its own, but when combined with CETA, the Canada-EU trade agreement, the picture is even worse. CETA requires Canada to bring in draconian intellectual property rights enforcement measures, including precautionary seizure of assets for alleged infringement. These would apply to the exclusive Plant Breeders' Rights that seed companies would gain if Bill C-18 is passed."

Boehm also pointed out that the NFU has a very different vision of a seed law for Canada, which recognizes the rights of farmers and which is summarized in the NFU document Fundamental Principles of a Farmers' Seed Act. The Farmers' Seed Act includes, in part:

- The right of farmers to exchange and sell seed, including through farmer-owned organizations such as cooperatives, non-profit organizations and associations.

- The unrestricted right of farmers to grow, save and use seed for planting which cannot be negated by any contract. This right would be supported by

- unrestricted right to clean seed;

- unrestricted right to store seed;

- unrestricted right to prepare seed for planting, including applying seed treatments;

- unrestricted establishment of new seed cleaning plants;

- unrestricted access to seed cleaning equipment and parts.

- Following expiration of plant breeders' rights, all varieties would be in the public domain allowing for unrestricted use and/or made available under a general public license. This would include a variety registration system that would protect farmers and our food system by ensuring seed that meets farmers' needs for quality, reliability and agronomic performance under local conditions across Canada is available.

- The NFU Seed Act would also prohibit Genetic Use Restriction Technologies (GURTs), sometimes referred to as Terminator Technology, and all gene patents or other patent mechanisms on seed.

Bill C-18 is a further attack on farmers' rights by the Harper dictatorship in the interests of agri-business. It follows on Harper's 2011 undemocratic assault on the Canadian Wheat Board in service of the monopolies, to dismantle its single-desk public monopoly on grain marketing in the name of offering a phony choice to farmers that undermines the stability of farmers' operations and income, the price of grain and Canada's food security and that of those countries that depend on Canada's grain. A new wave of federal government cuts to agriculture followed in 2012 after the federal Department of Agriculture budget was reduced by over nine per cent, including wiping out the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration branch, eliminating the Community Pastures Program, ending the Shelterbelt Program, and closing the Cereal Research Centre in Winnipeg. Today, there is the very real threat of Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement and the Transpacific Partnership free trade agreement to Canada's entire agricultural supply management system, a system which ensures that food production meets the needs of the people, farmers are properly compensated, and processors have stability and predictability of supply and price.

Many more examples of the Harper dictatorship's agricultural wrecking can be given. All threaten the well-being of the Canadian people because they weaken Canada's agricultural system and undermine people's livelihoods and the social fabric, leaving people at the mercy of the vagaries of market forces and the insatiable greed of the monopolists. All of the aspects of agriculture under attack have been part of the vast system of public enterprises that have long served the interests of the people. Now they are being shamelessly destroyed to serve the profit-making interests of the private monopolies. The content of the attacks on agriculture is to deliver control of it to private monopoly interests and politicize those private interests with the financial and other power of the state. The attacks fly in the face of public right and the necessity for the people and their public institutions to control their resources and benefit from their use.

Return to top

Bill C-377, Act to Amend the Income Tax Act

Private Member's Bill Which Attacks Workers and Unions Reintroduced

Private member's Bill C-377, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (requirements for labour organizations) is currently in debate before the Senate. Bill C-377 was originally passed by the House of Commons on December 12, 2012 and sent to the Senate for debate thereafter. The odious nature of the Bill, which singles out labour unions to publicly disclose expenses above $5,000 along with salaries of executives and employees, led to opposition from members of all parties in the Senate and its subsequent amendment.[1]

Organizations such as medical associations, law associations, and other professional bodies are not subject to the same requirements in the bill. C-377 specifies penalties of $1,000 per day up to $25,000 for failure to comply with the law. An example of the invasive and punitive character of the bill is that it would require the public listing of the names and addresses of deceased union members' spouses who received a union coverage-related death benefit. Any worker who similarly receives more than $5,000 in benefits from a union health care plan would also be forced to have their names and addresses, along with explanations of the payment, publicly displayed online.

Former Senator Hugh Segal led a group of 16 other Conservative Senators to amend the bill on June 26, 2013 to increase the spending disclosure amount to $150,000 and specify that the bill should only apply to unions with a membership of 50,000 or more. Segal and other Senators insisted that the bill as proposed was unconstitutional and in violation of sections 91 and 92 of the British North America Act (BNAA), as well as the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and violating freedom of speech, expression and association generally. Sections 91 and 92 of the BNAA delineate the division of responsibilities between federal and provincial governments. Segal pointed out that C-377 would subject labour unions to federal authority whereas they are currently recognized as being under provincial jurisdiction. Segal called the bill an expression of statutory contempt for workers in trade unions and for the right of said unions to organize.

After the amended Bill C-377 was passed in the Senate and referred back to the House of Commons, Prime Minister Stephen Harper prorogued Parliament on September 13. The House resumed business on October 16, where due to the prorogation the bill reappeared in its original form and was once again passed and referred to Senate.

The second reading of the bill was sponsored by Senator Ghislain Maltais on November 26, 2013. C-377 reappeared for debate first on February 25, 2014 but debate was adjourned immediately. Similarly on May 13 debate was resumed on the legislation but immediately adjourned. In June 2014 Hugh Segal retired from Senate to take a position as Master of Massey College in Toronto.

On September 9, Jean-Martin Masse, Chief of Staff of Claude Carignan, Leader of the Government in the Senate met with representatives of Merit Canada to discuss the bill. Merit is an organization representing a small portion of the non-union contractors in the construction industry that has been aggressively lobbying and spreading misinformation with the purposes of promoting Bill C-377. Merit Canada previously met with the Prime Minister's Office 16 times in relation to C-377.

Bill C-377 came up again at the September 18 sitting of the Senate but Conservative Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais, who assumed sponsorship of the bill, professed that he would not be ready to speak on the bill until a week later. Its re-emergence coincides with Conservative Senators recommending that time allocation limits be imposed on debates for private members' bills in the Senate.

On September 22 Minister of State (Finance) Kevin Sorenson expressed the support of the government for the legislation. He said "It is time to get it out of the Senate. We believe that we need to move this bill ahead."

The first discussion on the reintroduced Bill C-377 took place on September 25. Dagenais did not speak on the legislation, and instead Conservative Senator and former Ontario Progressive Conservative leader Bob Runciman provided the arguments in favour of the bill. He complained bitterly that many "union bosses" had worked to elect Liberal governments in Ontario and the NDP in the 2012 Kitchener-Waterloo by-election as justification for his position. Senator Joan Fraser questioned his use of the term "union bosses," and pointing out that unlike those they negotiate with, union leaders are subject to election. Runciman replied that: "From my perspective, that's the way I like to describe many of these individuals who -- you're right; they are elected, and they have, I guess, the authority to do and say what they please with respect to the matters that fall under their ambit of responsibility. But I think it's an appropriate use of the English language, and I will continue to use it, especially in respect to this legislation."

Fraser then moved to end debate on the motion and it has not resumed up to this point. During the remainder of 2014 the Senate is scheduled to sit from October 28-31, November 3-7, 17-21, 24-25, November 1-5, 8-12, and 15-19.


1. See TML Daily, March 1, 2013 - No. 27.

(Hansard, Canadian Press, Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada)

Return to top


Read The Marxist-Leninist Daily
Website:  www.cpcml.ca   Email:  editor@cpcml.ca