I have a piece in the current issue Capital Xtra, which is a full-page article on the Section 13 debate in Canada. It's a complex issue, and I will say right off that I am forever indebted to Professor Richard Moon from the University of Windsor, who took forty minutes out of his day in order to give me the complete background on the issue and walked me through his report on the issue.Now, that said, there were were a couple of issues with the editing that I wanted to address. First of all, I would never use the phrase "bowels of Parliament," especially in reference to a committee, as I know the meeting rooms are all above ground. But that's just me. But the bigger issue is that a point I was hoping to make was dropped in the final version, which was a point about the tension that exists in the Canadian legislative cycle between Parliament and the courts. Given that Parliament has often handed off certain tough decisions to the courts to make so that they wouldn't have to face the wrath of the voters, I wanted this fact highlighted - especially in the context that there are now two streams at play here - one with the appeal of the Tribunal decision in the Federal Court, the other the justice committee study in Parliament. It's also what Keith Martin was speaking to when he said that he hopes Parliament has the courage to address the topic. I'm sorry this bit was lost in the final piece.
Posts
