Collected Data

"The term “judicial oversight”, as used by members of the Conservative Party in this debate, is truly a perversion of reality."

Elizabeth May, via nationalobserver.com;

Sitting here today through third reading, I heard a great number of propositions from Conservative members of Parliament. I have no doubt that they believe those propositions in their speaking notes to be true, but they are consistently repeating fallacies that I would like to try to explain and deconstruct so that Canadians will understand why these repeated bromides are just not true.


The three fallacies I want to address in the time I have are the following. One notion is that information-sharing, which is part one of the bill, is designed to ensure that our security services, which are the RCMP, CSIS, Canada Border Services Agency, and CSEC, the agencies of policing and intelligence, share information with each other. That was put forward earlier today several times, and that, indeed, is something that must be done, but this bill does not do it.


The second fallacy is that there is judicial oversight in this bill, because judges are involved in one section. I want to deal with that one as well.


The other fallacy is that the terrorism and propaganda sections in the amendments to the Criminal Code in this omnibus bill would actually make it more likely that we could stop youth from being radicalized.


Elizabeth May makes impassioned speech against Bill C-51

The Conservatives are either ignorant or lying. I don’t know which is worse.