After listing every vote on the amendments to Bill 132 by the members of the committee, I was thinking that readers might be interested to read the entire discussion that took place on February 10, 2005, as each of these amendments were considered.
Four people presented amendments:
Norm Miller and Joe Tascona for the Conservatives
Peter Kormos for the New Democrats
David Zimmer for the Liberal party, the creators of the legislation
It’s a long read, but worthwhile. Here are some of my thoughts after reading it again:
- David Zimmer only confirmed his status in my mind as a weasel of the highest (lowest?) order.
- The lawyers who worded this legislation, and the government amendments, DON’T HAVE A CLUE! I could have written better stuff on the back of a napkin in Tim Horton’s!
  - A number of the suggestions by the non-government members were symbolic in nature, designed to allow further comments to be placed on record by the person making the motion. They should not be criticized individually, but should be considered as pieces of a whole strategy.
  - A simple review, as I did earlier, of only the motions themselves and their success or failure, misses most of the point. The accompanying comments and arguments show, in detail, the reasons for suggesting each amendment and, even more so, show the attitude of the government to clearly be one of “our minds are made up – don’t confuse us with the facts”.
- Many of the other parties’ recommendations were designed to reduce dog bites or to eliminate unfairness and vagueness, whereas all of the government recommendations were clearly to cover their legal behinds, to enable them to include more dogs (and their owners), or to make it easier to prosecute.
Here is the full text of the clause-by-clause discussions and voting.
And here are the four days of presentations by the public. Each time I re-read these, I am struck again by the massive amount of information and suggestions that were made available to the government, ALL of which were ignored.
January 24, 2005
January 27, 2005
February 2, 2005
February 3, 2005