DEFENCE OF CANADIAN LIBERTY COMMITTEE

LE COMITÉ DE LA LIBERTÉ CANADIENNE

Forced vaccinations coming to Canada: MP Speaks Out Against Bill C-42

Global Justice Network, Vancouver, BC

Bill C-42(R), (http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_individual.asp?Language=E&Parl=37&Ses=1&Bill=C-42&BillType=government) called the Public Safety Act (or by others the New and Improved War Measures Act ), amends numerous other Acts of Canada including The Department of Health Act, the Quarantine Act, the Food and Drug Act, and the Hazardous Products Act among others. The Bill has been tabled as part of new anti-terrorism legislation, along with Bill C-35, C-36 (Note:

A give new interim powers to the various Ministers in charge of the various Act; powers that have previously been in the hands of the courts, who have an obligation to respect the rule of law and consider impartially the rights of Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The potential effect of such interim powers were brought up by Bloc Quebecois MP Mario Laframboise in the House of Commons December 3, 2001:

I can perhaps try to explain, to help Quebecers listening to us to better understand the new powers that would be given to the Health Minister. It is quite simple:

11.1 (1) The Minister may make an interim order that contains any provision that may be contained in a regulation made under section 11 if the Minister believes that immediate action is required to deal with a significant risk, direct or indirect, to health or safety.

Hence, by way of an interim order, a new power has been given to the Health Minister. In the case of the anthrax vaccine or the protective inoculation, this power would have entailed the Minister to give his officials the power to buy the necessary vaccine and to compel every Canadian to receive it.

These new dispositions all give more powers and this is what makes it so serious. It is not done simply by giving the minister more powers, because we do not simply give him more powers, we tell him that now An interim order is exempt from the application of sections 3, 5 and 11 of the Statutory Instruments Act .

This means that the minister could adopt interim orders for all sorts of emergency purposes and be exempt from the application of sections of the Statutory Instruments Act. And I am not talking about any old section, either. I will read a part of section 3, which would no longer apply to the Minister of Health in the case of interim orders. This section states:

3.

(1) Subject to any regulations made pursuant to paragraph 20(a), where a regulation-making authority proposes to make a regulation, it shall cause to be forwarded to the Clerk of the Privy Council three copies of the proposed regulation in both official languages.

Now, it would no longer be necessary to send them in both official languages. I read on:

(2) On receipt by the Clerk of the Privy Council of copies of a proposed regulation pursuant to subsection (1), the Clerk of the Privy Council, in consultation with the Deputy Minister of Justice, shall examine the proposed regulation to ensure that

(a) it is authorized by the statute pursuant to which it is to be made;

(b) it does not constitute an unusual or unexpected use of the authority pursuant to which it is to be made;

(c) it does not trespass unduly on existing rights and freedoms and is not, in any case, inconsistent with the purposes and provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

If the Minister of Health is empowered to make interim orders, to purchase vaccines, of whatever kind, exempt from the application of the provisions of enabling legislation, he could very well acquire unacceptable vaccines, vaccines whose patents are held elsewhere. This is no problem. He could then require a group to be vaccinated without complying with the charter of rights and freedoms. All this is effective for 23 days. After 23 days, the regulation must be published.

If this does not infringe individual rights and freedoms, I do not know what they can be thinking. If the minister had all these powers, why write in black and white in a bill that, now, he will be able to make interim orders without the House or the usual regulatory procedure requiring him to meet the test of the charter of rights and freedoms.

The entire text of this speech in the House of Commons can be obtained at: http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/123_2001-12-03/HAN123-E.htm#Int-102138

This legislation is similar to the US Model State Emergency Health Powers Act. Health Scientist and Government Cover-up Investigator Dr. Les Horowicz claims in his article CDC (http://www.prophecyandpreparedness.com/Articles/CDC%20Advances%20Totalitarian%20Legislation%20Under%20Guise%20of%20Public%20Health%20Forced%20Drugging%20and%20Injections%20Are%20On%20The%20Horizon.html) Advances Totalitarian Legislation Under Guise of Public Health : Forced Drugging and Injections Are On The Horizon that forced vaccinations will soon be authorized in the United States under this proposed Act, a copy of which can be found at http://www.publichealthlaw.net/MSEHPA/MSEHPA.pdf

One such amendment allows the Minister of Transport to declare temporary military zones for up to one year, without adherence to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Section 260.1 (1) of this Bill reads ,

If it is necessary, in the opinion of the Minister, for the protection of international relations or national defence or security, the Minister, on the recommendation of the Chief of the Defence Staff, may, for the purpose of ensuring the safety or security of any person or thing, designate as a military security zone an area of land or water, a portion of airspace, or a structure or part of one, surrounding a thing referred to in subsection (2) or including it, whether the zone designated is fixed or moves with that thing. The zone automatically includes all corresponding water and land below the earth's surface.

This military zone may be designated to protect, includes property, a place or thing that the Canadian Forces have been directed to protect in order to fulfil a duty required by law. This could apply to the Kananaskis location of the upcoming G8 meeting, or any other area where the government wished to restrict legitimate protest and dissent. Under (4) The Canadian Forces may prohibit, restrict or control access to a military security zone ; and under (5) A person found in a military security zone without authorization, and any animal, vehicle, vessel, aircraft or other thing under the person's control, may be forcibly removed by any authorized person, officer or non-commissioned member.

Furthermore, with the recent passage of Bill C-24 (http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_individual.asp?Language=E&Parl=37&Ses=1&Bill=C-24&BillType=government) (otherwise known as the Police Brutality Act ) which is an Act to amend the Criminal Code, public officers and their agents are now exempt from criminal charges under certain and very broad conditions. This Bill was passed by the Senate on December 6, 2001, despite a plethora of credible witnesses testimony of the dangers of this Bill.

The Canadian Bar Association's National Criminal Justice Section says sweeping changes in Bill C-24, will place law enforcement personnel and their agents above the law. "We are opposed to this profound change to the law out of respect for Canadian constitutional guarantees and the rule of law," says Heather Perkins-McVey, of Ottawa, National Criminal Justice Section Chair. The legislation would allow police and even agents of the police to commit serious criminal acts without appropriate accountability, a move the CBA vigorously opposes. "Certainly, police must have the tools they need to do their job. However, creating a criminal exemption for police and their agents will create the possibility of a justice system prone to abuse and misuse of power," says Ms. Perkins-McVey. (see CBA (http://news/releases/2001_releases/2001-11-22_police.asp) Opposes Putting Police above the Law)

For instance, public officers who engage in or direct acts that would otherwise constitute an offense under the Criminal Code can now claim immunity under Section 25.1 if they were: engaged in the investigation of an offence under, or the enforcement of, an Act of Parliament& (ie Protection of foreign delegates under C-35 at an international G8 conference or acting under the interim orders of a Minister under C-42) and they believe on reasonable grounds that the commission of the act or omission& is reasonable and proportional in the circumstance. (This is left to the officer s discretion).

Although the public officer is normally required to obtain written authorization from a senior official, provision is made for the officer to undertake virtually any criminal offense on reasonable grounds that they COULD get such authorization.

The evidence is mounting that democracy is now a farce in Canada, as it is in the United States, and that dictatorial power now resides in the Prime Minister and his select group of Ministers. Please take the time to write Senators and Members of Parliament.

[ Liberty vs Security ]

[ Top of Page | Homepage | Feedback ]