In the case of JWR, a principled Liberal is still a Liberal

Not only has JWR stood over some of the worst legislation passed in this country, her much-admired chief of staff, Jessica Prince, has as well. For those of you who don’t, or can’t, pay attention to legislation that bursts forth from the Ottawa bubble, here is an overview that should make any conservative not just leery of JWR’s legislative legacy, but strongly opposed it.

Let’s start at the beginning.

The Supreme Court of Canada imposed euthanasia on the country and wagged the government into creating legislation. This decision is as top-down as anything could be in this country. Previous Canadian parliaments had repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected euthanasia up to that point. With that in mind, the June 2016 legislation on what is being called Medical Aid in Dying, could have respected those who profoundly disagreed with the SCC, by protecting a Charter right: freedom of conscience. Instead, that was deliberately omitted. With Bill C-14 not having explicit conscience rights protection for all healthcare providers, from the PSW to the pharmacist to the physician, the ramifications on healthcare as we know it, are quite sadly, probably permanent.

The coordinated advocacy to expand MAiD means that no safeguard put in place, is safe.

Bill C-225, was legislation introduced by Conservative backbencher MP Cathay Wagantall. She had been deeply moved by the murder of pregnant Cassandra Kaake whose boyfriend was shocked to discover the law did not recognize unborn Molly when punishing that crime. Wagantall wrote Cassie and Molly’s Law which would have made it a separate offence to cause injury or death to an unborn child if the mother was killed. A Nanos poll showed that nearly 70% of Canadians supported this. It also received the support of the Native Women’s Association of Canada as well as the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime. But having the word “pre-born” in it, meant it was doomed from the beginning with this ideologically-driven government. It didn’t pass 2nd reading.

Bill C- 45 was legislation expedited to legalize marijuana by an artificial deadline. Conservative Senators Plett and Unger were excellent advocates for a cautious approach to be taken in this monumental change to our society, particularly regarding youth. Canadians of many ethnic and religious backgrounds are still very reticent about this legislative accomplishment; while our Prime Minister brags about it. The consequences of this hastily written bill have yet to be fully determined, but justified warnings loom large.

In case you get the impression my perspective is narrowly conservative, let me assure you, concerns about Liberal government legislation have been expressed from both sides of the political spectrum. In just over 3 years, under Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould, concerns have been raised from a broad spectrum of people.

Such is the case with Bill C-51.

Upon introduction of this bill, people of all faiths were focused on the fact that within it, longstanding protections for religious leaders during a religious service were being removed. After a great backlash, the section was eventually removed, only to resurface Bill C-75 currently before the Senate. Conservative MPs David Anderson and Marilyn Gladu drew attention to C-51 and now C-75’s odd removal of the protection, given the age in which we live.

As a side note, Bill C-75 is a 300 page bill described by some as an omnibus bill, which among other things, would allow the court to exempt an offender from the requirement to pay a victim surcharge (damn you Stephen Harper) while taking away mandatory minimum sentences for forcible confinement of a minor (reducing the penalty in question to a two-year term or $1,000 fine), as well as for: polygamy, forced marriage, belonging to a terrorist organization, arson, and many others. I will sleep better. You?

Back to C-51 which passed in December last year. As more came to light, it became apparent what an extraordinary, transformative effect another section of this bill would have. Said to be a reaction to Jian Ghomeshi’s acquittal, it caused no little outrage in HuffPost and Narcity to the National Post and the Toronto Sun. Vocal opposition came from all sides. Defence lawyers, legal experts and columnists warned this bill would lead to a greater number of wrongful convictions. Bill C-51 damages the ability to mount a full defence when someone is accused of sexual assault. Yet, innocent until proven guilty is a tenet of our legal system. Full stop.

The hot topic most recently debated has been Bill C-46 regarding impaired driving and roadside testing. CBC discussed the ramifications of this bill, as well as its gross over-reach, as did Global News, and many commentators. While striving to protect the public, the bill tramples constitutional rights, inevitably leading to many court challenges. Sound familiar?

The Liberals have a pattern of defending non-existent charter rights while arguably trampling existing ones. This, while having relentlessly criticized the former Conservative government for doing the same. Bold.

Admire and respect courage when displayed in Parliament no matter on which side of the floor you find it. More than that, emulate it, even at the cost Jody Wilson-Raybould paid. But unless a Liberal abandons liberal policy, as has been notably done in the past, they are not Conservative. A principled Liberal is still a Liberal.