Bill C-6, current status, FACTS only
- Thread starter spyfy
- Start date
- Status
still i trust this bill will passspyfy said:
my be by end of 2017
or by June of 2018
that is my hope
wow- did you even read what spyfy wrote?Need Canadian Pr said:
edit: I don't wish to target you specifically. This thread's OP created the thread to keep this just for facts and updates regarding Bill C6. Not to discuss or debate about our hopes, fears and consequences about the Bill.
No one knows for sure. The expectation, according to tweets by Senator Jaffer, is that they will vote on the amendments on tuesday. If that passes, they will start debate of the entire bill. No point in speculating how long that will take in this thread.Zoma said:Great job spyfy!!! Can you please update what will happen on Tuesday?, are they going to vote on Am, then #C6 on another day?
This is what happened on Tuesday and Thursday, the two days the bill got debated:
- Several Senators spoke in favour and against the amendment
- One of those speakers was the government representative in the Senate whose words could be summarized by "as said before, the Minister is open for suggested amendments, but I can't give feedback on this particular amendment yet"
- A senator suggested to amend the amendment (you read that right) that the "notice of revocation" doesn't have to be a written notice.
On Tuesday, they will vote on this "subamendment". They decided on that already. They might (!) also vote on the whole amendment, but that's not sure. Afterwards, there will be a debate on the whole bill for third reading which will take several sessions probably.
More importantly though, and this is a remarkable change in process that happened on Thursday, several senators that are opposing this bill were trying to adjourn the debate (one of them said "I didn't have time to prepare my notes, can we please adjourn" although they just had a one hour break ) and even to adjourn the Senate as a whole until Tuesday. They had counted votes on these adjournments, three times. In all three cases the adjournments were defeated. This is a significant change from second reading where debate was adjourned by request of a senator unanimously every single time. It suggests that there is a majority in the Senate that wants to proceed with this bill and not delay it further.
- Several Senators spoke in favour and against the amendment
- One of those speakers was the government representative in the Senate whose words could be summarized by "as said before, the Minister is open for suggested amendments, but I can't give feedback on this particular amendment yet"
- A senator suggested to amend the amendment (you read that right) that the "notice of revocation" doesn't have to be a written notice.
On Tuesday, they will vote on this "subamendment". They decided on that already. They might (!) also vote on the whole amendment, but that's not sure. Afterwards, there will be a debate on the whole bill for third reading which will take several sessions probably.
More importantly though, and this is a remarkable change in process that happened on Thursday, several senators that are opposing this bill were trying to adjourn the debate (one of them said "I didn't have time to prepare my notes, can we please adjourn" although they just had a one hour break
) and even to adjourn the Senate as a whole until Tuesday. They had counted votes on these adjournments, three times. In all three cases the adjournments were defeated. This is a significant change from second reading where debate was adjourned by request of a senator unanimously every single time. It suggests that there is a majority in the Senate that wants to proceed with this bill and not delay it further.
We are not allowed to speculate on timing in this thread...as the post suggests its "Facts Only"...with that said, there are other active threads with lots of speculations...but frankly speaking, any guess at this point wouldn't be of much value.dbss said:
They are going to fight...they are determined. But more than their determination what is more highlighted is the weakness of the Libs and Inds.
Senator Linda FrumVerified account @LindaFrum
Senator Linda Frum Retweeted Senator Linda Frum
Update: Senate now adjourned til Tuesday. Point has been made clear to Libs that CPC caucus will fight for the right to full debate.
Senator Linda FrumVerified account @LindaFrum
Senator Linda Frum Retweeted Senator Linda Frum
Update: Senate now adjourned til Tuesday. Point has been made clear to Libs that CPC caucus will fight for the right to full debate.
Ehm, that is severely misreading the situation.subha_1962 said:
- The CPC tried to adjourn the debate once, there was a vote by individual names. Their motion failed.
- The CPC tried to adjourn the Senate, there was a vote by individual names. Their motion failed.
- The CPC tried to adjourn the Senate again, there was a vote by individual names. Their motion failed.
Afterwards, a CPC Senator tweets that a "point has been made that their caucus will fight for the right to full debate".
This is the equivalent of a football match ending 3:0 and the losing team tweeting "point has been made that our team will fight for the win".
Please read the full hansard, which is a much better source than Twitter:
https://sencanada.ca/en/content/sen/chamber/421/debates/107db_2017-03-30-e#39
Then it gets skipped the next day or not. No one knows for sure and this is not the thread for speculations. You might want to ask in the other thread where they entertain such questions.proudian said:
- Status