Everything that C-45 touches - Macleans.ca

Everything that C-45 touches


In all, C-45, the second budget implementation act, amends or affects the Income Tax Act, Excise Tax Act, Jobs and Economic Growth Act, Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, Trust and Loan Companies Act, Bank Act, Insurance Companies Act, the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, Canada Shipping Act, 2001, Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act, Payment Clearing and Settlement Act, Fisheries Act, Schedule I of the Bretton Woods and Related Agreements Act, Canada Pension Plan, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act, Indian Act, Judges Act, Canada Labour Code, Merchant Seamen Compensation Act, Customs Act, Hazardous Materials Information Review Act, Agreement on Internal Trade Implementation Act, Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, Employment Insurance Act, Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, Fees Act, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act, Navigable Waters Protection Act, Canada Grain Act, An Act to amend the Canada Grain Act and the Agriculture and Agri-Food Administrative Monetary Penalties Act and to Repeal the Grain Futures Act, International Interests in Mobile Equipment (aircraft equipment) Act, Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, Canada Employment Insurance Financing Board Act, Canada Employment Insurance Financing Board Act, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development Act, Schedule III to the Financial Administration Act, Canadian Forces Superannuation Act, Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act, Public Service Superannuation Act, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act and Canada Revenue Agency Act

It also enacts a new bill, the Bridge To Strengthen Trade Act, which “excludes the application of certain Acts to the construction of a bridge that spans the Detroit River and other works and to their initial operator … establishes ancillary measures” and “amends the International Bridges and Tunnels Act.”


Everything that C-45 touches

  1. The Conservatives might be able to avoid the huge uproar and controversy over these bills if they could just resist gloating and rubbing the Opposition’s nose in it over and over again in the House. They just keep yelling that the NDP and Liberals voted against this or that worthwhile uncontroversial measure, when of course the Conservatives have forced the Opposition’s hand by bundling the good stuff in with the bad stuff they know the Opposition could never support.
    They just can’t resist pushing the hyper partisanship that one last step, so instead of being an efficient way to do House business, the Omnibus Bills become a way to take cheap shots at the Opposition day after dreary day. .

    • Agreed. It’s a wonder they didn’t toss in an Anti-Bullying Bill into the mix since they are experts on the matter.

      I keep thinking the bar can’t get any lower but the CPC keep doing the bimbo limbo.Their stupid antics are an insult to all of us. Just how stupid do you think we all are Mr. Harper?

      • lol…Bimbo limbo…not bad. How low? How stupid? For god’s sake don’t start asking him leading questions like that now.

    • I’m starting to believe it’s part of a strategy to appear dumb and feckless [ we [i] as the opposition are all over it like someone just rang a bell or something] while winding up the opposition benches. It’s a game they never tire of. So, the question is, is it effective as a strategy in putting the opposition off their game and on the back foot, or are they really that stupid and feckless…or are we [i] ?
      Certainly it is often hard to think clearly or strategically if you’re angry all the time[ or even pretend to be?]

      • And this time the Opposition have to vote against the changes to their pension. The Conservative talking points will be flying off in all directions.

        • I know they wont, but really the opposition should all walk out and book a trip to vegas. [ on their tab of course]

          • I have often wondered when it would be a reasonable tactic for the Opposition to leave Parliament since they have no role there anyway. They could set up shop somewhere else and have lots of great debates pass motions, elect a decent speaker, a government in waiting.

          • They could even elect Mercer or Mary Walsh as speaker, it would be hilarious.

          • They could go to Toronto or Victoria – two leg’s not being used at the moment.

          • Or NL…or this that one up and running now?

  2. Now that’s what i call multitasking…let the spin battle begin.

    What might be interesting is if you, someone [i’m busy reading, and i have to make some more coffee] posted a comparable recent liberal budget bill to see just how wide the scope of their ambitions were? Of course all us Wherryites would turn as one and point a finger and pronounce shame on both their houses …[why are you getting inside my head Mr W?]

  3. They are Liberals with blue lawn signs.

    • Oh they’re way beyond blue lawn signs., i wouldn’t be a bit surprised to learn that Enbridge doesn’t already have an easement through at least half those lawns by now; Suncor’s digging up your back yard even as we speak.

  4. Wells has long been calling for a high speed train.

    It appears we may be getting railroaded again. The only thing left to determine is how much baggage it contains, and the freight charges.

  5. Well Mulcair, you want my vote? Then get some traction on this bullshite.

  6. And do they have a mandate for doing ANY of these things?


    • 37% is all the mandate we need baby.

      • Until the next election and the voters trash them.

        They could be down to 2 again at this rate.

        • I only wish i could believe that. I’m not sure enough people who care are watching anymore?

          • Well we’ll have a new NDP and Liberal leader for the next election….and/or Steve. So if Canadians make idiotic choices….especially through apathy….then the country will fall apart.

            Steve would like that I think, ol’ firewalls that he is….

          • I don’t think he would actually. But it scares me to think how far he might be willing to go make sure a different perspective doesn’t dislodge him or his party.

          • He’d be quite happy to have Alberta and BC as a separate country. Remember years ago when they talked about a nuclear sub in Alberta? Well that wouldn’t work without BC

            Sask and Man are probably also ‘acceptable’ now……..but the move has been on for years to divide the country.

          • I don’t know. I don’t even think he could sway AB leave alone BC. There’s zero real appetite for separation in BC. The whole scenario is off the wall – it would mean a civil war, even in Canada of all places.

          • Things change rapidly nowadays…..especially after having been the same for well over a century

            Canadians don’t do civil war

            We’d simply vote on it.

          • “He’d be quite happy to have Alberta and BC as a separate country.”
            Your insight into Stephen Harper’s innermost desires is remarkable. That’s quite a gift you have. We are truly privileged to have the benefit of your insightful posts.

          • I’m glad you appreciate it.

            But then, I was in the party for some years as exec….so I know it better than you do.

          • So I guess Steve sat around with you back in those days, casually and candidly discussing his hatred of Canada and his evil plans for destroying it. Cool.

          • Steve was too busy trying to make a name for himself by whining about Preston’s dry cleaning

            So I talked with everyone else.

            PS….I have always been cool

        • Again, this is highly unlikely.

          Remember, about half of voters vote the way they do because it’s the way they’ve always voted. It would take something truly massive to make them deviate. That splits out pretty evenly among all the parties, so the CPC share is about 17% of the vote.

          On top of that, there’s probably around 10% of Canadians who will simply refuse to vote for anything anywhere near the left side of the political spectrum. Given that there’s really only one significant party to the right, that another 10% or that coalesces around the CPC. Right there you’re looking at official opposition status.

          For the CPC to be eradicated the same way the PC’s were after Mulroney would take similar circumstances — that is the formation of a second serious national party to the right of the Liberals. Given the conservatives previous experience with that arrangement, don’t expect it to happen until the next generation or so unless Harper veers sharply left in his policies, or the economy takes a massive tank. I know which one I think is more likely, and I’m not looking forward to it.

          • Voting patterns have changed….nobody votes like grandad anymore.

            No, we don’t need anymore ‘right’ parties….or ‘left’ ones either….like I said voting patterns have changed.

          • Got any proof of that?

          • Yup, check the polling companies. They’ve said this for some years now.

          • Given their recent records.. hardly proof.

          • It’s not a matter of horserace numbers, it’s about general trends. I would have thought it’s fairly obvious…..fewer people than ever are voting, Quebec went NDP etc. It’s obvious people aren’t voting the same way they did in the past.

          • That’s an interesting point, but I’m not sure it’s evidence of anybody actually thinking yet. Especially when, at least in my riding, a paper candidate for the NDP ended up with more voters than the active, engaged Liberal candidate — and the CPC vote remained the same regardless.

            You can certainly look at last election as the repudiation of the Liberals, but really all that says is that the “left of CPC vote” that moves happened to coalesce around the NDP this time, rather than being split as it usually is.

          • ??? Quebec used to be Liberal….until it went PC….then Bloc…then NDP

            Alberta is now solidly Con

            Fewer people are voting….it’s not a ‘civic duty’ anymore

            This ain’t your grandfathers Canada.

  7. “Everything that C-45 touches”

    Oh oh…was i the first to spot the double entendre? I do so love those things.

  8. “The measures in the bill were clearly outlined in the budget he brought in last March, he said.”

    — Globe and Mail quoting Flaherty.

    As I understand it, the major problem with the first budget implementation bill was that it contained so many measures that simply weren’t contained in the budget bill.

    Is it the same case this time around? This is an opportunity for the opposition to nail Flaherty to the wall.

    • There was also a second problem in that many members of the government believed in contained measures that it didn’t. That was part of what Ms. May’s complaint (which was correct, imo) that the bill was obviously unfinished was based on.