NDP proposes bill to protect Canadians abroad

Hydraboss · August 27, 2009

No they can't. The wording is quite clear.

Yes, actually, they can. They will not prevent a Canadian from entering Canada, but you have to prove you're Canadian for that to apply. Otherwise anyone from anywhere could simply say they're Canadian and waltz right in.

Waltzing in we leave to Immigration.

In Canada, you are allowed to drive a vehicle. But only if you have a driver's license.

madmax · August 27, 2009

It is called the Charter.
That is where the challenge is coming from. Does royal prerogative contravene the Charter of Rights?

There is a Charter Challenge. That is all. And it could fail a Charter Challenge (hopefully unlikely). However That is the purpose of the Charter and no doubt the judges would suggest to the government to create a law to protect citizens abroad.

A law which encompasses these safeguards.

The proposed bill would also force consular officials at Canadian embassies and high commissions to report allegations of torture and mistreatment to the foreign affairs minister and create an ombudsman to ensure the new law is upheld.

That's smart thinking. There could be other ways for certain, but there is nothing inherently wrong with the proposal.

As the Liberals asked, if the government violates one law, what makes the NDP think they won't violate the second?

Sounds like Liberal double talk and excuses not to protect the citizens of Canada.

It seems to me that only a Supreme Court challenge can decide this and the appeal is to the Charter.

If you are suggesting that all Canadians have to use a charter challenge to ensure their safety abroad, then there is a problem with the function of government.

This bill directs specific government action. That is not necessarily a bad thing. Clearly the parties failed in their duties to act on behalf of Canadians.

Get ready for the invoice.

Edited August 27, 2009 by madmax

madmax · August 27, 2009

Yes, actually, they can. They will not prevent a Canadian from entering Canada, but you have to prove you're Canadian for that to apply. Otherwise anyone from anywhere could simply say they're Canadian and waltz right in.

Lets hope its you that gets trapped in a foreign country and ignored and betrayed by your own government. I look forward to ridding us of one more separtist

Edited August 27, 2009 by madmax

Smallc · August 27, 2009

In Canada, you are allowed to drive a vehicle. But only if you have a driver's license.

Driving isn't a constitutional right. No Canadian can be denied entry and we can't turn people away just because we aren't sure if they are. You might think that such things are OK, but the framers of the Constitution didn't.

lictor616 · August 27, 2009

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/686791
Great bill however Liberals claim it is already law, and even though many countries have legislation like the NDP want passed the Liberals are still shy on protecting Canadians. Fearing backlash from their new right wing coalition I think.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/687145

foolishness, suicidal foolishness.

why not just go straight into Canadian citizen bank accounts to buy whatever they need whenever they feel a whim to blow each other up?

punked · August 27, 2009

foolishness, suicidal foolishness.
why not just go straight into Canadian citizen bank accounts to buy whatever they need whenever they feel a whim to blow each other up?

Dumbest thing I have ever read. By far!

Hydraboss · August 27, 2009

Lets hope its you that gets trapped in a foreign country and ignored and betrayed by your own government. I look forward to ridding us of one more separtist

As soon as the US economy recovers a bit, I'm gone so relax.

lictor616 · August 27, 2009

Dumbest thing I have ever read. By far!

likewise, wow what a waste of a comment box.

Hydraboss · August 27, 2009

Driving isn't a constitutional right. No Canadian can be denied entry and we can't turn people away just because we aren't sure if they are. You might think that such things are OK, but the framers of the Constitution didn't.

Yes, we can turn people away if we're not sure who they are. The onus is not on the Canadian government to prove who they are; it's up to the individual. It's called responsibility (a term completely foreign to Liberals).

Smallc · August 27, 2009

Where does it say that we can turn Canadians away.

Hydraboss · August 27, 2009

Where does it say that we can turn Canadians away.

Where does it say that we have to let them in without papers? Remember, one statement does not necessarily preclude the other.

punked · August 27, 2009

Where does it say that we can turn Canadians away.

The problem is it doesn't say anything. Let's make a real law so w can stop arguing.

Hydraboss · August 27, 2009

The problem is it doesn't say anything. Let's make a real law so w can stop arguing.

But if any of our laws were clear it would take the fun out of it.

Smallc · August 27, 2009

The problem is it doesn't say anything.

It does when they're trying to enter the country. I'm not sure what it says about helping Canadians abroad. If it doesn't say something, it should.

Smallc · August 27, 2009

Where does it say that we have to let them in without papers?

We have a duty to Canadians as laid out in the Constitution. If they don't have the proper papers for one reason or another, we cant simply shirk our responsibilities to these people who might be Canadians.

Edited August 27, 2009 by Smallc

madmax · August 27, 2009

Yes, we can turn people away if we're not sure who they are.

I think we know how Omar Khadr is. So quite frankly, governments can turn away whoever they want. That is when the Charter comes to play.

The onus is not on the Canadian government to prove who they are; it's up to the individual.

That requires a competent government and competent agencies doing their job. It is difficult to suggest that the government did its due diligence with regards to the Kenyan woman

ok Canadian. Infact they were negligent of their duties. Grossly negligent, and the Conservative government is going to be increasing the deficit more when its time to pay up.

The more reason to have a Bill instructing government agencies how to act responsibly... got that, government have to be responsible. Is That too difficult for Conservatives to understand. Government responsibility.

Edited August 27, 2009 by madmax

Hydraboss · August 27, 2009

It does when they're trying to enter the country. I'm not sure what it says about helping Canadians abroad. If it doesn't say something, it should.

You cannot simply go by what the Charter says and treat it as some quote from the Bible. It also says Canadians have freedom of movement, but that doesn't apply if they're incarcerated does it? It also doesn't apply if I want to stroll into the House of Commons wherever and whenever I feel like it. The PMO is Canadian property, but I highly doubt I could just stop into Harper's office to use his phone.

There are always conditions, and entering Canada has them as well. Even for citizens.

Remiel · August 27, 2009

You cannot simply go by what the Charter says and treat it as some quote from the Bible. It also says Canadians have freedom of movement, but that doesn't apply if they're incarcerated does it? It also doesn't apply if I want to stroll into the House of Commons wherever and whenever I feel like it. The PMO is Canadian property, but I highly doubt I could just stop into Harper's office to use his phone.
There are always conditions, and entering Canada has them as well. Even for citizens.

Entering your country may be like entering your own house, however. The only reason to prevent someone from doing it is because the house itself is the scene of a crime, or on fire, or the like.

Smallc · August 27, 2009

Entering your country may be like entering your own house, however.

Exactly.

Keepitsimple · August 27, 2009

How do you know that the government hasn't been helping? Do you have access to all the back channel communications between governments? If so, could you please post them, I'd be really interested in reading them.
Stop blaming our government for the wrongs of other country's governments, and in some cases, the irresponsibility of individual citizens.

Right on. I don't care if it's a Liberal or Conservative government, on the whole, we have a very good Consulate system that helps Canadians every day in countries all over the world. I don't have stats but I'll bet there are hundreds of cases, if not thousands - of Canadians who request help from our Consulate officials. Almost all of them come to a successful conclusion.....we only get to hear about the rare one that falls off the rails - because it's a sexy story.......in the case of Muhamud, it appears that Lilliane Khadour, the official in Kenya - made a terrible mistake. What's missing from the media stories are the many cases of TRUE fraudulent representation that work their way through our Kenyan Consulate. Should Ottawa question every decision from 10,000 miles away? Khadour made a mistake - she will/has paid for it and the Canadian government will investigate, issue a report, and accept responsibility. The disgusting allegations of racism are exactly that - disgusting.

bush_cheney2004 · August 27, 2009

Where does it say that we can turn Canadians away.

...it makes one wonder why so many Canadians get their tits in this kind of wringer.

What's the real problem?

Smallc · August 27, 2009

...it makes one wonder why so many Canadians get their tits in this kind of wringer.

Different issue entirely.

bush_cheney2004 · August 27, 2009

Different issue entirely.

Fair enough...but what is the root cause of so many Canadians needing "protection" abroad? Surely the ruling party can't be expected to repatriate every Canadian who runs afoul of the law (or worse) while traveling around a world which "loves them" .

Edited August 27, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

Hydraboss · August 27, 2009

Fair enough...but what is the root cause of so many Canadians needing "protection" abroad? Surely the ruling party can't be expected to repatriate every Canadian who runs afoul of the law (or worse) while traveling around a world which "loves them" .

Because, apparently, the Canadian government (and by financial extension all taxpaying Canadians) are responsible for the stupidity and/or laziness of anyone who has Canadian citizenship. Sounds like there was a screw up in this case, and that will be dealt with. We (Canadians) will have to pay at least 2 1/2 million dollars to this person because SHE chose to go to Kenya.

Same reason that "Canadians" living in Lebanon have the "right" to be bailed out when shit goes sideways at our expense. They don't live here, but they like the free boat ticket. Canadians are stupid. Period.