First nations patiences waning

[jacee]

Maybe I'm misremembering, but it wasn't you saying that First Nations businesses have no requirement to collect provincial and federal taxes on reserve from non native people?

I expect they can sort that out.

[Smallc]

I expect they can sort that out.

So, now you've changed your mind on that, I'm assuming?

[jacee]

They are a headache for local officials and make the cost of providing government more expensive because of the loss of the tax base. Governments should spending money to avoid setting them up - it will save money in the long run. However, there is no law that prevents a native run group from owning land with fee simple. If they wanted this land they should have asked for fee simple title - this is what the Musqeum band does in Vancouver.

I guess they have their reasons for their choices.

[TimG]

I guess they have their reasons for their choices.

Yes. They are freeloaders looking for an unfair advantage. If they wanted equality they would play by the same rules as everyone else. Edited December 16, 2012 by TimG

[jacee]

So, now you've changed your mind on that, I'm assuming?

Like I said, I expect they'll sort that out.

[Smallc]

Like I said, I expect they'll sort that out.

No no, you can't dodge that easily. You said that they have no duty to collect taxes. Now, because they say they'll have to, you're suddenly willing to go along with that, because it happens to jive with your point here.

[jacee]

No no, you can't dodge that easily. You said that they have no duty to collect taxes. Now, because they say they'll have to, you're suddenly willing to go along with that, because it happens to jive with your point here.

I might have been jerking your chain a bit smallc.

My bad.

Truth is ... I'm sure they can sort that out.

[BC_chick]

Actually, no, it doesn't work like that for most of us. Aboriginal people don't really 'own' that land anymore, and only rights that set them apart...make them unequal....give them any claim to it. It really has no place in the year 2012, and we should work towards Constitutional change to reflect that.

As much as it pains me to say this because so much of Vancouver is sitting on leased land, yes, they do own it. Just because it's 2012 it doesn't mean we can back out of treaties that were signed in good faith.

[Moonbox]

Vancouver is sitting on leased land? Does that mean that in 2040 or 2060 or whatever, people/businesses are going to hand their property all back to the First Nations? Or are you just talking about disputed land, where the First Nations claim the land and are going back to hundreds year old treaties, but it won't actually happen?

The fact that it's 2012 DOES have a bearing on the whole situation, whatever you want to think.

[g_bambino]

He completely controls his party and the way Peter Van Loan has been talking lately, this may as well be a dictatorship because the Conservative backbench sure as hell isn't holding the cabinet accountable.

There's a certian truth to what you say (which links to the often-raised subject of the decline of parliament's power), but none negates the fact that laws aren't created simply at the snap of Harper's fingers. Bills will still be subject to critique by opposition MPs and Senators in their respective chambers and during committee reviews, to which, I believe, parties from outside parliament may contribute. Interested voters can pay and should be paying attention to what those people have to say. There may also be suggestions/criticism coming from Conservative MPs outside of Commons debating hours.

[ed.: c/e]

Edited December 17, 2012 by g_bambino

[cybercoma]

There's a certian truth to what you say (which links to the often-raised subject of the decline of parliament's power), but none negates the fact that laws aren't created simply at the snap of Harper's fingers. Bills will still be subject to critique by opposition MPs and Senators in their respective chambers and during committee reviews, to which, I believe, parties from outside parliament may contribute. Interested voters can pay and should be paying attention to what those people have to say. There may also be suggestions/criticism coming from Conservative MPs outside of Commons debating hours.

[ed.: c/e]

That's all well and true, at least in theory.

Then you get the news reports of Conservatives distributing information to their MPs on how to block committees and Peter Van Loan being chastized by the Speaker for even suggesting that parliamentarians be stripped of their ability to put forward amendments.

These are the kinds of things that make Parliament, as it currently functions under majority leaderships, more like elected dictatorships. When the Conservatives don't even accept a single amendment out of hundreds put forth on a budget bill that was one of the longest in Canadian history.... there's an issue there. Not even Chretien ignored amendments that way. It's arrogant and bad faith to ignore every single amendment motion for no other reason than the person making it is not in your party. And when the PMO just hands out talking points to the backbench and people they ignore question period in order to simply ramble off on tangents about their talking points, well... Parliament is no longer functional. It's no longer a place of debate and problem solving. It's a formality. And it's more a formality today than it has ever been. The Conservatives are setting a destructive precedent.

Edited December 17, 2012 by cybercoma

[Moonbox]

A destructive precedent? Excuse me while I yawn.

It's people like you, with your exaggerated rhetoric, fear-mongering and slippery-slope arguments that dumb down the debate to the point where nobody's listening. People like you handed Harper his majority. The more you rant and rave about his 'hidden agenda' and label him as Darth-Vader-in-a-Sweater, and the less this turns out to be true, the more people tune you out and head the other way. Criticize his budget. Criticize his foreign policy. That's all fair. Label him a dictator and the harbinger of the end of democracy, however, and people will see you as the clown that you are.

[Fletch 27]

That's all well and true, at least in theory.

Then you get the news reports of Conservatives distributing information to their MPs on how to block committees and Peter Van Loan being chastized by the Speaker for even suggesting that parliamentarians be stripped of their ability to put forward amendments.

These are the kinds of things that make Parliament, as it currently functions under majority leaderships, more like elected dictatorships. When the Conservatives don't even accept a single amendment out of hundreds put forth on a budget bill that was one of the longest in Canadian history.... there's an issue there. Not even Chretien ignored amendments that way. It's arrogant and bad faith to ignore every single amendment motion for no other reason than the person making it is not in your party. And when the PMO just hands out talking points to the backbench and people they ignore question period in order to simply ramble off on tangents about their talking points, well... Parliament is no longer functional. It's no longer a place of debate and problem solving. It's a formality. And it's more a formality today than it has ever been. The Conservatives are setting a destructive precedent.

The precedent is supposed to be hidden!

Look, you will have your say in 2015... Maybe take an extended trip to a socialist country and come back when the vote is up. You will get a clearer picture of what Canadians want then...... and can stop complaining

[cybercoma]

A destructive precedent? Excuse me while I yawn.

It's people like you, with your exaggerated rhetoric, fear-mongering and slippery-slope arguments that dumb down the debate to the point where nobody's listening. People like you handed Harper his majority. The more you rant and rave about his 'hidden agenda' and label him as Darth-Vader-in-a-Sweater, and the less this turns out to be true, the more people tune you out and head the other way. Criticize his budget. Criticize his foreign policy. That's all fair. Label him a dictator and the harbinger of the end of democracy, however, and people will see you as the clown that you are.

I've never once claimed Harper has a hidden agenda, but thanks for your knee-jerk nonsensical reply. I'm critcizing things that are actually happening and saying that it sets a dangerous precedent for future governments and House procedures.

[jacee]

Vancouver is sitting on leased land? Does that mean that in 2040 or 2060 or whatever, people/businesses are going to hand their property all back to the First Nations? Or are you just talking about disputed land, where the First Nations claim the land and are going back to hundreds year old treaties, but it won't actually happen?

The fact that it's 2012 DOES have a bearing on the whole situation, whatever you want to think.

There is no treaty for Vancouver.

That's why they still hold title.

Treaties were made to allow us to live on their land.

With no treaty, Aboriginal title (ownership) is still in effect, as bc_chick says.

[Fletch 27]

I've never once claimed Harper has a hidden agenda, but thanks for your knee-jerk nonsensical reply. I'm critcizing things that are actually happening and saying that it sets a dangerous precedent for future governments and House procedures.

Whats Dangerous? So far all i have seen is well withing the democratic process!? Arent we just a little paranoid now..... really...

In 2015 you can have your say.... YOu may not like the outcome but you are free to take the message any way you wish... But remember,, Its democracy...

Multiple terms as PM is i guess a "transition to dictatorship" for you? Hmmm ok

Edited December 17, 2012 by Fletch 27

[jacee]

As much as it pains me to say this because so much of Vancouver is sitting on leased land, yes, they do own it. Just because it's 2012 it doesn't mean we can back out of treaties that were signed in good faith.

So there are treaties for Vancouver?

[Moonbox]

I've never once claimed Harper has a hidden agenda, but thanks for your knee-jerk nonsensical reply. I'm critcizing things that are actually happening and saying that it sets a dangerous precedent for future governments and House procedures.

No, what you said was:

He completely controls his party and the way Peter Van Loan has been talking lately, this may as well be a dictatorship because the Conservative backbench sure as hell isn't holding the cabinet accountable.

which is exactly what I'm talking about. Sorry if I put you in with the 'hidden-agenda' crowd. Well, I'm sorry that you took exception to it. I was lumping you in the general category of people who, both here and in the United States (probably around the world), are regularly pulling out their hair, freaking out and giving us these bullshit slippery-slope arguments that have the intellectual merit of a steaming pile on the sidewalk. I'm sorry, but when you start making dictatorship references to Harper, it's no longer possible to take you seriously. Anyone with with a lick of sense will tune you out and/or roll their eyes at you. Unfortunately, there's enough mouth-breathers out there who will either echo those sentiments and start chanting it themselves, or who will retaliate against such claims with their own equally stupid counter attacks. What we end up with are childish elections where you have one side screaming, "Waah Dictatorship!" and the other side declaring them "Pinko Commies!".

You don't have to look any further than that to see what's wrong with our democracy. How is an overly emotional and/or generally uninformed electorate going to hold Harper accountable?

[cybercoma]

The concentration of power in the PMO is exactly that. A dictatorship with term limits. Peter Van Loan was calling for MPs outside the governing party to be stripped of their ability to put forth amendments to bills even. When the governing party tries to limit other MPs authority, what else is there to call it but a dictatorship. I hate to break it to you.

[NativeCharm]

Tansi!

WE all have a commitment to community. WE are governments.

More Natives, non-treaty citizens and newcomers need to learn the rich (authentic) history of Canada (the corporation), The Crown and the Native Nations and their relationships. Even the basics would be beneficial in our growth as neighbours. Perhaps we wouldn’t be where we are today, if many of us would simply educate ourselves and let’s face it- we are all frustrated. It’s in all our best interest to work together for a brighter future.

I’m obliged to share a bit about #IdleNOmore to better inform people regarding the current situation with the ‘waning of patience’ and unrest amongst the Native Nations. The number one focus is and should always be the ENVIRONMENT. The Natives are the only hope for saving the planet, as they are the healers, teachers, and practically the ivy league academics of Mother Earth with inherent rights and responsibilities that include the duty to protect the land and the waters for life.

Contrary to the wishes, concerns and written requests of Canadians, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is selling our companies and resources to China. If he signs a Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement with China, the effects can be catastrophic. We will not be able to protect our people nor our environment against eco-terrorists.

We all (humans) need to preserve a sustainable environment balanced with a sustainable economy.

Visiting this forum for quite a few years now, I’ve learned its best to not directly engage in the discussions as the racism and ignorance can be completely overwhelming and hinder real progress. However, I sometimes post and do enjoy reading, learning and laughing especially from those that are open minded, educated and willing to learn and share. I`ve compiled some valuable information for us.

Why the Native Nations & their supporters will IDLE NO MORE? We are in a critical state.

First, please take the time to enlighten yourself through these delightful and very informative articles and blogs (even the comments make for interesting tidbits):

Before we jump right into the thick of it all, I insist you read this one first.

Canada, it’s time. We need to fix this in our generation: http://apihtawikosisan.com/2012/12/16/canada-its-time-we-need-to-fix-this-in-our-generation/

Educate yourself with Aboriginal Issue Primers- http://apihtawikosisan.com/aboriginal-issue-primers/ Be sure to read – “Specific Myths or Misunderstandings” & ``Aboriginal Law and Treaties``

Rights? What rights? http://apihtawikosisan.com/2012/01/18/rights-what-rights/

Honour The Treaties: A great view from an old white hipster- http://behindthehedge.wordpress.com/2012/12/11/connecting-the-constitutional-dots-of-idlenomore-for-the-white-like-me-layperson/

Where did we go wrong? ( video: Wab Kinew/CBC) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmYu-Wppp3c

Some important treaty history and nation to nation relations.

Environmental Destruction Imminent http://getgrounded.tv/2012/12/environmental-destruction-imminent-harper-government-unloads-a-flurry-of-illegal-and-unconstitutional-legislation-grounded-news/

:::::: THIS IS THE REAL DEAL KIDS::::::

Breakin' it Down: Here are Some of the New Bill Features and Just How Treaties Break

Complete with video links ( A MUST SEE) and timestamps for reference. Be sure to thank Dr. Pam Palmater and Robert Animikii Horton for Breakin it down for us. Now, let’s work towards moving forward, nation to nation, shall we?

4 Points that Shocked: Bills, the White Paper, and Pre-Emptive Funding Cuts

Never, in history, have there been so many bills regarding First Nations pushed through the House of Commons at one time.

In 1969, the White Paper sought to Eliminate the Indian Act, Get Rid of Treaty Rights, Do Away with Reserves Lands, and Assimilate.

This is the WHITE PAPER 2012 - but instead of a policy proposal, this is a number of laws pushed through at one time where the dots have to be connected.

Before attempting to push these through, Harper made a pre-emptive strike against First Nations by slashing funding (sometimes up to 80%) to fracture capacity where we could protect ourselves fully through our organizations. (Vid 1: 8:10-8:49)

Here you will find changes, impositions, and encroachments without theright to free, prior, and informed consent, as well as other violations.

FULL LECTURE (WATCH HERE!!!!)

1:

2:

3:

4:

Bill C-45: Job and Growth Act – Omnibus Bill (PUSHED THROUGH THIS WEEK)

(TIME STAMP: Video Part 3, 1:24-4:35)

I. Land Surrenders

--Prevents any debate or Grand Chiefs to present views of amendments.

--Indian Act changes with zero consultation of communities.

--Lowers threshold for the surrender of reserve lands (because it is too hard for ‘Indians’ to surrender lands in recent years).

--The Minister will have the power to call a meeting, ask a band to surrender their lands, and whoever shows up as a majority (IMPLICATION: with the majroity of a small number voting yes ( an implication and EXAMPLE would be 3 out of 5 *I hope this clarification helps*) – it is surrendered and the Cabinet does not get a say anymore.

-The Minister CAN expedite this.

--It is no longer the majority of the band list that determines such a surrender of such Reserve lands, it is now just a handful of people.

--The Minister can expedite this and First Nation people or leaders can’t even have a say on it.

II. Navigable Waters Act

--The Federal Government vacates jurisdiction over waters, parks, fisheries, etc – and the responsibility and duty to consult, honour treaty rights, and cannot do anything without talking to First Nations first.

--By vacating it to the Province, the Feds wash their hands clean of Treaty Rights knowing the Province are free to do whatever they want.

Allows Provinces to have more powerful expropriation powers.

--Power to decide fate of individual First Nations – even in Treaty Territory.

--Harper Government wishes to “unlock” our lands for the maximized benefit of Canadians.

TREATY VIOLATIONS

(Assertion of our Treaty Rights protects the same environment that Canadians enjoy - from degradation).

First Nation Education Act (PRESENTED ON DECEMBER 11, 2012)

(TIME STAMP: Video Part 3, 4:40-7:20)

--Incorporates and imposes Provincial Laws into First Nation Education on Reserves.

--Violation of Treaty Right to Education.

--The Feds take the Treaty Right to Education – nationalize it, control it, legislate it.

--The Feds vacating jurisdiction to the Province isn’t just stepping away from Treaty Obligations – but Funding Obligations.

--(“Want to apply for Post-Secondary? Go Apply for Provincial Scholarships.” is coming)

--Does not account for Education being chronically underfunded – even in comparison to the Province.

--(Logic: If you don’t like underfunded schools, go to Provincial schools).

--Ignoring and Violation of Treaty Rights.

--“Assimilate or Integrate”

--Legislate a Treaty Right and put it under Section 35: (can’t be undone?)

TREATY VIOLATION

Bill C-27 First Nations Financial Transparency Act (TIME STAMP: Video Part 1, 9:00-14:01)

--Will force First Nations to open up all the books, source revenue, and business revenue (for the public) – in doing so, can continue making funding cuts and justifying it by high-lighting businesses on reserves trying to supplement poverty.

--Possibly the most controlling change to the Indian Act - A fail to make business information public – can be taken to court and funds can be cut off.

--Is this truly meant to give access to information due to “mismanagement” for community members – or another way to continue cutting off funds?

--Canadians often believe that First Nation leaders don’t file audits, financial reports, or give audits to members – but First Nation leaders would not get a cent unless an audit is submitted every year and financial reports roughly every three days.

--Anybody can get a copy from Indian Affairs if not from the band – the inaccessible claim is a myth.

--There is currently no control over funding models and if leaders speak up, they risk having budgets slashed.

--“First Nation leaders are millionaires and mismanaging and corrupt and the reason for poverty, news-reporters?”

The average salary for a First Nation leader is $36,000.

The salary of the average Canadian (be it research of photocopying) is $46,000

30 of the 615 First Nation leaders are paid zero.

How much do Mayors and Premiers make?

--There is the occasional mismanaging and corrupt leader, but a study was done of all band audits ever done regarding evidence of corruption.

--Less than 3% of audits ever found anything about individuals mismanaging and using band funds for personal purposes, as well as misspending. This is a lower corruption rate than all Municipalities and provinces in Canada.

TREATY VIOLATION

Bill S-2 Family Homes on Reserve and Matrimonial Interests or Right Act (TIME STAMP: Video Part 2, 4:28-8:06)

--Does not recognize any First Nation by-laws that already set out matrimonial property laws

--That is denying First Nation law making power – and attack on sovereignty.

--For the first-time in history – legal rights can be given to non-Indians over holds on lands on Reserve.

--A majority of First Nation marriages are outside the community – 80%-90% out-marry rate in some places.

--Reserve land can begin to start to transfer to non-Indian people.

--A judge (without notifying the First Nation, no arrest, no evidence, or no charge) can give occupation of house and land on reserve to a non-Indian spouse– indefinitely.

--This will add to the overrepresentation is prison and does not apply to Canadian citizens.

--Even though housing lists are long and there’s lack of land on reserve, this will add to it.

--Land, protected under treaties, exclusively for First Nations, can be transferred to non-First Nation people through this bill.

(0.2% of all land in Canada is on reserve. All reserves put together are smaller than Vancouver island.)

TREATY VIOLATION

Bill S-6 First Nations Elections Act -(TIME STAMP: Video Part 2, 8:06-11:46)

--Anyone in communities who protests illegal elections (or elections or processes run improperly) or raises any issue a problematic election in their community can go to jail or pay up to $5,000 in fines - essentially silencing voices.

--Problems would not to go Indian Affairs, but the Provinces will decide community fates.

--Even if there is a custom election code (Indian Act provisions where Indian Affairs has nothing to do with a community’s election) – if the Minister of Indian Affairs (without any evidence) decides so, he will have the power to impose a new bill on that First Nation and create his own election code and replace them.

--Under this new bill, only Chief and Councils will pass resolutions and do not have to ask community members.

--The Goal: Imprison people who exercise raising their voices in problematic elections and having the power to remove custom-elected impose selected officials (such as pro-resource extraction - i.e. Barrier Lake).

-As soon as they LEGISLATE a treaty right, its out of Section 35 - and we don't get to UNDO it.

TREATY VIOLATION

Bill S-8 Safe Drinking Water for First Nations (TIME STAMP : Video Part 2, 11:46-Video Part 3, 1:24 )

--Will give the Federal Government the power to set up rules and regulations around water and sanitation – and will be able to force Chief and Councils to do whatever the Feds see as necessary on water, but no funding.

--They can demand that Chief and Councils fix water systems, but if there is no money to do so – it is taken from band operating funding formulas (that pays for housing and social assistance).

--If the Federal Government’s contractors screw up, the Federal Government is not liable and they indemnify themselves from getting sued.

--If you don’t agree, you will go to prison.

--Transfers jurisdiction and pushes Provincial Laws on Reserve Lands.

--Contractors and Water Companies with ties to Harper aim to get very wealthy off of First Nations Poverty.

TREATY VIOLATION

Bill C-428 Indian Act Amendment and Replacement Act (TIME STAMP: Video Part 2, 0:00-4:30)

--Rob Clark’s Private Member’s Bill to Repeal the Indian Act All-Together

--Getting rid of old Provisions without consulting or with the consent of First Nations people.

--Getting rid of old Provisions without consulting (or with the informed consent) of those still in the TRC process who were impacted by it.

--Foregoes what community members and those who were impacted by it want.

--Doesn’t acknowledge a Band’s abilities to pass band by-laws

--Takes away the power of bands to pass by-laws to prohibit alcohol on reserves – taking power away to create by-laws and govern. (“You will get drunk and you will like it.”)

--Takes half of the Estates/Wills provision out of the Indian Act and leaves what happens if you do not have one – creates a battle between the Province and the Feds about what happens with your property.

--It is up to First Nations to decide if they want to repeal it, how they want to, when they want to, how they wish to transition, to replace it with what, etc.

--As terribly paternalistic and colonial as the Indian Act is, it currently protects reserves from Provincial Laws, protects reserve Treaty Rights, prevents taking reserve land, prevents mining and development and pipelines.

--An all out repeal of the Indian Act means Enbridge looking for a pipe to lay quickly.

--The Feds do not have a say if they are kept on the hook of obligations or not.

TREATY VIOLATION

Bill S-207 An Act to amend the Interpretation Act

--Non-Derogation of Aboriginal and treaty rights

Bill S-212 First Nations Self-Government Recognition Bill and the “First Nations” Private Ownership Act - (TIME STAMP: Video Part 3, 7:20-12:15)

--The 1887 Dawes Act (United States) in Canadian Form

--This will take community-held Reserve Lands and divide up into individual parcels.

--This land can be sold to non-Indians and corporations, like any piece of provincial land – under provincial laws and registries, with no Aboriginal or Treaty rights associated anymore.

--Even if the band has all underlying title, it can turn into management, rather than true governance, in practice.

--The objective is to destroy our governance systems all-together and land grabs.

--In the US, the biggest land grabs of indigenous land were not from treaties, but from the Dawes Act.

--Not just reserve lands, but it took 90 million acres in treaty lands locked down by treaty – and took them.

--Within two generations, 90,000 indigenous people in the US became homeless in their home territories.

--After Dawes, more amendments were set to go and over half of the privatized lands were given to government, military, and corporations for resource extraction.

--(Canada is now eye-ing up the Tarsands, pipelines, Ring of Fire, etc...and so is China)

--To put a pipeline through a community, the community’s consent is no longer needed nor Chief and Councils, but just the individual people where the pipe would go beneath.

--This circumvents all Duty to Consult and Treaty Rights.

--To get into this “opportunity” – a community must absolutely and unconditionally surrender the reserve land and all rights attached to it, to the Crown, and Canada will “give you back” Federal Title – a surrender of sovereignty.

--A dwindled title from first title to fourth title. (The First Title of our lands is First Nation Title Currently.)

FULL LECTURE (WATCH HERE!!!!)

1:

2:

3:

4:

________________________________________________________ EKOSI!

[Fletch 27]

ahhhhh, Harper is "selling our companies"...... I thought they were the white-man's "companies"..... Tell me again how this is not about the struggle for more money.....

How much of a share would you like? We will just send you and Theresa Spence a cheque...And and escallade

[NativeCharm]

ahhhhh, Harper is "selling our companies"...... I thought they were the white-man's "companies"..... Tell me again how this is not about the struggle for more money.....

How much of a share would you like? We will just send you and Theresa Spence a cheque...And and escallade

Really? Tell you again? Dude, your ears and mind are so closed its impossible to tell you anything that doesnt coincide with your ridiculously racial and ignorant ideologies. Have you even made a genuine concious effort to raise your knowledge? I didnt think so. I wont even bother replying to you anymore, as I mentioned in my post, it's people like you that make the situation (on this entire planet) worse than it needs to be.

[Fletch 27]

Yup really, I simply would not have made my first point about "finances" and a company selling itself.

It's time to pick up your own socks...and grow up with the "racial" remarks... It's the 2000's and I have spent many days at the "eagles nest" in Brantford watching the wallow..

You want a better planet?...... Well put some damn effort into it.

[g_bambino]

The concentration of power in the PMO is exactly that. A dictatorship with term limits.

Come now; you know well that isn't the case. Dictators jail political opposition, ignore the constitution, stage coups and usurp all power, control (through intimidation) the courts and all of the legislature, should they permit one to even exist. While there's been an erosion of parliament's proper influence, and Harper certainly has pushed the constitutional bounds more than any prior prime minister, he's no dictator.

[g_bambino]

When the Conservatives don't even accept a single amendment out of hundreds put forth on a budget bill that was one of the longest in Canadian history.... there's an issue there.

Yes, there is. However, the opposition still has its ability to voice, well... opposition. The Senate can still make amendments (it's the one chamber beyond the influence of the Prime Minister). And, am I wrong in thinking that extra-parliamentary parties and persons are able to speak on a bill at committee? That's no guarantee the proposed legislation will be altered before it's granted Royal Assent, but it does mean outside input and critique is expressed and some of it may be heeded; there have been both bills and government plans that've been amended, withdrawn, and defeated.