Bill 132 just passed second reading ...

All the Fiberals voted for it, all the opposition parties against.

Which means????????? :confused:

That it's one step closer to becoming law.

It means it now has to go through third reading. However, if all liberals voted for, then they will probably all vote for third reading and force it through, since they hold the majority in government.

oh ***k :mad:

Well I think we need to start jamming their email boxes everyday if you email to one bcc the others they seem to go through rather then having the addys show. Because then it looks like spam but by bcc it looks like interoffice stuff

I can't understand how they can pass a law restricting and eventually eliminating a breed they know NOTHING ABOUT!!They have refused to meet with any animal experts,pit bull owners,veternarians etc,...I'm so furioius!If this law passes ,like it has in my home city Windsor,then I'll just keep doing what I'm doing,which is to break the law:NO MUZZLE,NO LIABILITY INS.,NO PEN IN MY BACKYARD.And heaven forbid when my pit bulls do pass on(I can't even think about that-they are my precious babies!!!)I will continue to have pit bulls as pets until the day I die.
The best thing we can do is to support BANNED AID,ADVOCATES FOR THE UNDERDOG AND DLCC,financially and going to rallys and so on.And give our dictatorship government a BIG AND NEVERENDING FIGHT! :mad:

Also in all your emails you need to state that you will never ever vote liberal again and will make sure every person you can tell will know about there sleazy way of trying to pass this bill. You also need to let them know we are not stupid and will inform every dog owner that this affects them and their dog whether it be a chi or a great dane they are not sliding that menacing clause in their without us noticing it.

oh ***k :mad:

Yea... :sad:

i was a strong feeling this might happen. they usually leak the next days readings to the star the day before for printing the morning of.

they may very well try to get it thru late next week, just before the winter break, in hopes the by the time legislature reconvines in the spring the general public will have forgotten.

Stiffen up that upper lip people. Key words "we will not vote liberal again" Tell them how callous this is and that when this ends up in the supreme court people are just going to look at it as another waste of tax payers money and we will win.

Ask them how the media will portray this after its in the supreme court and we win. Remind them about Clayton Ruby.

Give them more statistics.

Lets just think of this as another challenge. EMAIL EMAIL EMAIL.

I thought that due to all the out cry, the Fibs were going to be forced to do some kind of committee meeting or something.... What happened to that???
How do we donate funds to Clayton Ruby's lawsuite?

I'm not sure they can be "forced" to do anything. I think they can do whatever they want because they hold a majority. Anyone who's smarter than me that can shed some light on this? (And I know that's not really narrowing the field down!)

I'm not smarter than anyone here, but it is true that the Liberals can do whatever they want, so long as it doesn't contravene the constitution or the charter.

Now, that being said, you have to make them "want" to change this bill. That means not only keeping the pressure on them, but intensifying it.

As for getting the bill sent to committee, it was mentioned in the legislature today, and I believe it is still possible.

Okay, to answer my own question, if at least 8 Members request the bill goes to commitee, then it must. At this point in time, the chances of the bill being actually defeated are quite slim. It may be put aside or die when the legislature convenes session, but it will probably not be defeated (that would mean the majority of the house votes no). So, we have to hope for it to go to committee, and then eventually die. The bill or Bryant. Either one.

Don't give me any ideas.

:evil:

I like the second option for bryant

Unfortunetly deep down we all knew the liberals would tow the party line and support Bryant , that was pointed out when all this garbage began .
We must let them know by email and the old telephone that this is not what we as voters in Ontario want . Do not be emotional , votes and nothing else much matters to these scumbags .Make sure they know this .
Threatening them with court action doesn't matter to them , they will use "OUR" money to fight us there . Three things matter to these inhuman bast****s votes, votes and votes and if it doesn't matter now it will in about 2 years and 10 months {yes I am counting the days}.
One more thing we are not the only group that the liberals have problems with and the only reason they were voted in is because they looked like the lesser of two evils . Since they have been in they have done nothing but break promises , heck they were even partly reponsible for Paul Martin not getting a majority vote . So when it comes time ,make sure you all become politically active and we will be at least partially responsible for the demize of Dalton and his band or liars .
I can't wait for a liberal supporter to ask if he/she can put a sign on my lawn . I will say certainly and after it is there I will spray it with lighter fluid and burn it before he/she is off the property.

Because there were more than 8 against (during the vote) I think it is expected to be sent to a standing committee which it was. Bryant referred the Bill to a standing committee. What that means, I don't know but I think short of the Bill being withdrawn that is what we hoped would happen. Someone else review Hansard and let me know what you think.


"The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr Claude L. DesRosiers): The ayes are 53 and the nays are 24.

The Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Shall the bill be ordered for third reading?

Hon Michael Bryant (Attorney General, minister responsible for native affairs, minister responsible for democratic renewal): Mr Speaker, I move that the bill be referred to the standing committee on the Legislative Assembly.

The Speaker: Agreed? Agreed" - Hansard

I believe it means that each part of the bill will be reviewed. There will also be debate and possible public consultations, but I don't believe that is mandatory.

By the way, I found this on my ride home last night--
Dump Dalton (http://www.dumpdalton.org/)

Well its not breezing through the way he wanted it to. This I think is good. I think there has been significant pressure brought to bare (bear?) which is clear in how the vote went. I expected all the Liberals to support Bryant but back in Oct the NDP and Conservatives weren't saying anything either way. Now, they are clearly fighting the proposed legislation and I don't know why but Bryant has conceeded in moving to refer the Bill to Committee.

By the way, I found this on my ride home last night--
Dump Dalton (http://www.dumpdalton.org/)

Cool :thumbs up

Well its not breezing through the way he wanted it to. This I think is good. I think there has been significant pressure brought to bare (bear?) which is clear in how the vote went. I expected all the Liberals to support Bryant but back in Oct the NDP and Conservatives weren't saying anything either way. Now, they are clearly fighting the proposed legislation and I don't know why but Bryant has conceeded in moving to refer the Bill to Committee.

I could be wrong, but I think it has to go to committee, whether he concedes or not. Or maybe he has to concede. Not sure.

By the way, I found this on my ride home last night--
Dump Dalton (http://www.dumpdalton.org/)


Schwinn, you are quickly becomming my hero .
Look this website over people , there is a proposed "gag" law that will prevent groups from attacking the govenment during election campaigns and reminding the people how much they lied during their time in power . This is getting to be a very dangerous government and I think we not only need to support the "bannedaid" group but take a serious look at the "dumpdalton gang" .I know that sounds a bit humorous but I am serious .


Go to the website open the page about the gag law and mail it to everyone in your address book . It is time the people of Ontario woke up and seen what is going on at Queenspark while they work and go on about their business .It is time to take a stand instead of thinking there is nothing they can do about an elected government until election day .

This is from Queens:
http://library.queensu.ca/webdoc/guides/bills_ontario.html#stand

The part that worries me is: Are "Standing" and "Select" committees the same?
If so, does Bryant decide on the committee?

--EDIT--

I just saw on another board that the commitee does include 3 opposition members:

Ernie Hardeman PC / Oxford
http://www.erniehardemanmpp.com/
ernie_hardeman@ontla.ola.org

Rosario Marchese NDP / Trinity--Spadina
http://www.rosariomarchese.ca/
rmarchese@ndp.on.ca

Norm Miller PC / Parry Sound--Muskoka
http://www.normmillermpp.com/
Norm_miller@ontla.ola.org

Can anybody confirm this?

I cant confirm anything but what I was told is that no matter what kind of committee that the fibs set up they always have the majority of members on the committee. Also I was told that committees can sit for very small or very long times. Rossario Marchese is my mpp so Ill call him in the am. He is definately siding with us, but on the other hand hes afraid of dogs-all dogs he says.I know rosario pretty well and he is a very articulate guy but as far as I can see our only faint hope was public hearings which it doesnt sound like this is. Even with public hearings they can pick and choose who they hear but there would be alot of public scrutiny as far as that goes.

I think that the standing comittee must unanimously vote yes for it to jump to third reading. So if the opposition on the comittee votes no, then it goes to House comittee and then third reading.

Bryant had the choice of Standing( input allowed) or House( no outside input) comittee. He may well be trying to give the impression that he is seeking input.

At the very least there will be some type of hearing(in Standing Comittee), not to mention- it buys some time for the shelter dogs.

Like Dukieboy said, this is probably the best scenerio that we could realistically expect.

Did anybody else find it ironic that McGinty was on the TV the other day thanking that woman who handed in $40G "for her honesty"? Isn't that like Hitler thanking mother Theresa for her compassion?

Did anybody else find it ironic that McGinty was on the TV the other day thanking that woman who handed in $40G "for her honesty"? Isn't that like Hitler thanking mother Theresa for her compassion?

That's funny!
I swear, everytime I see the Liberals on TV refering to each other by the title " the honorable ______;" I expect them to burst out laughing, and start high-fiving each other.

That's funny!
I swear, everytime I see the Liberals on TV refering to each other by the title " the honorable ______;" I expect them to burst out laughing, and start high-fiving each other.


How about instead of "The Honourable Dalton Mcguinty someone spoke the truth and said "The A-hole Dalton Mcguinty . Standing ovation from the opposition ,no doubt.
I'd do it

Standing ovation from the opposition ,no doubt.


Just got one from me.