Government Imposes Time Allocation on Bill C-11

Government House Leader Peter Van Loan announced yesterday that the government is imposing time allocation on the second reading debate on Bill C-11. That means debate on the bill should conclude on Friday and the bill will be sent to committee for further hearings and review. While the government’s overuse of time allocation is a concern, sending C-11 to committee places the core issues on the table – will it amend the digital lock rules as so many are asking and/or will it cave to copyright lobby pressure and add SOPA-style amendments to the bill? Now is the time to speak out.


  1. I’m going to go with they’ll blindly and short sightedly do what the industry wants. I have no faith that this government cares about the opinion of Canadians.

  2. Gotta agree with Ki, here.
    Like C-10, this bill will pass in the form the conservatives want, even if the policies it enshrines are clearly misguided. C-10 was passed in an environment where crime has been falling for decades and even Americans are realizing the “tough on crime” thing is total BS. And C-11 will pass despite the clear evidence that the DMCA has been regularly abused, that digital locks are a terrible idea, and that SOPA-style provisions are not supported by Canadians.

    Canadians made their choice when they gave these jokers a majority. We now all have to live with the consequences.

  3. who’s left to speak out to? As Brett said enough Canadians have given them a majority. The government now has no reason to listen to anyone and clearly aren’t going to listen to anyone be they a citizen or an expert. The major media doesn’t seem to care either, sure SOPA’s a big story to cover, but C-11? Pfft.

    Personally I’ve given up.

  4. SOPA and PIPA were also sure things
    Most politicians still think of copyright as something that voters don’t care about, so they can do whatever works best for them without worrying about the consequences. In the US, they recently learned that that isn’t the case. The same could easily happen here (in fact it did happen with the previous bill, which was delayed so that they could make it less one-sided).

  5. C-10 / C-11 synergy
    C-10 : We’re going to get tough on crime.
    C-11 : We’re going to criminalize more citizens.
    Synergy! Profit! Increased GDP! Lower unemployment! It’ll be grand.

    It bothers me that a party with only 39% of the popular vote can be so cavalier with the direction our country is being managed. I guess if I thought they were actually promoting an open, competitive market, I wouldn’t be all that concerned. Somehow, “being Right” seems to mean becoming part of a private collective, now; that entrenching an oligarchy/monopoly is regarded as an economically sound pursuit. A market should no longer have to evolve with market forces.
    I think, come next federal election, proportional representation (like Finland’s/Sweden’s/etc government) is going to become a priority for me. The phrase “leading the country” has been taken too literally, the concept of representation has lost its meaning.

  6. Let’s fill up the new jails with all of those wealth destroying “thieves” and “pirates”.

    Six downloaded songs should get you six months minimum jail time, just like six marijuana plants.

    Heh, that would even be technological neutrality!