By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - 0 Comments
Atop the notice paper this morning, under “introduction of government bills,” is the following.
The Minister of Finance — Bill entitled “A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures”.
That is the official notice of the government’s intention to table its second budget implementation act. You will remember the first bill to implement certain provisions of the budget as C-38.
With its addition to the notice paper, the bill could be tabled in the House as early as Thursday.
By Aaron Wherry - Monday, June 18, 2012 at 10:51 PM - 0 Comments
By that vote, C-38, an act to implement certain provisions of the budget, has just now been passed by the House at third reading.
David Wilks cast the second-last vote in favour. Elizabeth May cast the last vote against the bill.
By Scott Feschuk - Friday, June 1, 2012 at 11:54 AM - 0 Comments
A brick in the toilet tank of democracy.
Until recently, I wasn’t that big a fan of Conservative MP David Wilks, possibly on account of never having heard of him.
But he’s made quite an impression of late. First, Wilks spoke in favour of Stephen Harper’s omnibus budget bill. Then he told some constituents the legislation was flawed and overstuffed—and he would oppose it, even if it meant leaving caucus. About five minutes later, Wilks ever-so-slightly altered his position on the bill once more—now he was totally for it again.
Kudos to you, David Wilks. It is said that some members of Parliament are afraid to take a stand—but here we have an MP with the courage to take several.
Is it too soon to get excited about a David Wilks re-election speech in 2015? I say no.
By John Geddes - Wednesday, May 23, 2012 at 1:09 PM - 0 Comments
My colleague Aaron Wherry has posted here that illuminating, unfiltered video of B.C. Conservative MP David Wilks discussing with unusual candour the government’s omnibus budget bill with a group of his constituents.
Some of these concerned voters, quite rightly, voice concern about far too much being packed into that single unwieldy piece of legislation, making it impossible for all the elements—changes to environmental laws, pensions and Employment Insurance, to name three—to be properly reviewed by House committees.