OTTAWA - On October 18, 2006, the Government of Canada published Industry Canada's Regulations Amending the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations ("PM(NOC) Regulations") and Health Canada's Regulations Amending the Food and Drug Regulations in Part II of the Canada Gazette. These regulations, which came into force on October 5, 2006, will strengthen the economy in the long term by restoring certainty, predictability and balance to Canada's intellectual property framework for pharmaceuticals and bio-pharmaceuticals.

"These improvements to the intellectual property environment are the product of extensive consultations with the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry, and respond to the major concerns expressed by each sector of that industry," said the Honourable Maxime Bernier, Minister of Industry. "These improvements will encourage research into new and innovative drugs, and help to deliver on our government's commitment to provide the right environment for business-driven research and excellence."

"The amendments published today will benefit Canadians by making it easier for lower-cost, generic versions of these drugs to enter the market in a timely fashion," said the Honourable Tony Clement, Minister of Health.

Under Health Canada's Regulations Amending the Food and Drug Regulations, new and innovative drugs will receive an internationally competitive, guaranteed minimum period of market exclusivity of eight years - up from the current five years. This is especially important to Canada's burgeoning biotechnology industry, since biologic drugs often have little patent protection left by the time they are approved for sale due to lengthy development and regulatory review times. These regulations will also provide a further six months of market exclusivity to innovative drugs that are the subject of pediatric studies, in order to encourage companies to provide more information about the effects these products have on children.

In turn, Industry Canada's Regulations Amending the PM(NOC) Regulations will restore their original policy intent by enabling generic versions of innovative drugs to enter the market immediately following the expiry of relevant patents, while also allowing substantive improvements to innovative drugs to be duly protected. This will provide greater certainty and predictability for the industry overall, thereby strengthening investment and innovation in Canada.

Electronic copies of both sets of these regulations, as published in Part II of the Canada Gazette, can be found at http://canadagazette.gc.ca/index-e.html.

Backgrounder

Regulations Amending the Intellectual Property Rules for Pharmaceuticals

In Canada, there are two types of regulations that protect intellectual property in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry, the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations ("PM(NOC) Regulations") and the data protection provisions in the Food and Drug Regulations. Industry Canada is responsible for the PM(NOC) Regulations and Health Canada is responsible for the data protection regulations.

On October 18, 2006, a joint set of amendments to these two sets of regulations was published in Part II of the Canada Gazette. The purpose of Industry Canada's amendments to the PM(NOC) Regulations is to make it easier for generic drug companies to predict when they may enter the market with a lower-cost version of an innovative, patented drug. This will accelerate the market entry of generic drugs once relevant patents expire. The purpose of Health Canada's amendments to the data protection regulations is to provide new and innovative drugs with a guaranteed eight-year minimum period of market exclusivity. A further six months of protection is available to drugs that have been the subject of pediatric studies. This will encourage research in the area and improve drug information available to pediatric health professionals. Together, these amendments will make Canada's intellectual property environment for pharmaceuticals more predictable, stable and internationally competitive.

A draft version of the amendments was pre-published in Part I of the Canada Gazette on June 17, 2006. Pre-publication was followed by a 30-day public comment period during which the government received over thirty separate submissions from various sources, including brand-name, biotech and generic pharmaceutical companies, as well as patent law practitioners, parliamentarians and provincial governments. Minor technical changes were made to the amendments in response to these submissions.

Rationale

The past few years have given rise to significant public dialogue about the intellectual property protection of pharmaceuticals, internationally and nationally. Internationally, many countries have made policy adjustments to optimize the balance between innovation and access to affordable medicines. In 2003, the United States amended its version of the PM(NOC) Regulations to make it easier for generic drugs to enter the market. In 2004, the European Union adopted new measures for data protection, settling upon a uniform 10-year period of protection, with an additional year of protection in instances where a drug is approved for a new use.

In Canada, rising concerns have been expressed about the balance between encouraging innovation and the availability of generic drugs, most notably in the report of the Romanow Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada, the 2003 review of the PM(NOC)Regulations by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, and most recently, in a February 2004 statement by the Competition Bureau.

In response to these concerns, Industry Canada and Health Canada carefully examined Canada's intellectual property regime as it relates to the pharmaceutical and biotech industry and concluded that two types of changes are needed to restore balance and predictability to the marketplace. On the patent side, it was found that some brand-name drug companies were using the PM(NOC) Regulations to delay legitimate generic competition, a practice sometimes referred to as "evergreening." On the trade-secret side, it was found that Canada's data protection provisions, which are intended to implement a NAFTA and WTO obligation to protect the research data submitted to regulatory agencies by innovative (i.e., brand-name and biotech) companies, do not currently prohibit generic drug companies from obtaining marketing approval on the basis of bioequivalence comparisons to already-approved innovative drugs. This is out of line with current practice in other jurisdictions, most notably Europe and the United States.

On December 11, 2004, the government pre-published a joint set of amendments designed to address these problems in Part I of the Canada Gazette. Pre-publication was followed by extensive consultations with the innovative and generic sectors of the industry. The amendments published in the Canada Gazette on October 18 incorporate the most sought-after change requested by each side of the industry, but have the same underlying objectives of restoring balance and making Canada's intellectual property regime more predictable and internationally competitive.

Recognizing the significant contribution the Kitchener-Waterloo Symphony makes to the cultural, social and economic health of the entire Region, they are proposing a one-time financial package worth a total of $505,000.

The recommendations would see the Region of Waterloo pledge $250,000, the City of Kitchener pledging $170,000, and the City of Waterloo $85,000. Conditions require the Kitchener-Waterloo Symphony prepare a business and recovery plan to ensure the recovery and long-term survival of the Symphony. The funds will only be paid when it is clear that the balance of the needed funds are in hand and that the Symphony will carry on and not declare bankruptcy and that all three contributions from the Region of Waterloo, the City of Kitchener and the City of Waterloo are confirmed.

At the beginning of October, Kitchener-Waterloo Symphony Board Chair Robert Astley announced that the symphony had reached a critical financial situation and that it was calling on the community to help raise $2.5 million in pledges by the end of October.

“When we first announced this difficult financial situation and launched the Save Our Symphony campaign, I spoke of the critical importance of commitment,” said Astley. “Today, we are seeing first hand not only the depth of the commitment that exists across the Region, but the power of leadership. I applaud the leadership that has been demonstrated this afternoon. This sends a tremendous message to our community - and indeed to our Symphony - about the important role our musicians play in enhancing quality of life in our Region.”

Leading up to this morning, the Save Our Symphony campaign had resulted in a total of $610,000 pledged by the community. If the local government recommendations are approved, the overall total amount pledged during this campaign will amount to $1,115,000.

TORONTO - Dr. Lawrence LeDuc, political science professor at the University of Toronto, told a meeting of the Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform that he welcomes their review of Ontario's first-past-the-post system.

Dr. LeDuc participated in a panel discussion about Ontario's electoral system with Dr. David Docherty, Wilfrid Laurier University and Dr. Jennifer Smith, Dalhousie University, on Sunday morning at the third of six weekend meetings of the Assembly's Learning Phase.

During this weekend's session, which was well attended by members of the public, Assembly Academic Director, Dr. Jonathan Rose provided members with an overview of what people like and don't like about Ontario's first-past-the-post system before introducing the panel.

"There was no founding convention in Ontario that said, 'Gee what would we like?' That's why it's so great that we're having this debate now," Dr. LeDuc said in his opening comments.

Asked by an Assembly member about the cost of government, Dr. Docherty responded "I would argue democracy ain't cheap. One of the most fundamental things we have to invest in is our democracy. I don't think we can put a monetary value on engaging people in questions of citizenship."

Assembly members were thrilled to have the opportunity to ask panelists questions about first-past-the-post and other electoral systems. Assembly member Tom Engelhart went to the heart of the matter when he asked the panelists, "If you were asked on your own to set up a new system for Ontario and your life depended on how well it worked, what would you come up with?" Though the panelists have their own opinions, they advised Assembly members to develop their own priorities before forming a recommendation for the province.

As he thanked the panelists for their time, Assembly Chair George Thomson reminded fellow members that "there are no decisions until the final decision."

The Learning Phase continues on October 28th and 29th. Meetings are held at York University's Osgoode Hall (Keele campus). Public consultations are scheduled to begin in late November. Based on what the Assembly learns and what it hears from fellow Ontarians, it will recommend whether Ontario should keep its current electoral system or change to a new one.

If the Assembly recommends a different electoral system for the province, the Ontario government will hold a referendum on that alternative by the next provincial election on October 4, 2007.

Meeting schedules, member profiles, and useful resources about the Citizens' Assembly and electoral systems are available on-line at www.citizensassembly.gov.on.ca.

Third Year Gas Tax Fuelled Real Transit Results for Waterloo Region

WATERLOO REGION — The McGuinty government is investing $8,332,268 in Grand River Transit in the third year of the province’s successful gas tax program, John Milloy, MPP for Kitchener Centre announced October 13 on behalf of Transportation Minister Donna Cansfield.

This means that to-date, Waterloo Region has been allocated over $18.5 million in gas tax funding through this program.

“The gas tax is paying off for our community because it provides long-term, stable funding, allowing Grand River Transit to plan significant transit improvements at the local level,” said Milloy.

Last year, for 2005 / 06, Waterloo Region received over $6.1 million in gas tax funding, which was used to introduce significant transit service improvements to support of the implementation of Grand River Transit's ridership growth strategy. The year before, in 2004 / 05, Waterloo Region received $4 million.

"The gas tax funding has had a tremendous impact on transit services in the Region of Waterloo", said Ken Seiling, Regional Chair. " It has allowed us to fast track various initiatives such as service expansions and technological innovations which have helped increase overall ridership on GRT."

The McGuinty government’s gas tax funding program has increased ridership by 23 million passenger trips and expanded and improved transit services in Waterloo Region and municipalities across Ontario. This is the equivalent of removing 19 million car trips from our roads.

Increased ridership means Ontarians are burning less fuel, breathing cleaner air and reducing traffic congestion. Transit riders benefit from more convenient and efficient transit systems.

“We are delivering on our commitment to pump a share of the provincial gas tax into public transit, in Waterloo Region,” Cansfield said. “This year we have increased funding from one-and-a-half to two cents for every litre of gasoline sold in Ontario.”

In 2006/07 the Ontario government is investing more than $313 million in 86 transit systems serving 104 communities across the province. Funding from the gas tax program is in addition to the government’s other commitments to strengthen Ontario’s public transit. By 2010, the government will have invested more than $1.6 billion in gas tax funding in public transit.

Through significant infrastructure investments, the McGuinty government is delivering better hospitals, schools, transit systems, borders, roads and bridges -- all necessary for future growth and prosperity.

KINGSTON - Local medical and emergency organizations and the provincial Emergency Medical Assistance Team (EMAT- operated by Ornge) conducted a major simulated disaster exercise today in Kingston.

The exercise was developed in partnership with Kingston General Hospital and the City of Kingston, and involved participation from Kingston Fire & Rescue, Kingston Police and Frontenac Paramedic Services. Because of space limitations at KGH, the exercise was held at Providence Continuing Care Centre's Mental Health Services site.

"This exercise gave us an opportunity to work with our provincial and community partners in testing our emergency plans in a realistic environment. Although we hope to never experience such a disaster, our plans will be refined to ensure our response is as effective as possible," said Joe de Mora, KGH President and CEO.

The exercise simulated the effects of a massive traffic collision involving several vehicles and a chemical leak. The mock exercise resulted in a sudden surge of casualties requiring decontamination and specialized medical treatment. Participants were challenged to provide a coordinated medical response to the simulated disaster, while working in a high-risk environment.

"Today's exercise demonstrates the importance of a rapid and coordinated response in a disaster situation. We look forward to working with all of the organizations involved to debrief and review our collective performance, and make improvements for the future" said EMAT Medical Director Dr. Bruce Sawadsky.

Over 250 medical and emergency personnel took part in the exercise along with volunteer "victims" from the community. In addition to the exercise at the site, the City convened its Municipal Control Group and conducted a major tabletop emergency exercise.

"Hazardous products are transported within Kingston and other communities on a daily basis. It is vital that our community be prepared to quickly and decisively deploy all available health and emergency resources in the event of any major emergency," said Harvey Rosen, Mayor of the City of Kingston.

Simulated disasters help test the EMAT's ability to respond to local health emergencies. These exercises also test the local health care system's ability to respond to mass casualties resulting from a health emergency.

"The EMAT provides emergency medical support to Ontario communities facing major health emergencies," said Dr. Sawadsky. "The team trains regularly together with hospitals and emergency services across Ontario to practice the special skills required to respond effectively to a disaster situation."

For the first time, the number of adults held on remand or other temporary detention and the number of sentenced offenders were virtually equal. On an average day in 2004/2005, roughly 9,800 adults were being held in sentenced custody in provincial or territorial jails. At the same time, just over 9,900 were being held on remand or another form of temporary detention.

In contrast, 10 years earlier, the number of adults on remand accounted for only 28% of the total in custody. The remaining 72% were serving a custodial sentence.

The increasing trend in remand dates back to the mid-1980s. Remand counts in 2004/2005 were 30% higher than they were five years earlier and 83% higher than in 1995/1996.

In contrast, the number of sentenced offenders in provincial/territorial jails has been on the decline. The average number of sentenced offenders was nearly 11% below what it was in 2000/2001, and 31% below the level a decade earlier.

One important factor in this change in the composition of the custodial population is the increasing amount of time served in remand. In 2004/2005, more than half of all adults remanded in custody (54%) were held for less than a week, compared with 66% a decade earlier. At the same time, the proportion that served between one week and one month rose from 20% to 25%, and the proportion that spent more than a month in remand rose from 14% to 21%.

A number of other factors may also account for the shifting composition in the custodial population. For example, changes in bail practices and policies could affect the probability of bail being denied in many jurisdictions, thereby increasing the remand population.

Cases in Canada's adult criminal courts have also become more complex and are taking more time to resolve, increasing the length of stay for adults in remand while they await trial and/or sentencing.

The introduction of the conditional sentence as a sentencing option has also been a factor in the shift in composition of adult offenders. Some offenders who would have otherwise been admitted to sentenced custody served a conditional sentence in the community instead.

Slight decline in correctional system average counts

On an average day in 2004/2005, 152,600 adults were under the supervision of federal, provincial and territorial correctional service agencies, a 1% decline from the previous year.

Four out of five of these adults, about 120,500, were being supervised in the community. Of these, the vast majority (82%) were on probation, 12% were on conditional sentences and 6% were on parole or statutory release.

The remaining 20 %, about 32,100, were in a federal penitentiary or in a provincial or territorial jail. Of this total, 38%, were in federal custody while 31% were held in provincial/territorial custody. Adults in remand awaiting trial or sentencing represented 30% of Canada's incarcerated adults.

Admissions to correctional services remain stable

Overall in 2004/2005, there were just over 357,200 admissions to correctional services, unchanged from the previous year. Nearly 248,600 admissions, or 7 out of every 10, were to some form of custody, while the remainder, about 108,600, were to community supervision.

More than one-third of all admissions to correctional supervision were for remand or other temporary detention in the provincial/territorial correctional system.

Over the past decade, total admissions to remand and other temporary detention have been climbing steadily. Admissions to remand rose 14% from 1995/1996, while admissions to other temporary detention increased 21%. At the same time, the number of admissions to sentenced custody fell by about one-third.

Women represented 10% of admissions to provincial/territorial sentenced custody, 5% of admissions to federal custody, 11% of admissions to remand, and 17% of probation and conditional sentence admissions.

Aboriginal women represented nearly one-third of all women sentenced to provincial/territorial custody in 2004/2005, while Aboriginal men accounted for one-fifth of all men sentenced to custody in the provinces and territories.

Roughly 108,600, or 30% of all offenders, were admitted to correctional supervision in the community in 2004/2005, up 3% from the previous year.

Admissions to a conditional sentence increased by 2% from 2003/2004, while admissions to probation were up 4%, the first annual gain in the number of probation admissions since 2001/2002.

Conditional sentences for drug offences receive longest supervision orders

Conditional sentence admissions for drug offences received the longest conditional sentence orders in 2004/2005, according to data from five provinces: Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Alberta.

More than one-third (36%) of all conditional sentence admissions for drug offences carried a conditional sentence term of 18 months or more. This was roughly twice the proportion of those admitted for a violent offence (18%) or property offence (15%).

One-third of offenders return to correctional services within two years

Nearly one in three (31%) offenders released from correctional services in Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Saskatchewan in 2002/2003 returned to correctional services within two years of their release.

Rates of return to correctional supervision were higher for men (32%) than for women (23%), and almost half of all Aboriginal adults were re-involved in correctional services (45%) compared to less than one-third of non-Aboriginal adults (29%).

Increase in spending on correctional services

Spending on correctional services totalled $2.8 billion in 2004/2005. Taking inflation into account, total expenditures were up 2% from the previous year.

The federal system accounted for just over half (54%) of expenditures, with the remaining 46% going to provincial/territorial systems. Custodial services accounted for just over $2 billion, or 71% of total spending, while close to $382 million, or 14% of the total, went to community supervision. The remaining expenditures were for headquarters and central services and for provincial and federal parole boards.

The average daily cost of housing an inmate in a federal penitentiary in 2004/2005 was $259.05, compared with an average of $141.78 per inmate at the provincial/territorial level. This difference is the result of a number of factors, including higher levels of security and programming required in the federal system as well as higher costs associated with federally-sentenced female offenders and long-term offenders.

At the provincial/territorial level, spending on custodial services has risen 2% since 2000/2001. In contrast, the cost of delivering community corrections in the provinces and territories rose by more than 12% during the same period.

This increase can be attributed, in part, to an increase in the population of community supervision offenders with a conditional sentence who require more intensive supervision.

Composition of average counts of the adult correctional population
	2003/2004		2004/2005		2003/2004 to 2004/2005
	number	% of total	number	% of total	% change
Custodial supervision
Provincial/territorial custody, sentenced	9,863r	6.4	9,830	6.4	-0.3
Remand	9,163r	5.9	9,640	6.3	5.2
Other temporary detention, provincial/territorial	342r	0.2	346	0.2	1.3
Total Provincial/territorial custody	19,368r	12.5	19,816	13.0	2.3
Federal custody, sentenced	12,380r	8.0	12,301	8.1	-0.6
Total custodial supervision	31,747r	20.6	32,117	21.0	1.2
Community supervision
Probation	100,993	65.4	98,805	64.7	-2.2
Provincial parole	885	0.6	810	0.5	-8.5
Conditional sentences	13,632	8.8	13,931	9.1	2.2
Total provincial community supervision	115,510	74.8	113,546	74.4	-1.7
Federal Community releases (CSC)1	7,094r	4.6	6,954	4.6	-2.0
Total community supervision	122,604r	79.4	120,500	79.0	-1.7
Total correctional services	154,351r	100.0	152,618	100.0	-1.1
r revised 1. This category represents movement from custody to federal conditional release and includes provincial/territorial and federal offenders on day parole and full parole, and federal offenders on statutory release. Offenders released on warrant expiry and other release types are excluded. CSC denotes Correctional Service of Canada. Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. Percentage change has been calculated using unrounded numbers.

Composition of admissions to the adult correctional population
	2003/2004		2004/2005		2003/2004 to 2004/2005
	number	% of total1	number	% of total1	% change
Custodial Supervision:
Provincial/territorial custody, sentenced	81,123r	22.8	79,193	22.2	-2.4
Remand	123,990r	34.8	125,871	35.2	1.5
Other temporary detention, provincial/territorial	38,176r	10.7	35,722	10.0	-6.4
Total provincial/territorial custody	243,289r	68.3	240,786	67.4	-1.0
Federal custody, sentenced	7,562r	2.1	7,826	2.2	3.5
Total custodial supervision	250,851r	70.4	248,612	69.6	-0.9
Community Supervision:
Probation	77,606r	21.8	80,561	22.6	3.8
Provincial parole	1,860	0.5	1,755	0.5	-5.6
Conditional sentences	18,603r	5.2	18,916	5.3	1.7
Total provincial community supervision	98,069r	27.5	101,232	28.3	3.2
Federal Community releases (CSC)2	7,397r	2.1	7,326	2.1	-1.0
Total community supervision	105,466r	29.6	108,558	30.4	2.9
Total correctional services	356,317r	100.0	357,170	100.0	0.2
r revised 1. Excludes Prince Edward Island due to missing data.   2. This category represents movement from custody to federal conditional release and includes provincial/territorial and federal offenders on day parole and full parole, and federal offenders on statutory release. Offenders released on warrant expiry and other release types are excluded. CSC denotes Correctional Service of Canada. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Note to readers
This release is based on the annual Juristat Adult Correctional Services in Canada, which provides data on the characteristics of the adult correctional population and the delivery of correctional services.

Two basic indicators describe the use of correctional services: the average count of offenders imprisoned or serving a sentence in the community at a given point in time, and the number of annual admissions to correctional facilities or to community supervision programs.

Counts of inmates in custody or serving a sentence in the community provide a snapshot of the correctional population on any given day and are used to calculate an annual average count. Managers in correctional services use average counts as a key operational measure for the utilization of services, such as bed space in institutions.

Admissions data are collected when an offender enters an institution or community supervision program, and describe and measure the caseflow in correctional agencies over time. While aggregate admissions include all persons passing through the correctional system, they do not indicate the number of unique individuals in the correctional system. The same person can be included several times in the admission counts where the individual moves from one type of correctional service to another (e.g. from remand to sentenced custody) or re-enters the system in the same year.

Blaming hospitals for ER crisis is irresponsible, won't solve problem, Tory says

QUEEN'S PARK - On october 1, 2006 Progressive Conservative Party Leader John Tory called on Dalton McGuinty to start taking responsibility for Ontario's emergency room crisis and to stop deflecting blame on others.

"Hospitals across Ontario are having huge ER problems as a result of three years of broken McGuinty health care promises," said Tory. "The McGuinty Liberals are blaming the crisis at Grand River on that hospital's management. If the management is the problem, why are there ER crises in at least 20 other ERs around the province? It's time Dalton McGuinty and his Health Minister George Smitherman accepted that this is a province-wide problem that he could have acted on to prevent."

Almost 18 months ago Dalton McGuinty and George Smitherman were warned about a growing crisis in Ontario's emergency rooms. Last November they were warned again by ER doctors, but the McGuinty Liberal response was to dismiss them as a rogue group and do nothing. George Smitherman also has two reports on ERs recommending action and he is sitting on them.

"It's time for Dalton McGuinty to act to fix the situation in all Ontario's ERs," said Tory. "There are working condition issues, acute care bed shortages and long-term care issues Dalton McGuinty has left unaddressed." Tory added: "We've seen three years of broken promises and Dalton McGuinty saying anything to get elected. Unfortunately we've also seen three years of Dalton McGuinty doing very little about the problems facing Ontarians."

In response to your letter. Let us deal in facts. You are a Legislative Assistant to Guy Lauzon and you state, ‘I'm afraid I remain unaware of any plans for North American union’. Sir it is I who are afraid. If you are truly uninformed about such a dire situation for Canadians and your MP is equally uninformed, how can you defend a new Bill such as C-16? Canadians cannot possibly have trust in a government that is so out of touch with the events unfolding right under their noses? What manner of fool do you take Canadians for if you expect them to take a Bill like C-16 at face value, when you have clearly revealed so little knowledge of the Canadian situation?

In order to understand Bill C-16 and the threat it poses to Canadians you must understand all factors that may affect it or be affected by it. You are defending the bill based on one concept with regard to the Governor General. But when you say this, “The convention by

which the government must retain the confidence of the House is just that -a convention. In other words, it does not exist in writing.” You are denigrating the very foundation on which our parliamentary system is founded. Much of what Canadians rely on in our parliamentary system are based on tradition. We do not follow the U.S. traditions. Elections every four years will harmonize Canadian elections with U.S. elections. This fits very clearly with the North American Union. There are mock parliaments already in process. “Under the sponsorship of the Canadian based North American Forum on Integration, students met in the Mexican Senate for five days in May in an event dubbed "Triumvirate," with organizers declaring "A North American Parliament is born."

A similar event took place in the Canadian Senate in 2005. The intentions of organizers are clear. "The creation of a North American parliament, such as the one being simulated by these young people, should be considered," explained Raymond Chretien, the president of the Triumvirate and the former Canadian ambassador to both Mexico and the U.S.” * So a North American Parliament is born. Do you consider that a theory?

As for your dismissal of our ‘tradition’ or convention. I quote for your full understanding from an important Constitutional Expert, Eugene A. Forsey in his document ‘How Canadians Govern Themselves’.

“…Our written constitution still contains not one syllable on prime ministerial qualifications, the method of election or removal, or (except for the calling of the constitutional conferences) the Prime Minister’s powers. Nor is there anything on any of these matters in any Act of Parliament, except for provision of a salary….Everything else is a matter of established usage, or ‘convention.’(emphasis mine) ….there is nothing in any law to say that a government that loses its majority in the House of Commons on a matter of confidence must either resign(making way for a different government in the same House) or ask for a fresh general election.” Reference: Pg 30 How Canadians Govern Themselves

This is very significant. The premise or arguments in favour of Bill C-16 do not hold up under close scrutiny. To suggest that fixed election dates will make the House work better because members will know the date of the next election, is contradictory if you maintain that the non-confidence remains. This Bill must be examined with clear understanding of its intention, not simply its wording. Our Constitution already provides a fixed election date that members can rely on if they are not defeated by a non-confidence motion. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms states under section “4.(1) No House of Commons and no legislative assembly shall continue for longer than five years from the date fixed for the return of the writs at a general election of its members.” Therefore we find that this Bill is simply an attempt to set a precedent to remove ‘convention’ and allow for other changes to our traditions. This is a matter, which requires full discussion, disclosure and perhaps a referendum by the people of Canada. The timing of this bill along with the Conservative government’s recent elimination of funding for the Law Commission is significant.

I am very disappointed in your response to Connie Fogal. As a Legislative assistant and not an MP you have taken a very unimpressive position in your comment to another Federal Political Party Leader, Ms.Fogal. Your attempts to label her a ‘conspiracy theorist’ are derogatory at best, but more importantly they reveal the lack of communication in Ottawa and lack of full understanding of the political system in Canada. Canadian Action Party is fully aware of our legitimate role as part of the Opposition. It is not only our right to criticize, question and debate decisions which will impact the Canadian public, but it is our primary duty. Your attempts to downgrade our role, as defined by Elections Canada and the Supreme Court of Canada, are unacceptable. If you are a Canadian citizen you should be concerned about the loss of our country. Rather than discount a statement which you have admitted you have no knowledge of, perhaps you ought to be asking your MP and others to answer the questions. You have taken a very strong stand to defend your party’s Bill, although your MP has not in fact put forward an argument. No MP has responded to our letters of concern regarding the Security and Prosperity Agreement or the NAU.

Once again I express on behalf of the Canadian Action Party, our position is that Bill C-16 must be defeated. It serves no purpose based on the information contain therein other than to harmonize our government with the U.S. and set a precedent against convention. Our Parliamentary system is designed to ensure that all Federal Political parties work together in the best interest of the citizens. We do not owe security and certainty to any political party’s ability to hold power in government. Confidence in the government and its members remains the primary objective to ‘good government’. We owe security and accountability to the people of Canada. The two are not always mutually beneficial.

In the interest of public disclosure and information I copy this document to all MP’s , Senators, citizens and media for their information. We look forward to the defeat of Bill C-16.

Yours truly
Catherine Whelan Costen
Canadian Action Party President

"Administrative Coup D'etat" of America Bush 'super-state' agenda to create American Union is now official Steve Watson, Paul Watson & Alex Jones | September 28 2006 - CAP urges Canadians to speak out.

Documents Reveal Bush/CFR "Administrative Coup D'etat" of America

Journalist Jerome Corsi has received the first documents pertaining to a FOIA request asking for full disclosure of the SPP office in its activities towards creating a Pan American Union.

According to a report by World Net Daily, the documents reveal that the Bush administration is running a "shadow government" without congressional oversight in conjunction with Canada and Mexico under the guise of a program "to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation."

http://infowars.net/articles/September2006/280906Union.htm Documents Reveal Bush/CFR

Corsi asserts that a wide range of US administrative law is being re- written in stealth under this program to "integrate" and "harmonize" with administrative law in Mexico and Canada.

The documents contain references to upwards of 13 working groups within an entire organized infrastructure that has drawn from officials within most areas of administrative government including U.S. departments of State, Homeland Security, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture, Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

Corsi has further reported that at a recent high-level confab in Banff, an assistant U.S. secretary of state, Thomas A. Shannon , chaired a panel that featured a presentation by Prof. Robert Pastor, author of a book promoting the development of a North American union as a regional government and the adoption of the amero as a common monetary currency to replace the dollar and the peso.

The open plan to merge the US with Mexico and Canada and create a Pan American Union networked by a NAFTA Super Highway has long been a Globalist brainchild but its very real and prescient implementation on behalf of the Council on Foreign Relations has finally been reported on by mainstream news outlets.

After nearly ten years of reporting by Alex Jones and the rest of the Patriot Movement, the establishment press is finally covering serious reports on the plan for a Pan-American Union, based on recent articles by Human Events columnist Jerome Corsi.

Back in June World Net Daily reported ,

"The White House has established working groups, under the North American Free Trade Agreement office in the Department of Commerce, to implement the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or SPP, signed by President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and then-Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in Waco, Texas, March 23, 2005."

The article even carries the admission that the Council on Foreign Relations, often the bane of sophomoric stereotypical caricatures of paranoid conspiracy theorists, played a fundamental role in crafting the policy for the homogenization of the US, Canada and Mexico.

"Many SPP working groups appear to be working toward achieving specific objectives as defined by a May 2005 Council on Foreign Relations task force report, which presented a blueprint for expanding the SPP agreement into a North American union that would merge the U.S., Canada and Mexico into a new governmental form."

This admission is as historical as it is concerning - the CFR moulds the foundational policy for the elimination of American sovereignty and it is passed as executive law within weeks. It is once again evident that the true vestiges of power lie within the ranks of the CFR and the Trilateral Commission who act on policy decided upon by the big brother of multinational semi-secret steering societies, the Bilderberg Group.

Up until five or six years ago the CFR largely operated in the shadows, only publishing its mouthpiece Foreign Affairs, and any inference that the group held sway in US politics or even existed was met by heckles of incredulity from the establishment media. Now the Associated Press openly reports their guiding hand in the drives towards global government.

The framework on which the American Union is being pegged is the NAFTA Super Highway (pictured) , a four football-fields-wide leviathan that stretches from southern Mexico through the US up to Montreal Canada.

Corsi's work cites government websites which carry full planning details of the Super Highway and its construction has already begun in Texas with no congressional oversight whatsoever. The Trans-Texas Corridor is being overseen by The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the contract is owned by the Cintra corporation which in turn is owned by the King of Spain Juan Carlos. The project is being financed by the implementation of a toll that will be collected by means of GPS tracking devices installed in all vehicles and also envelops many connecting roads to the highway.

The NAFTA Super Highway will allow vehicles, people and goods to travel from Mexico, into the heart of America and up to Canada with little impediment, effectively erasing America's borders wholesale.

Coupled with Bush's blanket amnesty program, the Pan American Union is the final jigsaw piece for the total dismantling of America as we know it.

Related: Pan American Union Archive

Related: The American Union by 2005 - 2006 by Robert Gaylon Ross

The Canadian Action Party/Parti action canadienne is entirely opposed to this Bill! We have grave concerns that the impact of this Bill will profoundly affect the constitutional entitlement of Canadians to a sovereign, independent Canada. In addition to our concurrence with all the Arguments Against Fixed Election Dates, which arguments are set out in the Backgrounder respecting this Bill C-16 located on the government website (some of which are reprinted below) we see this Bill as a mechanism to further facilitate the de-structuring and de-stabilization of Canada to effect an integration of Canada, the USA and Mexico into a North American Entity dominated by the USA and ruled by a corporate, military, industrial, financial elite.

Well under way is the bureaucratic implementation of a North American Union with its own surrounding perimeter and an elimination of borders within it, along with the harmonization of all policies respecting all the significant areas of national business that makes an independent sovereign nation. You are aware of the various unconstitutional agreements that drive this agenda; for example, the Security and Prosperity Partnership Agreement signed by Presidents Bush and Fox and Prime Minister Paul Martin (L), in March 2005, which was affirmed in March of 2006 by the two Presidents and Prime Minister Harper ( C ) , as well as the Smart Border Plan of December 2001, and many others.

The Prime Minister’s Office already exercises an excessive and arbitrary power contrary to the interest of Canadians. You have Mr. Harper’s institutionalization of rule by unelected, unaccountable forces of the military/industrial/financial elite by his creation of the Competitiveness Council (arising out of the aforesaid agreements) so that their representatives can guide his government. You have secret meetings occurring between such people along with present and former members of government including Deputy Prime Ministers, and Deputy Ministers, Cabinet Ministers, and senior officials, such as occurred this September 2006 at Banff, AB, Canada, all for the purpose of planning, reporting on, and agreeing to ways to hasten this process. That power must be clipped, not augmented.

Bill C-16 comes into play here because the North American Agenda calls for full integration and unity by 2010. Bill C-16 would prevent any election before 2009. That time frame would stifle and prevent the only democratic way of stopping this Union – an election to unseat all those MP’s who are complicit in the Betrayal of Canada.

Further, we have grave concerns that Bill C-16 will eliminate or frustrate the “confidence convention” referred to in the Backgrounder. We concur that this convention “goes to the very root of parliamentary democracy”. It is crucial to our democracy that government must possess the confidence of the parliament, and that the “confidence convention” principle must remain protected as a basic tenet, untarnished and unviolated. Elections restricted to once every four years would undermine this principle, and would cripple the power of minority governments to reflect the will of the people to activate the power inherent in non-confidence motions.

We quote from the Backgrounder, “Under the confidence convention, the executive, or ministry, must have the confidence of the majority in the legislature. A government that is defeated on a vote of confidence is expected to resign or seek a dissolution. A new government must meet the House, and demonstrate that it has the confidence, or support, of the majority. What is involved is a convention, one that does not appear in the text of the Constitution (though, arguably, it forms part of the Constitution), in a statute, or the Standing Orders of the House, but which goes to the very root of parliamentary democracy.”

For your ready reference, we repeat the arguments against a fixed election date as set out in the backgrounder.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?lang=E&ls=c16&source=library_prb&Parl=39&Ses=1

Arguments Against Fixed Election Dates

… opponents cite various disadvantages associated with setting fixed election dates. These include the following:

? Fixed election dates and fixed terms are inconsistent with a parliamentary form of government, in which the executive must retain the confidence of the legislature.

? Governments would be able to do anything they wanted after an election, knowing that they would not have to face the next election for a specified period of time – there would be no requirement or incentive for governments to retain the confidence of a majority of the House of Commons, and they would be insulated from public opinion.

? It would make it harder than at present to remove an unpopular government between elections.

? It would not accommodate circumstances where governments may need, or want, to go to the people with an election; for instance, if a major issue or change of platform arose, or if the House of Commons was at an impasse.

? The calling of elections is an important and legitimate tool for a government: the threat of dissolution allows governments to keep their members in line, and the opposition off balance.

? Much of the impetus for fixed election dates comes from the mistaken notion that governments are elected; governments, in fact, are appointed, and are responsible to the House of Commons; an election is the election of individuals to serve in the House of Commons.

? With respect to the argument that fixed terms would lead to stability and to the opportunity for the government to carry through its policies and legislative program, it has been pointed out that stability and accountability are often inherently in conflict, and that security for governments should not take precedence over accountability.

? Fixed election dates or fixed terms would remove from individual Members the power – seldom exercised – to withdraw their support, and cause the downfall of the government. Thus, the status or independence of individual Members, whether government or opposition, would arguably be no better off under such a system.

Further, we concur with this observation and statement:

“Opponents of fixed election dates argue that they are inconsistent with parliamentary traditions and interfere with the effective functioning of Parliament. It is argued that the Prime Minister must have the flexibility and freedom to seek the dissolution of Parliament at any time – whether because of a loss of confidence or because of a need or desire for a renewed mandate from the electorate. Major policy initiatives, on which the government believes an election should be held, can arise outside of an election period. Fixed election dates could lead to paralysis if the House is unable to function, and if the situation cannot be resolved in the usual way by calling an election. Fixed election dates also raise the prospect of an American-style campaign that stretches over months or years, rather than a short period. It would also be possible for a government to forestall a fixed election date by engineering its own defeat on a motion of confidence. In addition, it is not correct to say that the existing system, where the Prime Minister determines the date of the election, always works to the advantage of the governing party, as many governments have been defeated at the polls. It is also debatable whether a fixed election date would in fact loosen party discipline.”

http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?lang=E&ls=c16&source=library_prb&Parl=39&Ses=1

This Bill is contrary to the best interest of Canadians and should not be passed.

Thank you for your consideration of our position. We look forward to the defeat of this Bill.

Yours truly

Constance Fogal, Leader

Canadian Action Party/ Parti Action Canadienne

Individuals, businesses, organizations and institutions who have preserved, restored or in some way helped conserve heritage resources in the city are eligible for the awards. Heritage resources may be residences; commercial, institutional or industrial buildings; structures such as bridges or monuments; or architectural details such as verandahs, additions, storefronts or entranceways.

The Awards recognize: excellence in all aspects of the profession; a strong awareness of the planning profession among related professions, all levels of government, potential private and public sector clients, and the general public; and professional planners providing excellence to the community.

The Region of Waterloo’s Planning, Housing and Community Services department has been awarded an Excellence in Planning Award for a project called Waterloo in the 21st Century: A Community Action Plan for Housing. This is one of the first of a new generation of housing plans in the way that it bridges the region’s affordable housing strategy and its regional growth management strategy. The plan not only outlines actions that the region itself will take to create housing, but also how other community stakeholders can participate in addressing collective housing needs. It’s an innovative document that makes the connection between planning and well-being.

The Region's Reurbanization Working Group has also been awarded an Excellence in Planning Award for a project called Seizing Opportunity in Urban Development. One of the difficulties of promoting the kind of compact, pedestrian-friendly communities is that the public supports them, but wants them put in someone else’s backyard. The purpose of this project is to promote those communities so that one day, people will say, “Yes, I want this in my back yard.” This group brings together developers, planners and other stakeholders to enhance public understanding of reurbanization.

Established in 1986, the Ontario Professional Planners Institute (OPPI) is the recognized voice of the Province’s planning profession and provides vision and leadership on key planning issues. The Institute’s 2,700 members are employed by government, private industry, agencies, and academic institutions. Members work in a wide variety of fields including urban and rural community development, urban design, environment, transportation, health and social services, housing, and economic development.

Investing $6.2 billion in our universities, colleges, student financial assistance and training programs.

"Canada's New Government is proud to be a partner in the BizPaL initiative - a service that will speed up the licensing and permit processes for businesses and entrepreneurs," said the Honourable Maxime Bernier, Minister of Industry. "By working with ServiceOntario and the City of Ottawa, we are launching a very useful technological initiative that will simplify government paperwork processes."

"We are pleased to be a partner in this important initiative supporting Ontario businesses," said Gerry Phillips, Ontario Minister of Government Services. "This is one more example of how ServiceOntario is partnering with other governments to make it easier for Ontarians to find and access government information and services."

"As part of our mandate to improve on-line services to local businesses, BizPaL will provide an easy and convenient system that allows individuals to succeed in their business ventures so Ottawa can continue to grow and prosper," said Ottawa Mayor Bob Chiarelli. "By implementing BizPaL, we are responding to businesses' needs for centralized and timely access to information."

Area business owners and entrepreneurs can access the service by visiting ottawa.ca/bizpal. Based on the responses to a number of interactive questions on the nature and location of the business, the online service generates a customized list of required government permits and licences. The list includes basic information about the permits and licences, the order in which they should be obtained, contact information and, in some cases, links to begin the application process.

The BizPaL system in Ottawa was developed with Industry Canada support, in collaboration with the City of Ottawa and ServiceOntario. To date, BizPaL has been launched in the Yukon Territory with the City of Whitehorse; in British Columbia with the City of Kamloops; in Ontario with the Regional Municipality of Halton; and in Saskatchewan with the City of Saskatoon.

BizPaL was a commitment of Canada's New Government in the 2006 budget. This government is getting things done for businesses and taxpayers by working with cities to launch the BizPaL program.

Proposed Legislation Would Set Stage To Eliminate Expiry Dates On Retail Gift Cards

TORONTO - The McGuinty government is moving to ban expiry dates on consumer gift cards, Minister of Government Services Gerry Phillips said September 24 at the Toronto Eaton Centre.

"Retail gift cards have become widely popular and the consumers of this province deserve to get what they pay for," said Phillips. "That's why our government is acting by introducing legislation that, if passed, will allow us to regulate the elimination of expiry dates, and the terms and conditions for these cards, ensuring they retain their full value no matter when consumers redeem them."

Gift cards and other stored value cards are a multi-billion dollar industry and one of the fastest growing products in the marketplace today. Virtually all major retailers now offer some form of gift card, with most containing an expiry date of about two years. Some retailers also apply fees to the cards, reducing their value after a certain length of time.

"We are delighted to see that Ontario intends to eliminate expiry dates on gift cards. More and more consumers are purchasing gift cards and we are pleased that Ontario is proactively leading the way to protect consumers," said Consumers Council of Canada President Bill Huzar.

New regulations will be developed to ensure that gift cards purchased by consumers in Ontario would not expire. The regulations would also put strict limits on any related fees and ensure that all terms and conditions are disclosed at the time of purchase.

"We look forward to working with the government to create rules that respond to the concerns of consumers but also take into consideration the legitimate needs of retailers. I am sure a balance can be found," said Diane J. Brisebois, President and CEO, Retail Council of Canada.

The proposed changes would apply to gift cards and certificates, but not to loyalty cards, discount coupons or promotional/charitable gift cards.

"We hope this legislation will pass quickly so that we can begin working with the retail industry to develop and implement