CAFE CALLS ON MINISTER OF JUSTICE NOT TO REINTRODUCE SEC 13 — INTERNET CENSORSHIP

CAFE CALLS ON MINISTER OF JUSTICE NOT TO REINTRODUCE SEC 13 — INTERNET CENSORSHIP

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 905-289-674-4455; FAX: 289-674-4820;

Website http://cafe.nfshost.com

Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director

 

June 21, 2019

 

Hon. David Lametti,

Minister of Justice,

House of Commons,

Ottawa, ON.,

K1A 0A6

 

Dear Minister Lametti:

 

RE: Please Don’t Reintroduce Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Code

 

I read in the National Post (June 20, 2019) that  you are considering “very carefully” a recommendation by the Commons Justice Committee to reintroduce the discredited Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act which was repealed by Parliament in 2013. Please don’t do it.

 

Sec. 13 made it a discriminatory practice to repeatedly communicate over the Internet material that is “likely to expose to hatred or contempt” a long list of privileged groups.

 

I represented a number of the victims of this section at Tribunals. Our organization the Canadian Association for Free Expression participated in a number of other Tribunals including the very complex Warman v Lemire.

 

In practice, Sec. 13 meant certain groups  were virtually immune from criticism. While hatred is a very strong emotion, contempt is merely the result of  negative commentary. To take  a neutral example, were I to say smokers had bad breath, discoloured teeth, stained fingers, smelled and ran added risks of cancer or strokes, I would not be exposing smokers to hatred. I wouldn’t be asking anyone to hate smokers but I would certainly be creating an unfavourable impression of them, and, thus, exposing them to contempt. Thus, were smokers a privileged groups, I’d risk a conviction under Sec. 13.

 

As time went on, Tribunal rulings held that it was not necessary to prove that anyone actually felt or expressed hatred or contempt as a result of the impugned posting. In the Lemire case, logs showed that only five people had ever even read one impugned post. Surely a case of de minimis! It also emerged that truth was not a defence, sincerely held religious belief was not a defence nor was opinion or commentary.

 

Indeed, there actually were no defences, except, perhaps, that the accused person had not posted the controversial material in question. Thus, until the Lemire case, Sec. 13 had a one hundred per cent conviction rate. This would rival the vile legal system of North Korea!

 

After 2001, when Sec. 13 was amended to specifically include material on the Internet, one individual, Richard Warman, a driven “anti-Nazi” campaigner and sometime employee of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, made the bulk of the complaints, turning it into an industry and, at times a profitable one too for, should the victim post criticisms of Mr. Warman after he filed a complaint, he would then allege retaliation, which exposed the victim to a punitive fine.

 

Sec. 13 was only used against people seen to be on the “right” of the political spectrum. No person expressing strident opinions against Christians or Europeans was ever prosecuted.

 

Much is made of so-called “hate speech” on the Internet. The Internet is not a free for all. Postings expressing extreme hatred can and have been prosecuted under Sec. 319 of the Criminal Code. Those who denounce “hate speech” are using a loaded term to demonize views they don’t like. The accusation of “hate speech” tells you little about the content of the impugned material but does tell you that it is material the accuser hates!

 

The Internet allows a much greater range of views and commentary and a more free wheeling debate, especially on such volatile issues as immigration, than usually appears in Canada’s fairly controlled press that tends to limit the range of acceptable opinions. Such freedom and the divergent voices being heard are upsetting to people who would like a much more controlled public discourse.

 

I have seen lives ruined by Sec. 13 — huge fines and life-long “cease and desist orders” that have the force of a Federal Court order. I have seen individuals jailed for nothing more than the non-violent expression of their political views.

 

I urge you to choose freedom. Reject calls for the reintroduction of Sec. 13. Yes, there is some extreme, foolish and insulting material on the Internet. Open discussion and debate tend to isolate and  expose such postings. Canada needs more speech and debate not less. Do not bring back Sec. 13.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

 

Paul Fromm

Director

 

 

 

 

WARMAN IS AT IT AGAIN: COMPLAINS TO FACEBOOK & GETS ANTI-MOSLEM PAGES TAKEN DOWN

WARMAN IS AT IT AGAIN: COMPLAINS TO FACEBOOK & GETS ANTI-MOSLEM PAGES TAKEN DOWN

 
         If you want to express a political or religious opinion on Facebook, you’d better run it by Richard Warman, who does something or other in the Department of National Defence. A chronic complainer under Sec. 13 (now repealed) of the notorious Canadian Human Rights Act, he damaged dozens of people’s lives — people who had views he deemed hate. Then, if you criticized him, he was likely to slap you with a libel suit. When his Sec. 13 toy was taken away, he switched to other methods of policing thought in Canada. A recent target was the zany, satirical newspaper YOUR WARD NEWS.
 
        Now, he’s after Facebook pages that are critical of Islam. Criticism of privileged minorities is, among the politically correct, “hate”>
 
         Facebook has removed some of these pages. That’s not surprising. Facebook President Mark Zukerberg is a fervent Zionist and did a deal with German thought control freak Angela Merkel to suppress German immigration critics expressing their views on Facebook.
 
         The National Post (February 21,2017) reports: “A half-dozen Facebook pages were offline Tuesday following a complaint by Ottawa lawyer Richard Warman, who had raised concerns they were engaged in hate speech against Muslims. Among them was “Canadians Against Islamization.” Banners bearing the same name were displayed by protesters at a small anti-Muslim demonstration Friday outside a downtown Toronto mosque.

         ‘It only takes a 30 second Google search to confirm why most of these individuals and groups are a problem in relation to hate speech,’ Warman said. ‘Hate speech has no place in Canada.’”

        Notice, the victims got no trial or right of response. And what is ‘hate spech’? Why it’s speech some privileged minority hates.

        Warman, who has long battled far right websites, had sent a list of suspected Canadian anti-Muslim pages to Facebook following the Quebec City mosque attack that left six worshippers dead.

Facebook has ‘taken action on those that qualify as hate speech,’ a company spokeswoman said Tuesday. While some of the pages were removed, others remained up but specific posts were deleted.

Six of the 22 Facebook links in Warman’s complaint were no longer online, among them the Cultural Action Party, Canadians Against Justin Trudeau and Soldiers of Odin – Ontario South.

        ‘The reason I forwarded the list of Facebook profiles to their management in Canada is because they had been reported to me with concerns about hate speech,’ Warman said.” [Who reported them? Was Warman’s complaint written on his own time?]


“According to Facebook’s community standards code, the company removes content that ‘directly attacks’ people based on their race, religion, sex or sexual orientation.

     ‘Organizations and people dedicated to promoting hatred against these protected groups are not allowed a presence on Facebook,’ it reads. ‘As with all of our standards, we rely on our community to report this content to us.’ But most of the links Warman had complained about were not taken down, despite having provocative names such as the Worldwide Coalition Against Islam and the Canadian Anti Islamic Force.

Canadian Facebook pages down following complaint they were anti-Muslim, possibly related to Toronto protest

Stewart Bell | February 21, 2017 | Last Updated: Feb 21 12:10 PM ET
More from Stewart Bell | @StewartBellNP

Images on social media showed the protesters carrying signs with anti-Muslim slogans as worshippers were entering the Toronto mosque.

Facebook

.

In Response to Zionist Pressure the Internet Bigs Vow to Censor “Racism, Anti-Semitism” and Criticism of Israel

In Response to Zionist Pressure the Internet Bigs Vow to Censor “Racism, Anti-Semitism” and Criticism of Israel

Cancelling the odd conference of free thinkers under pressure from the Zionist lobby, as the Hungarian Government failed to do this past weekend in Budapest, is small potatoes compared to the main target. For 20 years, groups like the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Anti-Defamation League have tried to gag the Internet as a free forum for ideas, well any ideas they don’t like; such as criticism of Israel, serious discussion of immigration and replacement of Whites (dubbed “racism”), and any challenge to the Hollywood version of World War II (dubbed “anti-semitism” of “holocaust denial.”
 
In Response to Zionist Pressure the Internet Bigs Vow to Censor "Racism, Anti-Semitism" and Criticism of Israel
Cancelling the odd conference of free thinkers under pressure from the Zionist lobby, as the Hungarian Government failed to do this past weekend in Budapest, is small potatoes compared to the main target. For 20 years, groups like the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Anti-Defamation League have tried to gag the Internet as a free forum for ideas, well any ideas they don't like; such as criticism of Israel, serious discussion of immigration and replacement of Whites (dubbed "racism"), and any challenge to the Hollywood version of World War II (dubbed "anti-semitism" of "holocaust denial."

This is an effort to do away with freedom of speech in the comment sections of just about any and all sites. A trial run for implementing this in the physical world perhaps?  Anyway their excuse is to do stop "racism, hatred, antisemitism, and anti israeli comments."  Apparently the latter is the real motivation.

Come on, Free Speech Supporters, contact Google, Twitter, facebook and Microsoft and remind them that America still has a quaint concept called the First Amendment. That means FREEDOM OF SPEECH, for the benefit of the politically correct brainwashed. Beyond that, there is the basic human right of FREEDOM OF SPEECH. How dare they!

Paul Fromm
Director
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

Web giants unite to fight online hate
By Marcus Dysch, September 23, 2014
Follow Marcus on Twitter
Internet giants Twitter, Facebook, Google and Microsoft have pledged to work harder to tackle online hatred after agreeing a deal with a leading antisemitism watchdog.
The companies endorsed a series of pledges on Monday following talks in California with the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism.
Described by one insider as a "game-changing" development, the agreement will see the companies increase efforts to stop the proliferation of racist and abusive comments on their sites.
The technology firms are all members of the ICCA's working group on cyber hate. The Anti-Defamation League is a co-convenor of the group. The taskforce has been leading collaborative efforts with politicians, lawyers and the business world to force racism and hatred from the web.
Digital help
An IT professional with over 30 years experience has launched an initiative to fight antisemitism and anti-Israel activity on social media.
The DJ First scheme offers free training courses for members of the community on how to use social networks like Twitter.
Gary Simon, who set up the project, explained that social media could be harnessed as a weapon against antisemitism but the community was suffering from a knowledge gap in the area.
Under the agreement, the companies have committed to introduce more user-friendly reporting systems, and will respond quicker to allegations of abuse. They will also enforce tougher sanctions against those who post abusive messages.
More work will now take place between the companies to develop further ideas on tackling online hate speech and create educational materials.
An ICCA spokeswoman in London said: "This is very significant. It's the first time solutions have been found. If we have the big players then the others will follow. It's not too much to say it's a game-changer."
British members of the working group travelled to Los Angeles last week to strike the deal. Labour MP John Mann joined Superintendent Paul Giannasi, of the Ministry of Justice's Hate Crime Unit, and Mike Whine of the Community Security Trust, in California.
Mr Mann, ICAA chair, said: "We welcome this development and will continue to work with the industry, governments and parliaments to implement these best practices and work against the spread of hatred on the internet."
Mr Whine said: "The internet has facilitated and encouraged the spread of hate speech. The impact is of mounting concern to governments, their criminal justice agencies and civil society alike.
"These new agreed best practices are a significant step forward. They follow five meetings in Silicon Valley which CST helped prepare and facilitate."
LikeLike ·  · Share
 
This is an effort to do away with freedom of speech in the comment sections of just about any and all sites. A trial run for implementing this in the physical world perhaps?  Anyway their excuse is to do stop “racism, hatred, antisemitism, and anti israeli comments.”  Apparently the latter is the real motivation.
 
Come on, Free Speech Supporters, contact Google, Twitter, facebook and Microsoft and remind them that America still has a quaint concept called the First Amendment. That means FREEDOM OF SPEECH, for the benefit of the politically correct brainwashed. Beyond that, there is the basic human right of FREEDOM OF SPEECH. How dare they!
 
 
Paul Fromm
Director
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION
 

 

Web giants unite to fight online hate

By Marcus Dysch, September 23, 2014
Follow Marcus on Twitter

Internet giants Twitter, Facebook, Google and Microsoft have pledged to work harder to tackle online hatred after agreeing a deal with a leading antisemitism watchdog.

The companies endorsed a series of pledges on Monday following talks in California with the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism.

Described by one insider as a “game-changing” development, the agreement will see the companies increase efforts to stop the proliferation of racist and abusive comments on their sites.

The technology firms are all members of the ICCA’s working group on cyber hate. The Anti-Defamation League is a co-convenor of the group. The taskforce has been leading collaborative efforts with politicians, lawyers and the business world to force racism and hatred from the web.

Digital help

An IT professional with over 30 years experience has launched an initiative to fight antisemitism and anti-Israel activity on social media.
The DJ First scheme offers free training courses for members of the community on how to use social networks like Twitter.
Gary Simon, who set up the project, explained that social media could be harnessed as a weapon against antisemitism but the community was suffering from a knowledge gap in the area.

 

Under the agreement, the companies have committed to introduce more user-friendly reporting systems, and will respond quicker to allegations of abuse. They will also enforce tougher sanctions against those who post abusive messages.

More work will now take place between the companies to develop further ideas on tackling online hate speech and create educational materials.

An ICCA spokeswoman in London said: “This is very significant. It’s the first time solutions have been found. If we have the big players then the others will follow. It’s not too much to say it’s a game-changer.”

British members of the working group travelled to Los Angeles last week to strike the deal. Labour MP John Mann joined Superintendent Paul Giannasi, of the Ministry of Justice’s Hate Crime Unit, and Mike Whine of the Community Security Trust, in California.

Mr Mann, ICAA chair, said: “We welcome this development and will continue to work with the industry, governments and parliaments to implement these best practices and work against the spread of hatred on the internet.”

Mr Whine said: “The internet has facilitated and encouraged the spread of hate speech. The impact is of mounting concern to governments, their criminal justice agencies and civil society alike.

“These new agreed best practices are a significant step forward. They follow five meetings in Silicon Valley which CST helped prepare and facilitate.”

FREE SPEECH URGENT — E-MAIL SENATORS IMMEDIATELY, C-304 Is Now Being Debated for Third and Final Reading

FREE SPEECH URGENT — E-MAIL SENATORS IMMEDIATELY, C-304 Is Now Being Debated for Third and Final Reading
Yesterday, June 25, C-304, which had recently received Second Reading in the Senate, was before the Senate Human Rights Committee. Bill C-304 is crucial in regaining some measure of freedom of speech in Canada. Introduced as a Private Member’s Bill in the House of Commons by Alberta MP Brian Storseth last year, it was past by the House of Commons, June 8, 2012. This Bill would repeal Sec. 13 (Internet censorship — truth is no defence, intent is no defence) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which makes criticism of privileged minorities very risky.
Censorship had some pals at the Senate’s Human Rights Committee, including Sen. Munson who subjected Mr. Storseth to some withering questioning.
However, this morning, according to the office of Sen. Robina Jaffer, Bill C-304 was “reported out of committee, without amendment.”
This is good news for freedom of speech.
The final step is now Third and final Reading. I spoke to the office of senior Ontario Senator Robert Runciman this afternoon. Bill C-304 will be debated either later today or tomorrow for Third Reading.
Those of us who have fought Internet censorship since the days of the Zundelsite case, 1996-2002, this is an exciting moment.
We need your help NOW! I don’t mean tonight or tomorrow. Bill C-304 may come up momentarily.
Please e-mail the Senate. The list is enclosed.
Please be brief and to the point.
Urge the Senators to vote for Bill C-304.
I enclose my letter on behalf of CAFE
Paul Fromm
Director
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION

Canadian Association for Free Expression

Box 332,

Rexdale, Ontario, M9W 5L3

Ph: 905-56-4455; FAX: 905-566-4820

Paul Fromm, B.Ed, M.A. Director

 

June 26, 2013

 
Memo to the Senate of Canada: Please Protect Internet Free Speech — Support Bill C-304 on Third Reading
Last June, the House of Commons passed a private Member’s Bill, Bill C-304 which repealed Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.
 
Sec. 13 had been a vague and much abused form of Internet censorship, making an offence out of views expressed over the Internet that were not criminal. Truth was not a defence. Intent was not a defence. The wording was  vague — communicating views “likely to expose” designated or privileged groups to “hatred or contempt.” No harm had to be proven. In fact, it was not necessary to prove that anyone other than the complainant had ever even seen the post in question. “Contempt” would capture any negative criticism. For instance, if smokers were a protected group, Internet comments stating smokers had bad breath and were damaging their skin and had higher rates of lung cancer would be “likely” to expose them to “contempt” is not hatred. Truth would not matter.
 
Until the Marc Lemire decision in 2009, Sec. 13 had a 100% conviction rate. That alone should have set off alarm bells. People are frequently charged with murder or robbery or fraud and acquitted. However, there were virtually no defences under Sec. 13. Worse, most of the prosecutions were driven by a chronic complainer with an admitted political agenda. This man worked for the Canadian Human Rights Commission during some of the time he was filing complaints. He has now moved over to the Department of National Defence. He admitted in a talk to Anti-Racist Action, a Toronto group with a history of violence, that he was seeking to “shut down” through “maximum disruption” those with an ideology he opposed.
 
Most of the victims of Sec. 13 complaints were poor and obscure people, unable to afford a lawyer. On behalf of the Canadian Association for Free Expression, I acted as a “representative” for half a dozen of these people. I saw lives and reputations ruined. The long drawn-out proceedings were an abuse BY process.
 
The investigators and prosecutors for the Canadian Human Rights Commission acted more like a political police than officials steeped in our tradition of fairness. When the lead “hate” investigator was questioned during the Warman v. Marc Lemire Tribunal, he was asked what weight he gave to freedom of expression when he was examining a website: “None,” he responded, “freedom of expression is an American idea.” Oh, really?
  
There is an urgency here. Canadians continue to suffer. Terry Tremaine, a former lecturer at the University of Saskatchewan, was charged under Sec. 13 and found guilty. He was then charged for much of the same material under Sec. 319 (“hate law”) of the Criminal Code. Last fall, a Regina judge dismissed the case. However, Mr. Tremaine had been hit with a lifetime “cease and desist” order by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal forbidding him from posting the same or similar comments to the ones at issue at the Tribunal. But what is “similar”? Although he tried to tone down his language, he was eventually found guilty of “contempt of court” for not removing the original posts, although the Tribunal’s order, as worded, had not required this. Subject to an appeal, he may soon head off to jail for up to six months!
 
Jail for expressing non-violent opinions on a website in another country? Such repression and micro-managing of opinion are unacceptable in a free society.
 
The Canadian press and many MPs rightly criticize restrictions on free speech in other countries. The case of Chinese architect, artist and dissident Wei Wei comes to mind. He was jailed briefly and then stripped of his political rights — not allowed to talk to the foreign media — for a year. Many Canadians rightly voiced their concern. Yet, Sec. 13 puts its victims under a lifetime gag!
 
In passing Bill C-304, the House of Commons went a long way to securing Internet freedom in Canada.  We urge you to do likewise, do the right thing and vote “aye” to give Third Reading to Bill C-304. 
Respectfully submitted.
 
Paul Fromm
Director
E-MAILS OF CANADIAN SENATORS
andrer@sen.parl.gc.ca, atauls@sen.parl.gc.ca, bakerg@sen.parl.gc.ca, belled@sen.parl.gc.ca, boisvp@sen.parl.gc.ca, braled@sen.parl.gc.ca, brazep@sen.parl.gc.ca, brownb@sen.parl.gc.ca, buthjo@sen.parl.gc.ca, callbc@sen.parl.gc.ca, campbel@sen.parl.gc.ca, carigc@sen.parl.gc.ca, dawsod@sen.parl.gc.ca, champa@sen.parl.gc.ca, chapum@sen.parl.gc.ca, mercet@sen.parl.gc.ca, dallar@sen.parl.gc.ca, poulim@sen.parl.gc.ca, comeag@sen.parl.gc.ca, coolsa@sen.parl.gc.ca, cordyj@sen.parl.gc.ca, cowanj@sen.parl.gc.ca, dagenj@sen.parl.gc.ca, dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca, debanp@sen.parl.gc.ca, mikeduffy@sen.parl.gc.ca, eatonn@sen.parl.gc.ca, envert@sen.parl.gc.ca, finled@sen.parl.gc.ca, fortis@sen.parl.gc.caharbm@sen.parl.gc.ca, hervic@sen.parl.gc.ca, lacomd@sen.parl.gc.ca, hublee@sen.parl.gc.ca, mjaffer@sen.parl.gc.ca, joyals@sen.parl.gc.ca, kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca, kinsen@sen.parl.gc.ca, langd@sen.parl.gc.ca, lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca, mannif@sen.parl.gc.ca, martin@sen.parl.gc.ca, mcintp@sen.parl.gc.ca, mccoye@sen.parl.gc.ca, merchp@sen.parl.gc.ca, meredd@sen.parl.gc.ca, mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca, mocklp@sen.parl.gc.ca, moorew@sen.parl.gc.ca, munsoj@sen.parl.gc.ca, mcgeed@sen.parl.gc.ca, ngoth@sen.parl.gc.ca, neufer@sen.parl.gc.ca, nolinp@sen.parl.gc.ca, ogilvk@sen.parl.gc.ca, olived@sen.parl.gc.ca, patted@sen.parl.gc.ca, plettd@sen.parl.gc.ca, rainen@sen.parl.gc.ca, poirir@sen.parl.gc.ca, ringup@sen.parl.gc.ca, rivarm@sen.parl.gc.ca, jcrivest@sen.parl.gc.ca, runcib@sen.parl.gc.ca, kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca, seidmj@sen.parl.gc.ca, setha@sen.parl.gc.ca, sibnic@sen.parl.gc.ca, smithd@sen.parl.gc.ca, smithlw@sen.parl.gc.ca, stewac@sen.parl.gc.ca, stratt@sen.parl.gc.ca, tardic@sen.parl.gc.ca, tkachd@sen.parl.gc.ca, ungerbe@sen.parl.gc.ca, vernej@sen.parl.gc.ca, wallinp@sen.parl.gc.ca, wallaj@sen.parl.gc.ca, wattc@sen.parl.gc.ca, zimmer@sen.parl.gc.ca, whitev@sen.parl.gc.camaltag@sen.parl.gc.ca, andrer@sen.parl.gc.ca, atauls@sen.parl.gc.ca, bakerg@sen.parl.gc.ca, belled@sen.parl.gc.ca, boisvp@sen.parl.gc.ca, braled@sen.parl.gc.ca, brazep@sen.parl.gc.ca, brownb@sen.parl.gc.ca, buthjo@sen.parl.gc.ca, callbc@sen.parl.gc.ca, campbel@sen.parl.gc.ca, carigc@sen.parl.gc.ca, dawsod@sen.parl.gc.ca, champa@sen.parl.gc.ca, chapum@sen.parl.gc.ca, mercet@sen.parl.gc.ca, dallar@sen.parl.gc.ca, poulim@sen.parl.gc.ca, comeag@sen.parl.gc.ca, coolsa@sen.parl.gc.ca, cordyj@sen.parl.gc.ca, cowanj@sen.parl.gc.ca, dagenj@sen.parl.gc.ca, dayja@sen.parl.gc.ca, debanp@sen.parl.gc.ca, mikeduffy@sen.parl.gc.ca, eatonn@sen.parl.gc.ca, envert@sen.parl.gc.ca, finled@sen.parl.gc.ca, fortis@sen.parl.gc.ca, frasej@sen.parl.gc.ca, harbm@sen.parl.gc.ca, hervic@sen.parl.gc.ca, lacomd@sen.parl.gc.ca, hublee@sen.parl.gc.ca, mjaffer@sen.parl.gc.ca, joyals@sen.parl.gc.ca, kennyco@sen.parl.gc.ca, kinsen@sen.parl.gc.ca, langd@sen.parl.gc.ca, lebrem@sen.parl.gc.ca, mannif@sen.parl.gc.ca, martin@sen.parl.gc.ca, mcintp@sen.parl.gc.ca, mccoye@sen.parl.gc.ca, merchp@sen.parl.gc.ca, meredd@sen.parl.gc.ca, mitchg@sen.parl.gc.ca, mocklp@sen.parl.gc.ca, moorew@sen.parl.gc.ca, munsoj@sen.parl.gc.ca, mcgeed@sen.parl.gc.ca, ngoth@sen.parl.gc.ca, neufer@sen.parl.gc.ca, nolinp@sen.parl.gc.ca, ogilvk@sen.parl.gc.ca, olived@sen.parl.gc.ca, patted@sen.parl.gc.ca, plettd@sen.parl.gc.ca, rainen@sen.parl.gc.ca, poirir@sen.parl.gc.ca, ringup@sen.parl.gc.ca, rivarm@sen.parl.gc.ca, jcrivest@sen.parl.gc.ca, runcib@sen.parl.gc.ca, kfl@sen.parl.gc.ca, seidmj@sen.parl.gc.ca, setha@sen.parl.gc.ca, sibnic@sen.parl.gc.ca, smithd@sen.parl.gc.ca, smithlw@sen.parl.gc.ca, stewac@sen.parl.gc.ca, stratt@sen.parl.gc.ca, tardic@sen.parl.gc.ca, tkachd@sen.parl.gc.ca, ungerbe@sen.parl.gc.ca, vernej@sen.parl.gc.ca, wallinp@sen.parl.gc.ca, wallaj@sen.parl.gc.ca, wattc@sen.parl.gc.ca, zimmer@sen.parl.gc.ca, whitev@sen.parl.gc.ca, maltag@sen.parl.gc.ca,