Please withdraw proposed bill
Dear Mr. MacGregor,
Having read your private members bill and having followed the debate I have to conclude that no matter how well intentioned your motivation, the result is a very poorly cobbled mess.
It is irresponsible to the extreme to not define the terms you are espousing. Every act has a preamble which either defines the terms within it or references other acts for definition. I don’t see this occurring here.
As an example, what if a future government viewed union activity as a violation of labour rights? According to your vague terms your act could be used to divest investment from firms that have unions. I have some limited experience in directly dealing with labour rights and you have to be very careful when constructing contracts that there aren’t unintended consequences. I presume you believe that by including the phrase “labour…rights” that you have precluded such an interpretation. You would be wrong because this isn’t linked to any other legislation that defines these rights you are alluding to.
I could argue similarly for both “human and environmental” rights.
This bill, no matter how well intentioned, will allow governments, most likely not NDP, a back-door access to the operation of the fund. I believe that the existing phrase of “policies, standards and procedures that a person of ordinary prudence” covers your concerns making your flawed bill redundant.
Please withdraw it.
Regards, a concerned constituent,
John Bradbury,
Cowichan Bay
