Premier Mum rams through new drinking and driving legislation
Premier Mum--that's what many are starting to call Alberta Premier Alison Redford. Last night, the controversial Bill 26 ("The 0.05") passed in the legislature 30-7.
First off, only 37 MLAs voted? Where were the other 50 or so? Not only that, but it's well known that the bill was hurried through with little debate and consultation. And now we learn that is was rammed through simply because Premier Mum wanted it in place before Christmas.
But why, when Solicitor General Jonathan Denis says although the bill passed, the law won't be in place until six months from now?
My only guess as to this "logic" is that Mum wanted to confuse Albertans into thinking that the 0.05 level is actually the law this Christmas season and not get behind the wheel after a drink or two.
What irks me is that she made no mention of this during her leadership campaign, on top with her other many flip flops.
Like the long gun registry, it's one of those unnecessary, reactionary laws used by politicians often after a tragedy to show that they're doing something constructive, but where our basic rights are taken away.
Now, I'm not advocating that it's okay to drink and drive, but in this case, the federal government mandates the limit and one's rights here, not the provinces. If provinces like BC and Alberta want to change the limit, then they should petition their federal MPs to introduce such legislation.
But I guess Premier Mum knows better.
Posts
8 comments:
Red rammed it thru with 'closure',
but there are some unhappy campers in her party.
This should be an election issue.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/money/Redford+drunk+driving+bill+runs+into+hiccups/5822666/story.html
This would be a political hot potato and nobody in their right mind would make this a election issue. If you made this a election issue it could be twisted around to look like you were for impaired driving, and nobody wants that.
Go after the RED MOM on other things and let the courts handle this, its bound to put down in the courts in the near future.
And also take a much more critical look at MADD. I used to support them, but like many other advocacy groups, they have blinders on and don't see the ramifications of their actions.
It is an on-going problem, a group is formed to tackle the problem. They solve it or come to solving it, and then look around for the next issue rather than disbanding and going home. MADD did great work in promoting awareness of the consequences of excessive drinking and driving, and they help out at check stops. But with that done, what's next? Premier Mum and her 0.05.
We have the same .05 law in Manitoba. It's the typical ploy by politicians to make it look like they did something while actually not addressing the problem at all. The problem is DRUNK drivers killing people, not people who are responsible and stop at one or two drinks. All this does is criminalize the people who are responsible, and does nothing to further penalize people who drive blitzed.
ride programs and other drinking and driving regulations are being used to control the people while going about their lawful travels. they are being used for something other than deterring impaired driving. when they first started in ontario the court struck them down but the socialists continued and pushed higher and finally got the scoc to ok stopping people without cause. by making it against the law to refuse to blow they created a crime without commiting one.
I do not like the "Premier Mum" monniker. It's not original. Just copying Premier Dad for Dalton. And the word mum (or mom) just does not evoke anything other than warm fuzzy feelings.
I think we should use "Nanny Redford" instead.
Last time I was stopped in a ride program in Ontario they checked if I was drinking and found I wasn't then another officer stood in front of my car for a second while the first one ran around and checked that I had my current sticker on my plate. Is that legal? They are using these ride programs now just for a fishing expedition to look for anything else they can get you on.
Punishing people for not breaking the law, that's new!
This law is like ticketing drivers for doing 90 in a 100 zone because if they go just a bit faster they'll be speeding? Ican't get behind the logic because there is none. If they want the law .05 then make it .05 we don't need soft spots in the law to increase the work load for lawyers like Alison Redford.
-Joe Albertan
Post a Comment