M-446 — January 30, 2008 — Mr. Martin (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca) — That, in the opinion of the House, subsection 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act should be deleted from the Act.
Should this ever come to a vote then section 13(1) is deleted from the act, and the Nazis run free, right?
Incorrect! M-446 is not a private member's bill; it's a private member's motion. The HOC explains how these work as follows:
Private Members’ motions are used to introduce a wide range of issues and are framed either as orders or resolutions, depending on their intent.  Motions attempting to make a declaration of opinion or purpose, without ordering or requiring a particular course of action, are considered resolutions.  Hence, such motions which simply suggest that the government initiate a certain measure are generally phrased as follows: “That, in the opinion of this House, the government should consider …”. The government is not bound to adopt a specific policy or course of action as a result of the adoption of such a resolution since the House is only stating an opinion or making a declaration of purpose. 
Or, as Ezra himself puts it:
...as a motion (as opposed to a bill), it is what lawyers might call obiter dicta -- a non-binding statement of opinion, not a change in the law. Martin's motion is a call for a Parliamentary rebuke of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
What M-446 will amount to should it pass, and this is all it will amount to should it pass, is a verbal spanking for the CHRC at the hands of Parliament.
Which puts the motion's abysmal level of support in a whole new light: a mere four MPs have indicated they will vote in favor of M-446 and, arguably, one of these is on the list because he was conned by a Nazi. Not only will Parliament not repeal Section 13(1), they are afraid to even say anything nasty about it.
Who's winning the debate, again?