(Caps added)
Not:
Bill C - 484 passed Second Reading yesterday - 147 to 133.
Isn't Joanne's fault though, the single (1) story in the news today about C-484 (G&M) indeed suggested in its earliest versions that the Bill had gone through 2nd reading. They have since corrected their mistake.
So we are earlier along in the process than was reported and there is still time to contact that list of 20 Liberal assholes RT has conveniently compiled and give 'em heck.
There is also time for real journalists in the MSM get off their asses and report on this thing. One story?
UPDATE: One of my commentors suggests G&M got it right the first time.
The confusion here seems to be about what exactly a vote on "second reading" is. Here's a quick civics lesson to clear things up.
A bill is read in Parliament for the first time when it is introduced. There is no vote at first reading. The initial vote any bill faces is on having it read a second time (hence the vote being referred to as a vote on "second reading"). If the bill passes the vote on second reading it's sent to committee, which then reports on the bill. A "report stage" debate and vote follows. If the bill passes that vote, a motion is made to read the bill a third time. If the bill passes the vote at third reading, it is sent to the Senate.
In short, a vote on second reading is actually the first vote a bill faces. C-484 still has a committee to pass through in addition to two more votes in the House before it even makes its way to the Senate, where it would have to start the process all over again.
Also, keep in mind that the Justice committee can amend the bill during its deliberations. This gives MPs the opportunity to change the more controversial, seemingly anti-choice passages contained in C-484.
[...]
Probably a less confusing but correct title would be "Unborn-victims bill passes first VOTE in Commons".
Mea Culpa. But still two more VOTES to go.
