Editing Filibuster (section)

===Canada===

====Federal====
A dramatic example of filibustering in the [[House of Commons of Canada]] took place between Thursday June 23, 2011 and Saturday June 25, 2011. In an attempt to prevent the passing of Bill C-6, which would have legislated the imposing of a four-year contract and pay conditions on the locked out [[Canada Post]] workers, the [[New Democratic Party]] (NDP) led a filibustering session which lasted for fifty-eight hours. The NDP argued that the legislation in its then form undermined collective bargaining. Specifically, the NDP opposed the salary provisions and the form of binding arbitration outlined in the bill.<ref name="CBC">{{Cite news |date=June 25, 2011 |title=Canada Post back-to-work bill passes key vote |publisher=CBC |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-post-back-to-work-bill-clears-house-1.1053744?ref=rss |url-status=live |access-date=June 25, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110626185933/http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/06/25/canada-post.html?ref=rss |archive-date=June 26, 2011}}</ref>

The House was supposed to break for the summer on June 23 but remained open in an extended session due to the filibuster. The 103 NDP MPs had been taking it in turn to deliver 20-minute speeches, plus 10 minutes of questions and comments, to delay the passing of the bill. MPs are allowed to give such speeches each time a vote takes place, and many votes were needed before the bill could be passed. As the [[Conservative Party of Canada]] held a majority in the House, the bill passed.<ref name="CBC" /><ref>{{Cite web |date=June 24, 2011 |title=John Ivison: Time stands still in the House of Commons as NDP filibuster drags on |url=http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/24/john-ivison-time-stands-still-in-the-house-of-commons-as-ndp-filibuster-drags-on/ |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130129151106/http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/24/john-ivison-time-stands-still-in-the-house-of-commons-as-ndp-filibuster-drags-on/ |archive-date=January 29, 2013 |website=National Post}}</ref> This was the longest filibuster since the 1999 [[Reform Party of Canada]] filibuster, on native treaty issues in [[British Columbia]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=How much will the NDP filibuster cost taxpayers? |url=http://politics.canada.com/2011/06/ndp-filibuster-cost-canadians/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110629101140/http://politics.canada.com/2011/06/ndp-filibuster-cost-canadians/ |archive-date=June 29, 2011 |website=Canada.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |date=June 24, 2011 |title=Marathon Canada Post debate continues on Hill |work=Vancouver Sun |url=http://www.vancouversun.com/news/canada/Marathon+Canada+Post+debate+continues+Hill/4999680/story.html |url-status=live |access-date=June 26, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110628214546/http://www.vancouversun.com/news/canada/Marathon+Canada+Post+debate+continues+Hill/4999680/story.html |archive-date=June 28, 2011}}</ref>

Former Conservative [[House of Commons of Canada|Member of Parliament]] [[Tom Lukiwski]] was known for his ability to stall [[Standing committee (Canada)|Parliamentary Committee]] business by filibustering.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Alexander Panetta |date=2008-04-03 |title=Tory's loose lips an asset – until now |publisher=The Canadian Press |location=Toronto |url=https://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/409983 |url-status=live |access-date=2010-02-13 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110426071116/http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/409983 |archive-date=2011-04-26}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Catherine Clark |first=Tom Lukiwski |date=July 27, 2009 |title='Beyond Politics' interview (at 19:11) |url=http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&lang=e&clipID=2996 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720112642/http://www.cpac.ca/forms/index.asp?dsp=template&act=view3&pagetype=vod&lang=e&clipID=2996 |archive-date=July 20, 2011 |access-date=February 14, 2010 |publisher=CPAC}}</ref> One such example occurred on October 26, 2006, when he spoke for almost 120 minutes to prevent the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development from studying a [[private member's bill]] to implement the [[Kyoto Accord]].<ref>{{Cite news |date=2006-10-26 |title=Parties trade blame for House logjam |publisher=The Canadian Press |location=Toronto |url=https://www.thestar.com/article/111918 |access-date=2010-02-13 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110606044507/http://www.thestar.com/article/111918 |archive-date=2011-06-06}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=October 26, 2006 |title=Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development |url=http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=2440684&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=39&Ses=1#Int-1732248 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160108130652/http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=e&Mode=1&Parl=39&Ses=1&DocId=2440684#Int-1732248 |archive-date=2016-01-08 |access-date=2010-02-13 |publisher=Parliament of Canada}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Mike De Souza |title=Tories accused of stalling their own green agenda |url=http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=963fa80f-2996-46c4-8696-6df2034365f8&sponsor= |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604123717/http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=963fa80f-2996-46c4-8696-6df2034365f8&sponsor= |archive-date=2011-06-04 |access-date=2010-02-13 |publisher=www.canada.com}}</ref> He also spoke for about 6 hours on February 5, 2008, and February 7, 2008, at the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs meetings to block inquiry into allegations that the Conservative Party [[In and Out scandal|spent more than the maximum allowable campaign limits]] during the [[2006 Canadian federal election]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Angry chairman suspends session |url=http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=04f4ea3b-6cdd-4cca-8aba-78710c4a8733 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604123721/http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/news/story.html?id=04f4ea3b-6cdd-4cca-8aba-78710c4a8733 |archive-date=2011-06-04 |access-date=2010-02-13 |publisher=www.canada.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Tories accused of stalling ad scheme review |url=http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=90e06005-f60c-4f46-b668-6015e7fffebc |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110604123728/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=90e06005-f60c-4f46-b668-6015e7fffebc |archive-date=2011-06-04 |access-date=2010-02-13 |publisher=www.canada.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=O'Malley |first=Kady |date=2008-02-05 |title=Filibuster ahoy! Liveblogging the Procedure and House Affairs Committee for as long as it takes... |url=https://www.macleans.ca/general/filibuster-ahoy-liveblogging-the-procedure-and-house-affairs-committee-for-as-long-as-it-takes-from-the-archives/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141003092908/https://www.macleans.ca/general/filibuster-ahoy-liveblogging-the-procedure-and-house-affairs-committee-for-as-long-as-it-takes-from-the-archives/ |archive-date=2014-10-03 |access-date=2023-01-18 |publisher=www.Macleans.ca}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=O'Malley |first=Kady |date=2008-02-07 |title=Liveblogging PROC: We'll stop blogging when he stops talking – the return of the killer filibuster (From the archives) |url=https://www.macleans.ca/general/liveblogging-proc-well-stop-blogging-when-he-stops-talking-the-return-of-the-killer-filibuster-from-the-archives/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211205030153/https://www.macleans.ca/general/liveblogging-proc-well-stop-blogging-when-he-stops-talking-the-return-of-the-killer-filibuster-from-the-archives/ |archive-date=2021-12-05 |access-date=2021-12-05 |publisher=www.Macleans.ca}}</ref>

Another example of filibuster in Canada federally came in early 2014 when NDP MP and Deputy Leader [[David Christopherson]] filibustered the government's bill C-23, the Fair Elections Act at the Procedure and House Affairs Committee.<ref>{{Cite web |title=House of Commons Committees – PROC (41-2) – Minutes of Proceedings – Number 016 |url=http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=6427238&Language=E&Mode=1 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924122839/http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=6427238&Language=E&Mode=1 |archive-date=24 September 2015 |access-date=June 15, 2016}}</ref> His filibuster lasted several meetings, in the last of which he spoke for over 8 hours.  It was done to support his own motion to hold cross-country hearings on the bill so that MPs could hear what the Canadian public thought of the bill.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Stone |first=Laura |title=The art of the filibuster: preparation, focus, and a hardy bladder |url=http://globalnews.ca/news/1190246/the-art-of-the-filibuster-preparation-focus-and-a-hardy-bladder/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304060224/http://globalnews.ca/news/1190246/the-art-of-the-filibuster-preparation-focus-and-a-hardy-bladder/ |archive-date=March 4, 2016 |access-date=June 15, 2016}}</ref> In the end, given that the Conservative government had a majority at committee, his motion was defeated and the bill passed — though with some significant amendments.<ref>{{Cite news |date=May 13, 2014 |title=Conservatives pass Fair Elections Act |work=Toronto Star |url=https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/05/13/conservatives_pass_fair_elections_act.html |url-status=live |access-date=June 15, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160810114537/https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/05/13/conservatives_pass_fair_elections_act.html |archive-date=August 10, 2016}}</ref>

In the spring of 2017 Conservative and NDP Opposition MPs united to filibuster a motion from Government House Leader [[Bardish Chagger]], arguing it was an attempt by the [[Liberal Party of Canada|Liberal]] government to limit the ability of opposition parties to hold the government to account.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Zimonjic |first1=Peter |last2=Van Dusen |first2=Julie |date=Apr 2, 2017 |title=Committee filibuster over changes to House of Commons rules to resume Monday, opposition MPs say |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/house-procedure-reid-christopherson-1.4050987 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220807162536/https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/house-procedure-reid-christopherson-1.4050987 |archive-date=August 7, 2022 |access-date=August 12, 2022 |website=CBC News}}</ref> David Christopherson was again one of the leaders in this filibuster along with Conservative [[Scott Reid (politician)|Scott Reid]]. Several other opposition MPs made significant contributions to the filibuster, including Conservatives [[Blake Richards]], [[John Nater]], and [[Jamie Schmale]]. The filibuster lasted from March 21 until May 2, when the governing Liberals agreed to drop the most controversial elements of their proposal.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Bryden |first=Joan |date=April 30, 2017 |title=Government drops most contentious proposals for reforming House of Commons rules |url=https://www.macleans.ca/politics/government-drops-most-contentious-proposals-for-reforming-house-of-commons-rules/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220128174309/https://www.macleans.ca/politics/government-drops-most-contentious-proposals-for-reforming-house-of-commons-rules/ |archive-date=January 28, 2022 |access-date=January 28, 2022 |agency=The Canadian Press}}</ref>

====Provincial====

=====Newfoundland and Labrador=====

An ironic example of filibustering occurred when the [[Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador]] reportedly had "nothing else to do in the [[Newfoundland and Labrador House of Assembly|House of Assembly]]" and debated between only themselves about their own budget after both the Conservative and NDP party indicated either their support for the bill or intent to vote.<ref>{{Cite web |last=McLeod |first=James |date=March 14, 2017 |title=Liberal government filibusters its own budget debate |url=https://www.thetelegram.com/news/local/2017/3/14/liberal-government-filibusters-its-own-budget-debate.amp.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170315024711/http://www.thetelegram.com/news/local/2017/3/14/liberal-government-filibusters-its-own-budget-debate.amp.html |archive-date=March 15, 2017 |access-date=November 5, 2017 |website=The Telegram}}</ref>

The [[Legislative Assembly of Ontario|Legislature]] of the [[Ontario|Province of Ontario]] has witnessed several significant filibusters,<ref name="cpsa-acsp.ca">{{Cite web |title=Obstruction in the Ontario Legislature: The struggle for power between the government and the opposition |url=http://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2006/Locke.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130307231612/http://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2006/Locke.pdf |archive-date=2013-03-07 |access-date=2012-08-07}}</ref> although two are notable for the unusual manner by which they were undertaken.<ref>{{Cite web |title=On Filibusters |url=http://thoughtundermined.com/2011/01/26/on-filibusters/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120803022656/http://thoughtundermined.com/2011/01/26/on-filibusters/ |archive-date=2012-08-03 |access-date=2012-08-07}}</ref> The first was an effort on May 6, 1991, by [[Mike Harris]] — later premier but then leader of the opposition [[Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario|Progressive Conservatives]] — to derail the implementation of the budget tabled by the [[Ontario New Democratic Party|NDP]] government under premier [[Bob Rae]]. The tactic involved the introduction of Bill 95 (''a.k.a.'' Zebra Mussel Act), the title of which contained the names of every lake, river and stream in the province.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Hansard Transcripts 1991-May-06 ¦ Legislative Assembly of Ontario |date=May 6, 1991 |url=https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/house-documents/parliament-35/session-1/1991-05-06/hansard#PARA385 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220830173957/https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/house-documents/parliament-35/session-1/1991-05-06/hansard#PARA385 |archive-date=2022-08-30 |access-date=2022-06-03}}</ref> Between the reading of the title by the proposing [[Member of Provincial Parliament (Ontario)|MPP]], and the subsequent obligatory reading of the title by the clerk of the chamber, this filibuster occupied the entirety of the day's session until adjournment. To prevent this particular tactic from being used again, changes were eventually made to the [[Parliamentary procedure|Standing Orders]] to limit the time allocated each day to the introduction of bills to 30 minutes.<ref name="cpsa-acsp.ca" />

A second high-profile and uniquely implemented filibuster in the [[Legislative Assembly of Ontario|Ontario Legislature]] occurred in April 1997, where the [[Ontario New Democratic Party]], then in opposition, tried to prevent the governing [[Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario|Progressive Conservatives']] [[Common Sense Revolution#Bill 103|Bill 103]] from taking effect. To protest the Tory government's legislation that would [[Amalgamation (politics)|amalgamate]] the municipalities of [[Metro Toronto]] into the "megacity" of [[Toronto]], the small NDP caucus introduced 11,500 [[Bill (proposed law)|amendments]] to the megacity bill, created on computers with [[mail merge]] functionality. Each amendment would name a street in the proposed city, and provide that public hearings be held in the megacity with residents of the street invited to participate. The [[Ontario Liberal Party]] also joined the filibuster with a smaller series of amendments; a typical Liberal amendment would give a historical designation to a named street. The NDP then added another series of over 700 amendments, each proposing a different date for the bill to come into force.

The filibuster began on April 2 with the Abbeywood Trail amendment<ref>{{Cite web |title=Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Hansard. Wednesday, 2 April 1997, volume B |url=http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-02&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=/house-proceedings/transcripts/files_html/1997-04-02_L176b.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170707213246/http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-02&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-02_L176b.htm |archive-date=2017-07-07 |access-date=2010-12-24 |publisher=Ontla.on.ca |language=fr}}</ref> and occupied the legislature day and night, the members alternating in shifts. On April 4, exhausted and often sleepy government members inadvertently let one of the NDP amendments pass, and the handful of residents of Cafon Court in [[Etobicoke, Ontario|Etobicoke]] were granted the right to a public consultation on the bill, although the government subsequently nullified this with an amendment of its own.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Hansard. Friday, 4 April 1997, volume H |url=http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-04&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-04_L176h.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611084941/http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-04&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-04_L176h.htm |archive-date=2011-06-11 |access-date=2010-12-24 |publisher=Ontla.on.ca}}</ref> On April 6, with the alphabetical list of streets barely into the Es, [[Speaker (politics)|Speaker]] [[Chris Stockwell]] ruled that there was no need for the 220 words identical in each amendment to be read aloud each time, only the street name.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Hansard. Sunday, 6 April 1997, volume N |url=http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-06&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-06_L176n.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611085021/http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-06&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-06_L176n.htm |archive-date=2011-06-11 |access-date=2010-12-24 |publisher=Ontla.on.ca}}</ref> With a vote still needed on each amendment, Zorra Street was not reached until April 8.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Hansard. Tuesday, 8 April 1997, volume S |url=http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-08&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-08_L176s.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611085115/http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-08&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-08_L176s.htm |archive-date=2011-06-11 |access-date=2010-12-24 |publisher=Ontla.on.ca}}</ref> The Liberal amendments were then voted down one by one, eventually using a similar abbreviated process, and the filibuster finally ended on April 11.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Hansard. Friday, 11 April 1997, volume AE |url=http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-11&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-11_L176zae.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110611085145/http://www.ontla.on.ca/web/house-proceedings/house_detail.do?locale=en&Date=1997-04-11&Parl=36&Sess=1&detailPage=%2Fhouse-proceedings%2Ftranscripts%2Ffiles_html%2F1997-04-11_L176zae.htm |archive-date=2011-06-11 |access-date=2010-12-24 |publisher=Ontla.on.ca}}</ref>