It seems  I erred when I wrote the Senate may not introduce Bills.  It 'seems'  they may introduce Bills!  Here's a copy of the criteria -  taken from the Senate Fact Sheet - I found today.  I don't know how new this is.. this is the first time I've seen it during the 8 months I've been digging my way through the horrific maze of Government documents, whilst trying to find answers re:  "Our Laws"  etc..    In any event, let's take a look at the 'Steps the Senate or a Senator must follow'  .. and then address if they in 'fact' do follow the steps - and the 'Spirit Of The Law'. . (see Senate link at end of the post)

"Passing Bills in the Senate"

Passing bills in the Senate is similar to that in the House of Commons. There are five steps:

   1. First reading
      The bill is received, printed and circulated. This is an introductory proceeding without debate or vote.

   2. Second reading
      The principle of the bill is debated: Is the bill good policy?

   3. Committee stage
      Ministers, department officials, experts and members of the public who have an interest in the bill appear as witnesses before a Senate committee. Committee members then study the bill clause by clause. Amendments or changes to the bill may be proposed. In the final stage, the committee adopts a report on the bill, recommending to the Senate that it be accepted as is; that it be accepted with amendments; or that it be rejected.

   4. Report stage
      If the committee report recommends adopting the bill as is (i.e., with no amendments), there is no report stage in the Senate and the bill goes directly to third reading.  If, however, the report recommends amendments, the Senate must debate the report and either accept, amend or reject the amendments, in whole or in part.

   5. Third reading
      Final approval of the bill. Senators may propose further amendments at this stage. If the bill originated in the Senate, it is sent to the House of Commons, which will examine it through a similar three-reading process. If the bill originated in the House of Commons and was not amended in the Senate, it is now ready for Royal Assent. If the bill originated in the Commons and was amended in the Senate, a message about the amendments is sent to the Commons to ask for their agreement. The Commons and the Senate must agree on the exact contents of a bill before Royal Assent can be granted, making it law.

So, there you have it.

Let's address Steps  2 & 3.   Step 2. The principal of the bill is debated.  Is it a good Bill policy?   This part confuses me to no end - because,  it clearly states in our Statute of Law Making Regulations that  all Public Bills - must be with the public being 'provided' with  full and easy access to all Bills being introduced !   I believe it is the people's  right to discuss &/or  debate and decide the 'Principal of bills  and whether or not it is a good Bill policy -no?  After all - It is Our Lives - that will be affected and/or changed,  and it is our responsibility and right to decide whether or not - we  want the bloody thing to go any further - no?  Therefore - at the very least - Step 2..  warrants a discussion with our Senate.

Step 3:  This one is the big one:  The Committee Stage:  Notice - the part that says "...members of the public who have an interest in the bill appear as witnesses before a Senate Committee...",  who will study what they/we have to say... and they  may  -or- may not  propose amendments to the bill!    First of all - how many people do you know - who have had ANY opportunity to add their voice  to ANY bill - let alone a Senate bill  Committee ?   I repeat -  these Senators  are making decisions that  affect our lives!!  You know like the freaking illegal language laws!  What is this?  First we have to find out these bill introductions  are happening... and quite unlike the law demands... the people of Canada  are  NOT fully informed - not by a long shot..  and certainly is anything  but easy to access!   Add to that - if per chance by some fluke - we do find out - bills are being introduced and/or enacted  - we have to freaking go to Ottawa and what - plead our case for -or- against  these bills?  And leave it up to the individual Senators - who may or may not consider our concerns as valid?   (I've read some of the Senate transcripts - particularly when it comes to the ugly illegal language laws,  and believe me - it is clear that to 'some of our  'named, not elected Senators'  - our best interest - or the benefit to the public - seems to be the least of their priorities!)

So what - I repeat is going on here?   And how dare - these people take it upon themselves - to decide to create  new laws..  without the required - full knowledge and FULL Consent of the people of Canada!