For those who are not Harry Potter fans, parseltongue is a language spoken by serpents or snakes.  You can read more about it here or you can read the books or watch the movies.   Just like the fictional world of Harry Potter, statutes and regulations are a forked tongue language that looks like English but is NOT.  It was developed to govern the fictional realm upon which the state resides and for some reason people have fallen for its spell.  Because of this spell, people act out the fictional realm within this physical world, a place where it does not belong.

source:  www.express.co.uk

As with martial arts, lets start slowly and work on a piece of legislation that has minimal risk, the Statistics Act passed by the Canadian government.  For people who live in other jurisdictions, feel free to follow along and then see if you can apply it to where you live.  This is a tough exercise but I encourage everyone to participate as there is a very important point I want to make at the end.  Computer Programmers are going to have a hay day with this!  

To follow along you will need a couple documents.

• Statistics Act of Canada
• Interpretation Act of Canada

Important note:  When deconstructing legislation, we cannot read it like a book.  This is not an English language, it is a language all on it's own.  Assumptions on how words are defined can really trip you up.  So please don't assume you know what the document says.  That is how they catch us all.  So this exercise is to figure out the definition of all the words within the document.  It works much like how variables in computer programs work.

Deconstructing Legislation & Regulations

When we look at the Statistics Act, you will notice that each section has a number.  This helps us divide up the document into sections which is important.  Some sections have more numbers in brackets, these are called sub-sections.  

Step 1:  Check to see if words are defined within the section you are reading.

If you find a definition subsection, then the words that are defined in that subsection only apply in the section and cannot be used elsewhere in the document.  Once you leave that section and move onto another section, then any words that were defined in that subsection do not apply.  Clear as mud right!  Here is an example from section 17 of the Interpretation Act of Canada:

What this means is that within section 17, if you see the words 'carrier' or 'public utility', this is the definition.  However, outside section 17 if you see these words, you cannot use this definition.  To find the definition of those words you would need to move onto the next step.

Step 2:  Check the definition section of the Act.

Each act has a definition section that defines the words that will apply to the act ... unless the word is re-defined in a section else where.  The Income Tax Act is really good at doing this, so reader beware.  In the Statistics Act, the definition section is found near the top of the document.  In some of the other more confusing acts, the definition section is found near the end of the document.  Clear as fog during a snow storm at night with no moon, right?  Here is the definition section of the Interpretation Act of Canada:

As we can see, not many words are defined here.  So is that it?  No.  If a word that we are reading within the act does not show up in the section of the act or the definition section, then the next step is to see if the word is defined in the Interpretation Act.  

Step 3:  Look up the word in the Interpretation Act.

The Interpretation Act is designed to define words that then apply to all statutes and regulations unless redefined in the act or section within the act.  Be careful as the Interpretation Act of a province often defines works by linking itself to the federal Interpretation Act.  So now they cross jurisdictions as well.  It is within this federal act we will find the word 'person' and 'Canada' defined.  But we have to look towards the bottom of the document to find the definition section.  This act is an interesting read but we still have to be careful as the words still may not mean what we think they mean.  If we cannot find the word within the act or Interpretation Act, then we need to move to Step 4.

Step 4:  Canadian Law Dictionary

I've used the Canadian Law Dictionary 5th Edition for years, but technically what the dictionary author did was dig through thousands of president setting court cases to see how the courts interpreted the word and ruled on its definition.  Because most western country's function on a common law principle, what that means is that the courts make rulings which then creates 'law'.  Statutes and regulations are a source of law, but not until the courts make their rulings does it become 'law' ... for that jurisdiction.  Yes, at times these rulings can be argued in other jurisdictions, but I won't go there today.  If you are really eager to learn, Canada has most of their court rulings on line now, searchable through a database.  A lot can be learned by doing key word searches and reading Supreme Court Rulings.  You can access that database through www.canlii.org!  Courts rule on the definition of words and that is how these words must be interpreted.  The problem is that the courts have many definitions.  In the US alone, the word person has hundreds upon hundreds of different definitions.  

 "When words lose their meaning, people lose their freedom." -  Confucius 

Step 5:  Blacks Law Dictionary

While I recognize that there is some controversy regarding this dictionary, it is used by some lawyers.  So I'm going to add it to this list as well.  Some other people use Ballantines or even Bouviers legal dictionaries.  It would depend on the type of research or work that you are doing and in which jurisdiction you are in as well.  But if you cannot find the word you are looking for here, then Step 6 is next.

Step 6:  English Dictionary

Yes, you made it through the gantlet and found a word that has not been changed by the legal system.  Bravo!  But hold on one moment.  The English language has changed for hundreds upon hundreds of years.  Even today with over a million words within the dictionary, which one do we use?  This is where context is important but also the time period of the document that you are reading.  You cannot use a 2017 definition of a word when you are reading text that was written in 1813.  That is where some of the older dictionaries and etymology dictionary's come in.  

Congratulations, you figured out what the word means.  Now you can go through that whole process for the next word.  Wonder why lawyers charge $500/hr?

Who in their right mind is willing to go through all that work?  I hear you.  I did this process for years as I studied the legal system in order to protect my rights when I was a citizen and subject to it all.  There are books and many more things to learn if you want to become proficient at deconstructing legislation.  But for this exercise you have enough information to complete this task.  So here is the exercise:

A representative of Statistics Canada is knocking on your door making demands that you fill out the census form.  The form has all kinds of private and confidential information that you do not want to give to the government or the US military contractors who were contracted to compile the information.  You have not removed yourself from the feudal tenure of the Crown, so what can you do?  Read through the Statistics Act and see if there is a way to respond to the representative while protecting your right to privacy.

Pause here for 10 - 15 minutes to give you enough time to work through the exercise.

Did you figure out how to protect your privacy?  I'll share what I learned in a moment.  The more important question is:  

How did you feel going through that exercise?

I've done this exercise many times in my workshops.  Feelings that I heard from people run from confused, tired, frustrated, angry, lost, overwhelmed, etc.  I spent years doing this work in order to protect myself from a government gone rogue.  I found that I was spending a great deal of time working through this shit and it consumed my life.  It drained me of energy, joy and even hope.  That is when I realized that statutes and regulations are dead and act very much like dementors in the Harry Potter series of books.  

Statutes and regulations suck the life out of you.  They are designed for fictional constructs, not Spiritual beings.  You will not find words like love, compassion, forgiveness, kindness or anything like that within their pages.  That is when I discovered that these documents were just another trap to confuse and enslave people.  At that point I stopped reading them and looked for other ways to find freedom.  

But for those who are still in the system, here is what I found while I deconstructed the legislation and how I shared it with Statistics Canada people.  These are excerpts from the actual letters I wrote to the government regarding their threats in 2006.  I've edited them to make them more brief and to fix errors.  These were written long ago, so I've learned much since then and made lots of mistakes back then too.  I've also combined two letters together for brevity as well.  

____________________________________________________

  The Statistics Act reads:  

8. The Minister may, by order, authorize the obtaining, for a particular purpose, of information, other than information for a census of population or agriculture, on a voluntary basis, [underline added by me to highlight key areas] but where such information is requested section 31 does not apply in respect of a refusal or neglect to furnish the information. 

Since I could not find any definition of the term “census” or “census of population” in the Statistics Act or in the Interpretation Act or in the Canadian Law dictionary, I had to go to the Blacks law dictionary eighth edition for a definition of “census”.

Census.  The official counting of people [underline added by me to highlight key areas] to compile social and economic data for the political subdivision to which the people belong.

It is my understanding based on the Statistics Act that the only information that is required is the census of population which is the count of people in the residence, which is four (4).  The other information such as name, birthday, marital status, etc is voluntary; meaning disclosure of the information is voluntary.  At no point in the Statistics Act does it say anywhere that the act is going to abrogate, abridge or infringe on my rights in order to collect that information or define the word census to include the information found on these forms.

I’ll also add that the Statistics Act defines a respondent as:  

“respondent” means a person in respect of whom or in respect of whose activities any report or information is sought or provided pursuant to this Act.  

The Interpretation Act defines a person as:

“person”, or any word or expression descriptive of a person, includes a corporation;

Blacks law dictionary defines the word includes as:

Include, vb. To contain as a part of something.

This means that the Interpretation Act is restricting the meaning of the word person to only include a corporation as the word include(s) is restrictive (to contain) rather than adding to the meaning of the word.  As the word person means corporation that would mean the word respondent means corporation.  As I’m not a corporation, I am not legally obligated to follow the requirements that a respondent would have within the Statistics Act.     

What I’m looking for from you is a very specific clarification on the following statements by showing me specific sections of legislation that support your position that:     
  

• A “Natural Person” and / or “Individual” as defined in the Canadian Law Dictionary (Fifth Edition) is required by the Statistics Act to provide his or her name, address, phone number, birth date, sex, marital status and relationship with others in the household.     
• That the definition of “Census” or “Census of Population” is defined to include the count of population and name, address, phone number, birth date, sex, relationships with others in the household. 
• That the definition of “Census” or “Census of Population” includes the short form or the long form and the entire information requested on these forms are included in this definition and that this information is not voluntary. 
• That a “Person”, as defined by the Interpretation Act, is in fact not only a corporation (Artificial Person) but is also a “Natural Person” and / or an “Individual”.     
• Should you find that the definition of a “Person” and a “Natural Person” or “Individual” is one in the same; then I would like to know where in the Statistics Act it states that it is acting notwithstanding the Canadian Bill of Rights and that my right to privacy is not being protected in the act and that there is a sunset clause in the Statistics Act?      
• That my personal information is protected and not disclosed in whole or in part to the courts, police officers, businesses, corporations, other government agencies or entities and that the information is only used for the specific purposes in which it was collected (of which I’m not entirely clear what those purposes are).     
• That corporations like Lockheed Martin and Compusearch do not have access to my data and that there is zero risk of my data ending up in data mining lists for businesses or in US databases as a result of the Patriot Act.     

If you’re not aware of the terms “Natural Person”, “Individual”, “Artificial Person” or if you’re not aware of the rules of construction or how words are defined within government legislation then I suggest that you find some help in answering these questions as it is imperative that you understand these concepts to ensure that we both are talking the same language and that we don’t have any misunderstandings.  

______________________________________________

I never heard back from them and we have had zero problems with Statistics Canada ever since! 

Remember:  They are the ones making the claim that people must fill out the forms.  It is their duty to prove that claim.  Issuing threats is not proof but rather is coercion.  Put the burden on them!  You owe them nothing!  Learning the words also does not mean you have the language and knowledge of how their system works.  It is far more complicated than what I've shown here as well.  Yet another reason to get out. 

My spirit felt for years that the solution is simple.  This is not simple, so I felt that it is not the solution either.  But it helps to be aware of it all!