An example: human rights bills are not laws as such. They are modifications of many other laws and regulatory guidelines. A bill consisting of a few dozen pages is really a far reaching modification. As for the effects, even experienced experts must rely on speculatio. Political warfare of this nature appears well beyond conservatives' competency having never found why underlying legislation was always irremediable. They are politically costly to discard, even with a majority. So they pass a few tax cuts and hand the credit card back along with the scaffold they let alone.

This, as the edit indicates, is a bill affectes the courts, regulators and vastly expanded discretion down to lower level bureaucrats or employers.  I believe it stands as bill c-63, The facile terms are not contentious but nobody will change a word of holy writ pertaining the holocaust.

Conservatives may disagree with the abuse of language, but they can't dislodge humpty dumpty words https://thefeebleclone.com/admin/index.php?process=Post&id=9 if they feel obliged to use them. They aren't words at all but what Stephen Coughlin https://unconstrainedanalytics.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/WARNING-ON-RACISM-131119-2.pdf calls attack narratives.  

 This tendency is all too evident in Canadia.  Every federal party holds in their founding documents the sinister platitude that diversity is our strength. 
Another exmaple: the conservatives never challenge the 1995 employment equity act. [For those not familiar with this 30 year old legislation, it mandates employers hire a portion of applicants members of the familiar victim groups. They must keep up-to date documenation of their efforts to 'represent' various groups, even to the point of offering raises and proportions to retain diversity hires. These efforts can be audited at the discretion of institutionally entrechned networks of petty tyrants.]


* Stephen Coughlin, who is a CIA expert in political warfare and subersion, provides a superb dissection of one "Racism" in the link above.