Canadian Election 2006

[Ottawan]

So . . . . . what does everyone think of the result?

[LunarOrbit]

I'm glad the Conservatives only got a minority government... I feared a majority. I suspect they will act all innocent and harmless for the duration of their first term, win a majority for their second, and then we'll see the REAL conservatives in action.

I'll wait and see what happens before I get too critical of them, but I do not trust them.

[Ottawan]

I agree about them playing it low key but the way I see it is about 18 months of Harper then a new Liberal majority government under a new leader. This country is a sucker for Liberal governments!!

[snake river rufus]

I heard a bit about the election on the radio last night as I was going home. How do you see the new Prime Minister's vision of Canada in space for the future?

[DonPMitchell]

So are Canadian "conservatives" like Goldwater Republicans (economic conservatives) or more like Pat Robertson Republicans (religious nuts)?

[LunarOrbit]

I agree about them playing it low key but the way I see it is about 18 months of Harper then a new Liberal majority government under a new leader.

I hope so. Honestly, other than the mismanaged sponsorship fund I don't think the Liberals did a bad job. They gave us budget surpluses for a decade, the economy did fairly well, they helped win Quebec's 1995 referendum, and they kept us out of Iraq.

But I still suspect that the voters will re-elect the Conservatives if they don't make any big mistakes in their first term. They (the voters) won't have a reason to go back to the Liberals if the Conservatives don't stray too far from the path the Liberals had us on.

[LunarOrbit]

So are Canadian "conservatives" like Goldwater Republicans (economic conservatives) or more like Pat Robertson Republicans (religious nuts)?

Well, Canadian conservatives are closer to the center than American conservatives... but there definately is a religious element to the Conservative party. Legalized gay marriages, and other recent decisions by the Supreme Court that the Conservatives disagree with, would likely be struck down if the Conservatives had won a majority.

[LunarOrbit]

I heard a bit about the election on the radio last night as I was going home. How do you see the new Prime Minister's vision of Canada in space for the future?

If the current Conservatives are anything like the Brian Mulroney conservatives of the 1980's then the space program should be ok, but I'm not really sure because I've never heard Harper's stance on the space program. Harper might be getting his orders from Bush now, so maybe we will be joining you guys on the moon.

One of the (defeated) Liberal candidates in Quebec was Marc Garneau, Canada's first astronaut and the President of the Canadian Space Agency. He might do more good at the CSA than in Parliament so maybe it's good that he lost.

[Ottawan]

You'd better hope that Harpers's guys are nothing like Mulroney's . . . that guy was directly responsible for the destruction of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, which proceeded to give the Liberals free wins for the next 13 years. Plus, Mulroney gave us the "much loved" GST

I think Harper will try to distance himself from that legacy but I cannot bring myself to trust a Conservative majority government.

[LunarOrbit]

I'm too young to remember the all of the Mulroney years clearly (sorry, Ott ) but wasn't it his government that gave us the CSA in the first place? But yeah, towards the end Mulroney was not very popular, to say the least. Now the Conservatives are promising to lower the GST... whoopie! What a crock... in order to benefit from a lower GST you have to have money to spend.

[snake river rufus]

Well, Canadian conservatives are closer to the center than American conservatives... but there definitely is a religious element to the Conservative party. Legalized gay marriages, and other recent decisions by the Supreme Court that the Conservatives disagree with, would likely be struck down if the Conservatives had won a majority.

So your executive branch can supersede your judicial branch? Or are you saying that with a large majority that they might simply change the law of the land with out changing your constitution?

[LunarOrbit]

We have something called the "Notwithstanding clause" in our constitution which basically allows the government to overturn any decision made by the Supreme Court. I don't think it has ever been used (but I could be wrong) because it might have negative political consequences for the party that uses it. Harper denies any plans to use the notwithstanding clause to overturn the decision to allow gay marriages, but many suspect he will if his party has enough support.

During one of the debates before the election Paul Martin challenged Stephen Harper to remove the notwithstanding clause from the constitution if he won, and he would do the same if the Liberals won. Harper more or less brushed off the challenge.

[LunarOrbit]

Here's a page describing the Notwithstanding Clause in detail:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/bp194-e.htm

Section 33(1) of the Charter of Rights permits Parliament or a provincial legislature to adopt legislation to override section 2 of the Charter (containing such fundamental rights as freedom of expression, freedom of conscience, freedom of association and freedom of assembly) and sections 7-15 of the Charter (containing the right to life, liberty and security of the person, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention, a number of other legal rights, and the right to equality). Such a use of the notwithstanding power must be contained in an Act, and not subordinate legislation (regulations), and must be express rather than implied.

It sounds worse than the Patriot Act.

[Johno]

Sounds like the Liberal Party of Australia would fit into the Goldwater Republican mode - ironic, because they're anti-republican!

[snake river rufus]

Here's a page describing the Notwithstanding Clause in detail:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/bp194-e.htm

Section 33(1) of the Charter of Rights permits Parliament or a provincial legislature to adopt legislation to override section 2 of the Charter (containing such fundamental rights as freedom of expression, freedom of conscience, freedom of association and freedom of assembly) and sections 7-15 of the Charter (containing the right to life, liberty and security of the person, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention, a number of other legal rights, and the right to equality). Such a use of the notwithstanding power must be contained in an Act, and not subordinate legislation (regulations), and must be express rather than implied.

It sounds worse than the Patriot Act.

It sounds to me as if it were only intended to be used in extraordinary circumstances. If it is not commonly used ,,,,
Note to everyone; repeat after me
"Economic Conservatives are your friends"
"Economic Conservatives are your friends"