The Canadian Election

Great Debates
201

During the English language debate, the issue was touched on when Stephen Harper, attempting to explain when he might use the notwithstanding clause, mentioned he might use it to stop child porn. He didn’t explain why.

Anyway, last week Michael Briere pleaded guilty to the murder of Holly Jones, a 10-year-old girl he kidnapped, raped, sawed into pieces and disposed of in Etobicoke last year - just a few blocks from my house, actually. During his court statement he blamed child porn for driving him to do it.

Then, in a bizarre series of moves on Friday, the Conservative Party released, then recalled, then released again, and then recalled again a press release titled “Paul Martin Supports Child Porn?” I’m not making that up. The release hinted that Martin’s voting record suggested that he is not opposed to child porn. (Martin voted against a private member’s bill that would have banned almost anything that could be vaguely construed as child porn, including stuff that obviously isn’t.)

Anyway, the Conservatives did recall the release, but Harper refused to apologize or conduct any real damage control for what really is a pretty nasty, scurrilous insult, and what appeared to almost everyone, especially us here in Toronto, to be an attempt to capitalize on the Holly Jones tragedy. Harper went on to claim the Liberals have a poor record on child porn, although to be quite honest - and I’m a small-c conservative, remember - I cannot think of any objective reason to think that.

Unsurprisingly, the Conservatives have suddenly lost some of their lead in the race.

202

Tory press releases said that Martin “personally supported” child porn, and so did the entirety of the NDP. This on the grounds that they hadn’t voted for a Conservative (or probably Alliance, I guess) bill that would have closed the “loophole” in current child porn laws which don’t criminilize fiction, drawings, etc. I’d expect it wouldn’t be too hard to find links with more details on cbc or the globe and mail.

203

Thanks, guys. I remember seeing the headlines about Briere and thinking that the Tories couldn’t be stupid enough to try to link Martin’s position on an Opposition bill into support for a sadistic pædophilic murderer. Guess I was wrong.

204

Welcome to the SDMB! It can be quite a ride here, especially on the Great Debates forum, but I always find the postings interesting and informative - I’ve come to rely on the Dope as an alternative to the talking heads on tv.

Hope you have fun and stick around - best use of $15 going!

205

The same day that the National Post is predicting a Tory minority [see my previous post on p. 4], the Globe and Mail says that the Liberals have regained the lead overall, and particularly in Ontario:

Far as I can tell, it’s still anyone’s game because of the extremely volatile electorate. Every vote will count this time.

206

Imagine if you will, the focus possible if the NDP formed the opposition. Did you notice the focus on economic issues when the fiscal conservative sat across from the government? Think that kind of political shifting of the public consciousness might happen if social progressives sat in opposition? I do.

Right, because political parties dislike being in power. Those 100 odd seats (~33% of the House) really wouldn’t be needed next time they go for a mandate from the public.

207

Indeed. And every riding matters. For a change, I might not see election coverage starting with Peter Mansbridge saying “And now we welcome viewers in Saskatchewan and Alberta. And we can tell you this. There will be a _________ majority government.” Oh goody. Why don’t we just not bother counting up the votes out here, then?

Course, there was that court decision about election coverage starting before polls close out west. Does anyone know if CBC et al are broadcasting results nationwide the minute they start coming in?

208

The weird thing about it is that it showed incredibly bad political judgement. Attacks, even scurrilous ones, have been part of politics for a long time (even though this one is way over the line). But the thing is, whoever thought this could possibly work in the PC’s favor is an absolute political moron. The only people an ad like that would appeal to would be the christian right, which is already a total lock for the PCs. Everyone else was horrified. Stupid, stupid move. And also sleazy and unethical.

Still, I’m going to wind up holding my nose and voting conservative. The liberals really, really have to go. It’ll even be good for them to be out of power for a while - time to shake out and retire the field of old corrupt cronies that have been running Canada like their personal fiefdom for a long time. Maybe next time around, they’ll act like they are serving the people and not themselves.

So if the Liberals have to go, that leaves the NDP and the Conservatives. And frankly, I think the NDP are nuts. They’re out in Dennis Kucinich land when it comes to their policies. They are trade protectionists, which right there disqualifies them. Couple that with their reflexive anti-Americanism, and they’ll be an economic disaster.

In fact, the NDP want government to meddle in the economy like you wouldn’t believe. They want to institute new industrial policy. They want government to become ‘partners’ with trade unions. They want R&D grants for the auto industry (along with tariffs on auto imports). They want to implement closed shop rules and make it illegal for companies to hire replacement workers in the event of strikes. They want a ‘watchdog agency’ to limit foreign investment in Canada! Most countries actually seek out foreign investment. They want to ‘proactively protect’ our film and television industry. They want to institute steel tariffs to prevent the horror of Canadians having cheap steel dumped on them to build things with.

The NDP also want to protect the ‘family farm’ by offering special social programs that will supplement farm incomes in lean years and ‘protect’ against disasters and ‘adverse trade rules’ (i.e. farm subsidies).

And for assinine policies, you’d be hard pressed to match the NDP’s planned ban on genetically modified crops. Because when you want to be competitive, I guess it really helps if you prevent Canadian farmers from using modern technology. They’re going to need those subsidies.

And the list goes on. Those are just from my sampling of two of the eight ‘platform’ categories of the NDP. They are economically illiterate. Can’t vote for 'em. That pretty much leaves the Conservatives.

Actually, I wish the Rhino party was running. They had a sensible platform last time. For instance, they wanted to flatten the Rocky Mountains so that Alberta could get another 20 minutes of daylight. We need that kind of visionary yet sensible thinking in Canadian politics.

209

I’m not sure that would actually work, since they also promised to decrease the speed of light in order to ease traffic congestion in Vancouver. I think the two would cancel each other out, leaving Albertans still in the dark. :slight_smile:

210

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

I really see no good option. The Conservatives have too many social regressives for my liking and I suspect they’ll form an alliance with the separatists, which turns my stomach. We all know how well that worked out when Brian Mulroney tried it.

On the other hand, the Liberals have to go (and aren’t as socially progressive as they’d like you to believe.) The party needs new blood, which won’t happen if they aren’t punished for stealing all our money. The NDP would put half a million people out of work.

I gotta tell ya, Green almost had me this time.

I am considering joining the Conservatives to try to change them from the inside to a party I could get behind - a more libertarian conservative approach. Not too far, but we could use a more socially progressive conservatism. If that fails I’m gonna start a new party and you’re all welcome to join.

211

Don’t forget, there’s always the Marijuana Party. Oh, and the Libertarians managed to get registered this time as well.

212

Thanks for the welcome Northern Piper.

I am somewhat sorry I voted in the advance polls yesterday. However, even as I voted my conscience, I needed my Super Canadian Election Day Clothespin. ™

It was easier to be an idealist before I started to make a decent wage. I work in health care. (Registered Nurse) I now live in an underserviced area, but almost everywhere I have lived in this country (I’ve lived in 4 different provinces, and voted in three…) has had its share of under serviced, long wait lists, difficulty finding a family doctor…

I have NO FREAKING CLUE what I would do if I was suddenly health minister. (Not something likely to happen, but at least I admit I have no solutions)Im left-leaning in all social policies, etc, but on CBC radio on Sunday morning they were talking about Native-run free for service MRI clinic in Saskatoon. I really couldn’t argue with that clinic.

I make a good wage on paper but with student debt and other problems Im cash poor. I don’t want to pay higher taxes, but I appreciate the impact that social programs, breakfasts for kids, safe injection sites, etc have in saving money in the long run.

I thought Jack Layton was pushy and rude in the debates, although his statements and appearance were well polished.

Harper and his ilk frighten me for the usual reasons left leaning individuals dislike Reform/Alliance etc…

Paul Martins Liberals are corrupt. I could never trust someone who has been so Mad for Power as he as been for years.

If I voted next week on election day, I might have voted differently. But today the Globe and Mail reports the Liberals ahead 6% in polls, so maybe they don’t need my vote to stop the New Conservatives.

I voted with my conscience, not my T-4. But as a Mommiy with a baby and a profession I don’t have all the ideals anymore.

Damn growing up sucks.

213

Can you elaborate a bit on this one, Sam? I don’t understand what the NDP is pushing for, since the Canada Labour Code already allows the employer and the union to agree to union shop and closed shop clauses in a collective agreement:

214

We used to have a party like that - it was called the Progressive Conservative Party.

215

They’ve got me, even though their candidate in my riding is a 20 year old university student. I find myself quite shocked at the sensibleness of their platform – and when’s the last time you saw a Green Party platform that included reducing personal income tax? More than just being a ‘protest vote’, they’re someone I’d like to see get a voice in Canadian politics, even if I don’t agree with every thing in their policy book. Might smarten up the NDP some. :slight_smile:

216

From their platform:

217

Why is that something to get worked up about? All it means is that an NDP govt wouldn’t hire scabs. This surpises you? The next govt could repeal the rule, if they wanted.

218

Does ‘federal jurisdiction’ just mean federal employees? Or something more?

219

But that’s not a closed shop. A ban on replacement workers only has effect during a strike. A closed shop lasts as long as the collective agreement is in force, even if there’s no strike.

220

It’s more than just federal employees. It means all industries that are subject to federal labour laws, through section 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

The Canada Labour Code summarises the areas of federal jurisdiction as follows:

I’ve seen estimates which suggest that no more than 10% of the Canadian workforce is subject to federal labour laws. The other 90% are under provincial labour laws.