Monday, April 03, 2006

Oh Boy

Harper promises to re-open constitution.

posted by calgarygrit at 12:21 a.m.

12 Comments:

  • Why bother? It works right now.
    The only purpose could be getting tthe liberals back in power.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:18 a.m.  

  • The only purpose could be getting the liberals back in power.

    Well, given the way the conservative parties have behaved since the Free Trade Agreement was concluded, you'd think that their entire purpose _was_ to put the Liberals in power.

    This is the maximum possible error; whereas the sensible political course would be to promise that there will be No Constitutional Changes under a Tory government, Harper has promised that there will be Significant Eventual Unspecified Constitutional Changes.

    By Blogger Tybalt, at 10:18 a.m.  

  • "whereas the sensible political course would be to promise that there will be No Constitutional Changes under a Tory government"

    Yah, people so love it when a PM does what is politically expedient instead of what is best for the country.

    By Blogger Brian C, at 10:35 a.m.  

  • The Constit is owned by the people of Canada, and needs to reflect the timbre of the times. This means at least generational updates.
    There are a couple of options as is:
    1/ Judgment of the Supreme Court
    2/ Legislation and Use of the Notwithstanding Clause
    3/ Constitutional Conference
    I oppose (for what that's worth) the SCC having authority over our basic defining document, and the use of the NWC will at the very least bring into direct conflict our Legislative and Judicial branches. Not pretty...
    So that leaves the feared Constitutional Conference. But I truly think that this should be a fairly regular (say every ten years) occurence. Yes - they'll be a lot of banging of heads, but, I think, worth it.

    By Blogger Lemon, at 11:14 a.m.  

  • Does anybody else find it exceedingly worrisome that Harper's talking about reopening the constitution, but he won't say what he wants to change?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:22 a.m.  

  • Our long, national nightmare is over.

    Long live our long, national nightmare.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:24 a.m.  

  • We have two options, folks. Either we're a federation that can adapt itself in every important way when necessary, or we're a federation that is bound to fall apart.

    "Constitutional Change" are not bad words. Our willingness to consider Constitutional Change is directly related to our ability to survive as a country in the long term.

    Sustainability has to do with more than the environment.

    By Blogger Gauntlet, at 12:12 p.m.  

  • Mulroney in the background as puppet master really just can't seem to leave well enough alone.

    This whole thing worked out so well the last time we tried it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:31 p.m.  

  • Joe; Maybe "muses" would be a better word, but it sounds fairly clear to me:

    "Ultimately, there will have to be constitutional changes,"

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 1:25 p.m.  

  • "Does anybody else find it exceedingly worrisome that Harper's talking about reopening the constitution, but he won't say what he wants to change?"

    Its pretty obvious. He is going to change the constitution to outlaw the Liberal party for all time.

    And he has the support of the Canadian public. In a recent poll 81% of canadians think he should govern and do "whats best for the country" And there's no doubt getting rid of liberals would be whats best for the country.

    Horny Toad

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:32 p.m.  

  • CG, aren't you being a bit of an alarmist here? As Joe Edmonton points out, there was no "promise" made whatsoever.

    You're usually above this sort of post.

    By Blogger Candace, at 12:57 p.m.  

  • Sweet Jesus, NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

    By Blogger doggerelblogger, at 2:30 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home