Thursday, June 09, 2005

A Propos of Nothing

Harper's recent suggestions that a Conservative government might consider invoking the Charter-overriding notwithstanding clause, Martin said, point to a "fundamental difference" between the two leaders.

"I would not use the notwithstanding clause," Martin said. "And if what you're prepared to do is use the notwithstanding clause, then what you're saying essentially is minority rights can be subjected to the will of the majority.

"I've got to tell you that is not the kind of country I believe in, nor do I think it's the kind of country that Canadians believe in."

-June 14th, 2004


  • I hope he doesn't use it here either. Fix the problem, don't hide behind technicalities.

    By Blogger Greg, at 4:53 p.m.  

  • Funny, I've been thinking the same thing.

    "It's the Charter, stupid" - we'll see.

    By Blogger Michael Fox, at 4:55 p.m.  

  • Is this even a question though? In my understanding, the notwithstanding clause can only be used by the relevant level of government. In the same way that Klein cannot notwithstanding opt out of same sex marriage, Martin should not be able to override the health care rights of Canadians which are still the official domain of the provinces. Or am I totally off base here?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:54 a.m.  

  • Ryan - right now Charest would be the only one who could use the notwithstanding clause since it's a Quebec case.

    Now, if there's another challenge on the federal charter that won, I'm not sure. I suspect it would still be up to provincial governments but I'm not a legal expert. But, at the very least, Martin has basically said "it's the Charter, stupid" and "the charter is always right" so it's harder for him to oppose this decision.

    By Blogger calgarygrit, at 2:03 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home