[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Malthus]

We don't really have abortion rights tho, we have abortion access.

The reason women in Canada have access to abortion is because the law gives them the right to choose to have an abortion.

I don't get the "Scheer is a social conservative" angle.  He ran as "Harperism with a smile" as his overall platform and philosophy.  Yes, he gained the second ballot support of social conservatives, but only as a kind of compromise candidate.

Yes, he ran as Harper with a smile, but it remains to be seen whether he can silence the social conservatives in the same way Harper did.  Early signs are that he will not.  Harper was emphatic that the abortion question was settled and that women had the right to choose.   When Scheer was asked whether he would allow the abortion issue to be raised again, he avoided the question.

The reason you don't "get the Scheer as a social conservative angle" is probably the same reason you think Pence is bland.

My impression was that Harper could rein in the social conservatives precisely because he was *not* a 'nice person'. 

His tendency towards bullying autocracy was much hated by the liberal-leaning, but without it I think the social conservatives would have had more sway within the party he ran (and the Conservatives a shorter run in power, if they got there at all).

'Harperism with a smile' sure. But a would-be Harper had better keep an iron fist in reserve - for his or her own party - if they want any chance at power.

[Valmy]

I just want to point out we also have same sex marriage and abortion rights.

Abortion rights, sure. Actual access? Sometimes.

My point was you can have same sex marriage and abortion rights and have them be rolled back.

[viper37]

The other troubling thing is he is against carbon taxes.  He says the Conservatives need to develop a climate policy so I will hold judgment to see what that is.

At this point, the damage is done.  Going the other way would not have positive effects compensating the negatives of the tax.

I would offer all the provinces an opt-out if they develop their own system though.  Quebec, Ontario and Alberta aren't affected by the tax, so in the future, if another province wants its own system, let them out.

If the government truly invests the revenues from this tax into R&D for a green economy (I highly doubt it, it's not what Quebec has done, and it does not look it's what your party aims to do either, prefering expensive trips over the global economy), it would be positive though.

Not sure what you are referring to.  The BC carbon tax works as designed.  It is tax neutral while putting a higher cost on carbon.

the Federal tax.

Quebec has a carbon market + a "green tax", specifically for gaz, diesel, oil.  Theoritically, the funds were to be used to develop new green energy initiative.  In reality, it is used as a general fund for just about anything the Liberals like at the moment.

[viper37]

When Scheer was asked whether he would allow the abortion issue to be raised again, he avoided the question.

no.  When asked about it, he said he would not reopen the issue.
While he's thought to personally oppose abortion and recent legislation granting human rights protections to transgender Canadians, he says he won't be re-opening those debates if he becomes prime minister.


It won't be reopened for the same reasons it wasn't under Harper.

[viper37]

I just want to point out we also have same sex marriage and abortion rights.

Abortion rights, sure. Actual access? Sometimes.

My point was you can have same sex marriage and abortion rights and have them be rolled back.

not in Canada.

[Barrister]

Green agree to support NDP in BC.  No details yet that I've seen.

Suspect that's a mistake by the Greens.  They'll be blamed for everything the NDP does wrong, but only the NDP will get the credit for anything that goes right.

[Josephus]

Politics make strange bedfellows. Not surprised.

[Jacob]

Link on the NDP-Greens coalition: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/greens-announce-support-in-legislature/article35147472/

The Greens have previously stated three fundamental "deal breakers" to form part of government: official party status (because they're below the threshold), campaign finance reform (which will hamstring the Liberals the most, then the NDP), and proportional representation (which could be a serious game changer). If they get any of those, it may well be worth it for them... of course, the coalition gov't has a razor thin majority.

As for the Greens getting blamed... in theory that's a risk, but it's the NDP. They are not canny political operators, IMO. My expectation is that the next election (barring proportional representation reforms that change the system entirely) will see the Greens grow, the NDP shrink, and the Libs back with a majority.

... but we'll see.

[Jacob]

And then, of course, there's the fact that it's a one person majority which could be derailed by any number of things.

[Jacob]

My point was you can have same sex marriage and abortion rights and have them be rolled back.

Then I agree with your point.

[HVC]

Viper might became catholic

[viper37]

Viper might became catholic

Techically, I still am, even if I don't have Faith.  I am baptized and confirmed.

But I'll admit seeing this picture, I can't help thinking the Pope is indeed a special kind of human.  It's the first time I've see a world leader not smiling with Trudeau.  It's gotta count for something.

[crazy canuck]

We don't really have abortion rights tho, we have abortion access.

The reason women in Canada have access to abortion is because the law gives them the right to choose to have an abortion.

I don't get the "Scheer is a social conservative" angle.  He ran as "Harperism with a smile" as his overall platform and philosophy.  Yes, he gained the second ballot support of social conservatives, but only as a kind of compromise candidate.

Yes, he ran as Harper with a smile, but it remains to be seen whether he can silence the social conservatives in the same way Harper did.  Early signs are that he will not.  Harper was emphatic that the abortion question was settled and that women had the right to choose.   When Scheer was asked whether he would allow the abortion issue to be raised again, he avoided the question.

The reason you don't "get the Scheer as a social conservative angle" is probably the same reason you think Pence is bland.

My impression was that Harper could rein in the social conservatives precisely because he was *not* a 'nice person'. 

His tendency towards bullying autocracy was much hated by the liberal-leaning, but without it I think the social conservatives would have had more sway within the party he ran (and the Conservatives a shorter run in power, if they got there at all).

'Harperism with a smile' sure. But a would-be Harper had better keep an iron fist in reserve - for his or her own party - if they want any chance at power.

Yes, I agree. 

When Scheer was asked whether he would allow the abortion issue to be raised again, he avoided the question.

no.  When asked about it, he said he would not reopen the issue.
While he's thought to personally oppose abortion and recent legislation granting human rights protections to transgender Canadians, he says he won't be re-opening those debates if he becomes prime minister.


It won't be reopened for the same reasons it wasn't under Harper.

I hope you are correct, but two things of note.   When he was saying he wouldn't reopen the issue he hadn't just won the leadership with the support of the social conservatives.

After he won he said this:

was asked during a news conference later Saturday if he would allow caucus members to bring forward bills related to abortion.

He would say only that he won't be put in a "binary box"

There is also video of that question and answer session in the link below.  That is a long way from Harper's position.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-leadership-race-winner-1.4134575

[crazy canuck]

Green agree to support NDP in BC.  No details yet that I've seen.

Suspect that's a mistake by the Greens.  They'll be blamed for everything the NDP does wrong, but only the NDP will get the credit for anything that goes right.

The other way around actually.  It would have been political suicide for Weaver to cooperate with the Liberals.  Most Green supporters lean left.  But more importantly, the main issue for the Greens is getting an electoral system of proportional representation.   This is going to be their only chance to get that passed.  With that system in place the Greens have a very good chance of holding the balance of power in many future elections and likely growing their proportion of the vote at the expense of the NDP. 

The only party who could give them that is the NDP.  Even if Clarke had agreed to it she would have faced a caucus revolt if she tried to implement it.

[Malthus]

I hope you are correct, but two things of note.   When he was saying he wouldn't reopen the issue he hadn't just won the leadership with the support of the social conservatives.

After he won he said this:

was asked during a news conference later Saturday if he would allow caucus members to bring forward bills related to abortion.

He would say only that he won't be put in a "binary box"

There is also video of that question and answer session in the link below.  That is a long way from Harper's position.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-leadership-race-winner-1.4134575

I agree that this is concerning. Unless he's willing to slap down the social conservatives - hard - they will sense his vulnerability and swarm all over him. Playing to the social conservative base is a losing strategy, all it will do is ensure that the swing voters avoid the Conservatives in droves and ensure a steady Liberal majority (at least until they grow as weary and corrupt as every Canadian party in steady power eventually gets).