The lobby group Democracy Watch is in a federal courtroom today arguing that the last election should be declared illegal. It is too late to stop the election and the group cannot hope to overturn the results but the hope is a court ruling could force future prime ministers to abide by the fixed election date law passed in 2007 that sets elections every four years on the third Monday in October. That is of course unless the government is defeated on a confidence vote, much like we are likely to see later this month.
Did Harper break the law?
Now I’ve argued earlier that this court case is a fraud itself. By the letter of the law, Prime Minister Stephen Harper broke no laws. The first line of the fixed election date law states that none of the powers of the Governor General to dissolve parliament will be changed. We can all agree that he broke the spirit of his law. Heck, he broke the spirit of that law and did a tap dance on it, but he did follow the letter of the law.
The Liberals have been quiet on this issue lately but decided today, just ahead of their expected push to defeat the government after less than one year of the current parliament, to put out a list of quotes from various Conservatives. Here is the list:
"Fixed election dates prevent governments from calling snap elections for short-term political advantage." – Stephen Harper, The Toronto Star, May 27, 2006.
“This Prime Minister will live by the law and spirit of this particular piece of legislation. He and this government are driving this democratic reform.” - Rob Nicholson, introducing the legislation in the House of Commons.
“If a prime minister went against the spirit of this legislation and purely called an election because he or she felt the opportunity was ripe, that the situation for his or her particular political party was very advantageous to go to the polls, I suspect that person would quite likely be punished by the Canadian people in the subsequent election campaign.” - Jay Hill, House of Commons, September 18, 2006.
“It would ensure that no party, regardless of political affiliation, while in power would be able to manipulate a date for a federal election to its particular advantage.” - Tom Lukiwski, House of Commons, September 18, 2006.
“It removes the power of the prime minister… to call an election when it is good for the government, when it suits the government and when it is damaging to the chances of the opposition, the main opposition party or some other opposition party, to contest that election. It would remove an inherent unfairness in the system.” - Scott Reid, House of Commons, September 18, 2006.
“This is the first Prime Minister who is willing to give up that huge tool in his tool chest and yet we are debating that in the House.” - Gerald Keddy, House of Commons, September 18, 2006.
“I think that common sense is having an election every four years and not on the whim and call of the Prime Minister.” - Carol Skelton, House of Commons, September 19, 2006.
“It provides fairness. No longer will the governing party be allowed to manipulate the process... It improves governance by removing power from the prime minister's office and devolving it to the people, as it should be.” - Russ Heibert, House of Commons, September 18, 2006.http://www.examiner.com/x-22884-Canada-Politics-Examiner~y2009m9d8-Did-Harper-break-the-law
No comments:
Post a Comment