jdobbin Posted January 24, 2007 Report Posted January 24, 2007 Once, in Quebec, to oppress English speaking minorities. It has been used 15 times in Canada including once by Saskatchewan. Quote
sharkman Posted January 24, 2007 Report Posted January 24, 2007 Your original post implied that the courts could strike down any law passed by the government. I simply pointed out that is not the case because the government can override the courts by using the notwithstanding clause (I'm not sure if you forgot we had a notwithstanding clause, or purposely left it out of your post).While pointing out a strawman, I see you avoided the issue completely. How many times has the notwithstanding clause been used? Are you going to avoid the question again? This is completely irrelevant. But to answer your question, I don't think it has ever been used, but I could be wrong on that...it certainly hasn't been used often. But how often has there been a need to use it? How often has there been an important issue that the majority of Canadians (including the majority of MPs) agree with that has been struck down by the courts? My point is that IF the majority of Canadians wanted abortions to be illegal, the Harper government could (and most likely would) bring in legislation to make it illegal. If the courts struck it down, he could (and probably would) use the withstanding clause. That is what I have been arguing...do you disagree? I guess I agree with what you've said, but the majority of Cdns are not going to want to make abortions illegal any time soon. It would take a straight out referendum and can you imagine the screeching on both sides on that one? \ Quote
JerrySeinfeld Posted January 25, 2007 Report Posted January 25, 2007 They're both left wing ninnies as far as I'm concerned. Seriously. We need a real right wing party in this country. Quote
geoffrey Posted January 28, 2007 Report Posted January 28, 2007 Once, in Quebec, to oppress English speaking minorities. It has been used 15 times in Canada including once by Saskatchewan. The Saskatchewan law was later to be found in compliance with the Charter. Alberta's use of the clause was found to be unneccesary as the entire peice of legislation was outside of their jurisdiction. As far as I know, the only real use has been in Quebec. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.