View Single Post
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-08-13, 06:49

In Canada the recent history of the euthanasia debate traces back to a 2016 Supreme court decision, and then a Quebec superior court decision a couple of years after that struck down the "foreseeable death" conditions to access. I'm not really sure why this also wasn't appealed to the Supreme Court, but I believe the government at least in part believed that the Supreme Court would rule similarly, and likely rationalized their move in part on some "freedom to legislate" argument (and a read of popular sentiment). I don't particularly buy the former line, it would have been interesting to see this legally tested... The Parliament acted and all but the Conservative party, under then leader Peter O'Toole, supported legislation to expand access to medically assisted death. Interestingly though, Peter O'Toole is also quoted as saying that he would not have re-opened the question once decided, and you have to believe that in large part their opposition was essentially procedural, part of their role as the "Queen's Loyal Opposition." O'Toole is out, and the Conservative Party members’ most recent resolutions oppose Canada's euthanasia laws. However, the Conservative Party itself (the organization, not the rank and file citizenry who've paid a membership) has no formal position, nor has had one since.

I find ALL the parties tend to lack the courage of their convictions, including Canada's Conservatives. In his career, Harper fought like crazy to suppress his party's sentiments on same sex marriage and abortion, while giving them a wink and a nod behind closed doors, particularly in the early days of securing his leadership. To be clear, I'm not judging the value of their ideas here, I'm just taking a look at how they tend to edit their thoughts and beliefs to the political reality of the moment. Today, there is almost no doubt that Pierre Poilievre will be the next conservative leader. He spoke against Bill C-7, and has referenced the very case of Roger Foley mentioned earlier in thread.

He's out there selling an image of hard lined conservatism. He's got an interesting history of talking out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to abortion (just like Stephen Harper). Now he's spoken against C-7, even somewhat recently. Its most contentious sections come into force in 2023, but we'll see. His ilk has a penchant for courting opposition only to declare the matter settled if they sense it harms their popular appeal. So we'll see...

Last edited by Matsu : 2022-08-13 at 15:01.
  quote