Harper and the Supreme Court

I sometimes think that those of us who write blogs, being the passionate political followers that we are, read more into things than are really there, especially when it comes to alleging biases in the media. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Nonetheless, as the saying goes, even paranoid people really do have enemies.

I was thinking about this last night as I watched a segment of the 8:00 p.m. Power Play in which Patrick Monaghan, Osgoode Hall's former dean, held forth on what might happen to the composition of Canada's Supreme Court should Harper win a majority this election. From the first question posed by the reporter, I had the feeling this was a pro-Tory piece leading to the inevitable conclusion that there is nothing to fear in such a scenario.

Given the right-wing proclivities of Harper and his acolytes, being told, “Nothing to see here. Move along,” did not seem credible. Monaghan, for example, attempted to allay fears by pointing out that Harper's two appointments to the Supreme Court thus far were good and restrained choices, totally ignoring the political reality that for the Prime Minister to have made controversial choices whilst leading a minority government would have given considerable ammunition to those who fear the restrictive and state-directed nature of the social conservatives who wield considerable influence in the Conservative Party. Why would anyone think that the kind of incrementalism that has characterized Harper's legislative agenda thus far be any different when it comes to judicial appointments? Wouldn't it be logical for him to wait until he has complete power before pulling back the curtain?

Everything I know about the Conservative philosophy under Harper suggests we should all be very afraid of what will happen if this man rises above minority government status.

You can watch the six-minute interview here.