Several times on the Bloggers Hotstove we have batted around the prospects of the Green Party and key on my mind is where do they fit on the Canadian political spectrum. Nik Nanos of SES Research did some polling showing the Greens being the party of second choice for a plurality of Conservatives. The most logical explanation behind this was that former leader Jim Harris was a former Progressive Conservatives and his revenue neutral tax shifting from income taxes to carbon taxes could fit on the centre-right.
That being said I've always had my doubts about Elizabeth May and have always suspected that she is the further left (I know, what the heck is left and right anyway) on the spectrum that any of the other leaders (anglophone anyway, Duceppe would be further left). It is just that her ideas seem to holdovers from another time and another place. Ms. May was recently a panel guest on TVO's excellent program, The Agenda with Steve Paikin, discussing environmentalism and the GDP and during the discussion the examples she used to nothing to relieve my doubts. From David Suzuki to Maurice Strong to the so-called Population Explosion to her anti-nuclear power stance. It just seems so '80's. I've pulled together a "greatest hits" package from the program and posted it here. Oh yeah, I've saved the best comment for last.

Comments (8)
That was a great panel and an excellent discussion, but the only problem with such lengthy podcasts is that they don’t get listened to by the overworked “joe public” on the street. Yes, we have time because we make it priority, but shouldn’t it be priority for these shows to cut down the length of their productions? Just a thought.
Posted by Scott | February 25, 2007 3:25 PM
Posted on February 25, 2007 15:25
That was a great panel and an excellent discussion, but the only problem with such lengthy podcasts is that they don’t get listened to by the overworked “Joe Q public” on the street. Yes, I have time and probably many other politicos have time because we make it priority, but shouldn’t it be priority for these shows to cut down on the length of their productions so as to benefit the entire public? Just a thought.
Posted by Scott | February 25, 2007 3:28 PM
Posted on February 25, 2007 15:28
I suspect that the reason the Greens are the second choice of Conservatives is a combination of:
a. They are not NDP or the ever-increasingly leftish Liberals b. They are not clearly defined but represent something new.
A second choice for a Conservative is a challenge with only parties on the Left as choices. I would wager ‘None of the Above’ as a more popular second choice.
Posted by Larry | February 25, 2007 3:54 PM
Posted on February 25, 2007 15:54
May was aligned with the Mulroney-era Tories. In Estonia (is it?) where the Greens formed part of the govt they were definitively a centre-right party, whereas in Germany they are more of a left of centre party.
Posted by Andrew Mason | February 25, 2007 5:37 PM
Posted on February 25, 2007 17:37
Greens have attracted some blue Liberals and Conservatives because of environmental issues that are only now being addressed by Harper.
Social Conservatives had driven some out of the tent toward the Greens.
Corrupt Liberals have driven a lot out of their tent and some are still parked with the Greens until they can decide if the MSM’s hysterical rants against Harper are valid.
With SSM out of the way and a new pragmatic platform on the environment, we should be rolling out the welcome mat for fickle Green supporters to not waste their vote.
But if Lizzy May thinks nuclear power is OK for Iran and not for stupid Canadians, which is de facto her position unless she plans to attack Iran and shut that program down; then I’d say we should remind parked voters at the Green Party they are dealing with a one-trick pony that is out of touch with geopolitical risk.
Posted by nomdenet | February 25, 2007 6:35 PM
Posted on February 25, 2007 18:35
The reason why the Greens are supposedly the second choice of Conservatives is not because of Jim Harris and his tax-shifting schemes. To my mind, it is because Conservatives simply find the other alternatives to be unacceptable and simply choose the Greens by default.
Posted by Dwayne | February 25, 2007 7:29 PM
Posted on February 25, 2007 19:29
Yeah, the N.D.P. believe in everything which would be very expensive. the Liberals believe in nothing, so they automatically adopt any policy. The Greens believe in one thing, so they’re the best of a bad lot.
Posted by DJeffery | February 26, 2007 1:18 AM
Posted on February 26, 2007 01:18
Forgive me for having not invested the time in the ‘cast.
Have you placed yourself on the multidimensional graphs established by http://www.moral-politics.com/ ? Or, as importantly, noted how the Canadian distribution compares to other jurisdictions?
Posted by Paul O | February 26, 2007 1:43 AM
Posted on February 26, 2007 01:43