Well the by-election is done, and here are the somewhat interesting results:

Party / Candidate /Votes/ % Votes
Canadian Action / Will Arlow /49/ 0.1%
Independent / Robert Ede / 68/ 0.2%
Conservative / Dianne Haskett /8,434 / 24.3%
PC Party / Steve Hunter /132 / 0.4%
Green Party / Elizabeth May / 9,091 / 26.1%
Liberal / Glen Pearson /12,064 / 34.7%
N.D.P. / Megan Walker /4,939 / 14.2%
Total number of valid votes: 34,777
Polls reporting: 235/253 Voter turnout: 34,777 of 89,139 registered electors (39.0%)

I was impressed to see the Green Party perform that well... as well as being disappointed at the lower than usual voter turn out. Anyways it looks like 75% voted centre->left which I'm sure has got the Conservatives a little worried given how wrong the party predictions turned out (and of course the resignation of a Cabinet member over the Quebec as a nation passing in the House today).

Who are the Canadian Action Party?? Are they anythinbg like the Canadian National Party (I think that's what they're called)?


However, since he only got 49 votes I'm guessing their platform is none too popular.

You should have seen some of the wack jobs running for councillor in my riding (33 - Don Valley) for the municipal elections. There was this one guy, Anderson Tung, who had some serious issues with the media, and was going on and on how when he became mayor he was going to sue the CBC, the Attorney General, Julian Fantino and a whole slew of others. I think he received about 49 votes as well.

What is Quebec as a nation? will that apply to British Columbia as well?

Lady Pi Phi - the Canadian Action Party... hmmm they are a little hard to nail down, since their politics are all over the place. For the most part they are Nationalists politically and economically (ie. very protectionist); think of the Heritage twits but liberal minded.

RU OX Alum - the recognition of Quebec as a nation within a nation is a "wonderful" new idea that our PM came up with to "deal" with the seperatists in Quebec. Before Quebec was recognized as a "seperate and disticnt society", as a result of the 1995 referedum held in Quebec about seperation from Canada (very narrowly defeated). The Harper government (well okay some of the Harper government) saw this as a way of taking the wind out of the seperatists (Bloc's) sails, and to cut the Liberal's federal hold on Quebec by showing that the Conservatives recognize Quebec more... the only problem though is that the seperatists are now proclaiming this the first step in the seperation process.

is there a Federalist Party in Canada?

Heh... well historically that would have been the Tories or the old Progressive Conservative party... but they merged with the Alliance/Reform party who were strong adovactes of less federal power, basically giving provinces more power. So the Liberals who used to be challenged on the fact that they gave too much power to the provinces are now seen as the 'federalists' of the political spectrum.... other weirdness also exists, like the fact that the Tories used to be the most staunch of Monarchists; but since the Alliance/Reform merger that mantle seems to fall to the NDP at the opposite end of the political spectrum.

Federalism in the U.S. is currently focused on moving towards more states rights as well.

I find it iternesting that the NDP is monarchist. Aren't they pushing towards provencial power as well due to the cannabis laws?

Being a Monarchist and being in favour of more provincial power have nothing to do with one another ;)

Anyways if the NDP was all about changes to laws regarding possession or usage of cannabis they'd be aiming at federal power - since laws in Canada are federally based, with the 'tweaking' of terms done on a provincial basis (ie. Sunday shopping, drinking age). The Liberals modified the drug laws a bit concerning cannabis, and if the NDP or the Conservatives wanted to change them one way or the other it'd have to happen again at a federal level.

It is just criminal law that is federally based. All other laws are determined by the provinces.