Monday, January 28, 2008

The Compromise

The compromise position is to stay in Afghanistan under the current mission mandate until February 2009. Harper’s proposed surge strategy, more troops more equipment, is not a compromise solution; it is an escalation. I fail to see how anyone could imagine that it is not just more of the same, more of a failed strategy on into an indeterminate future.

Certainly, to those in Ottawa, the Manley report must seem a refreshing change of tone in comparison to the barrage of insults and emotional rhetoric that has substituted for argument to date on the part of the Conservatives. But then again anything is better than the jingoism and simple minded pro-any-war statements Harper has made over the last two years. Though I appreciate the Conservatives’ decision to begin speaking like adults, I am not sure it merits special praise, and it should not alter the Liberal policy. The facts have not changed from a week ago. The security situation is deteriorating, NOT improving, and the end game realistically does not involve the eradication of the Taliban but rather a negociated settlement with them.

I would have the international community move toward the end game sooner rather than later, although, with regard to the current aggressive NATO tactics, Canada has done much more than its fair share. If hunting the Taliban is indeed worth continuing, then other NATO nations should be more than willing to step up.

Ending the current mission in February 2009 honors our international commitment while striking a fair compromise position amongst the larger part of public opinion. Maybe not everyone gets exactly what they want, but democratically it should do.

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Nuclear Safety: No Leadership

Stephen Harper and the Conservative party resolutely refuse to accept any responsibility for the shut-down of the Chalk River nuclear facilities which threatened the world supply of medical isotopes.

Rather than show leadership, the Conservatives are trying to shift the blame to someone else. They blame the Liberals, they blame Linda Keen the nuclear safety regulator, heck they even tried to blame the former head of AECL who incidentally was a Conservative appointee with ties to the Conservative party.

Rather than present Canadians with the facts, which given potential public alarm over nuclear safety would seem the right course of action, Conservatives have tried to obscure the facts. Responsibility for the misinformation lies squarely at the feet of Stephen Harper.

Leadership is about more than just ordering people around. And recently (see my last two posts) the Harper Conservatives have demonstrated a flagrant lack of leadership. No Leadership on the ethics of the Mulroney-Schreiber scandal; no leadership on the legitimate economic concerns of the premiers. And if you know what the Conservative positions on the combat mission in Afghanistan or the Environment are, please let me know. Do Conservatives even know what their position is?

All the Conservatives’ talk about Leadership is only half what it seems to be. What about honesty? What about clarity of purpose? What about listening or even just a little executive competence?

Federal-Provincial relations: No Leadership

Well, Stephen Harper can check "Photo-op with Premiers" off his to-do list. The dinner with the premiers yesterday represents little more than the appearance of consultation i.e. an attempt to "neutralize" the fact that there have been no formal meetings with the premiers since Stephen Harper became prime minister.

Somewhat ominously, the Globe and Mail reports, “The Prime Minister did pledge to write to the premiers with a summary of the meeting and some ideas on how to push issues forward, Alberta's Ed Stelmach said.” Given Stephen Harper’s awkward leadership style this means they will receive a memo essentially saying: Here are your orders from the federal government, now shut-up.

Honestly, why can’t the premiers be more obedient like Conservative federal cabinet ministers. There would be more Unity and Openness in this country if the premiers would just do as they are told. A good premier should be seen and not heard. ; )

Joking aside, the Conservatives are not offering any leadership on the Environment or the Economy. Leaders also listen sometimes.

Mulroney-Schreiber Affair: No Leadership

In the eyes of a substantial block of voters, there is only one type of Conservative. There is no difference between Mulroney Conservatives and Harper Conservatives. There is one Conservative party --and until recently Stephen Harper was happy with the association. The Mulroney-Schreiber affair when explored will damage the Conservative brand one way or another. It is surprising then that the Conservatives are offering no leadership on the issue.

Admittedly, the Conservative scandal is a bit of a lose-lose situation, having the public associate the Conservative party with secret hotel meetings where ambiguous amounts of untraceable cash traded hands cannot help but sound bad while on the other hand denying the association of Brian Mulroney with the Conservative party is somewhat preposterous. But Stephen Harper is falling out of the tree and he seems determined to hit every branch on the way.

At first, Harper said there was no need for a public inquiry. Then Mulroney said he wanted a public inquiry, then possibly as a consequence Stephen Harper said he also wanted an inquiry. Mulroney later changed his mind and said he did not want an inquiry. Harper also seemed to change his mind and suggested he longer thought an inquiry was necessary. The recommendations offered by the independent advisor, David Johnston, do not provide more clarity because they are not legally binding and do not settle the issue of whether or not there will be a public inquiry. Harper can ignore the suggestions. He could set in motion a full inquiry with a broad scope as of tomorrow or, as is more likely, he will keep stalling. Meanwhile, those in the public and especially those in the media who would gladly defend Harper’s stance --were he to take one-- are left twisting in the wind. Is Mulroney really one of us, a Conservative? Do we need an inquiry in any form? How does this relate to the Conservative party’s position on Accountability? By not deciding, Harper is ultimately jerking around his own supporters and you can only do that for so long.

By offering no leadership, the Conservatives are also green lighting the House of Commons Ethics committee to do anything they want with the issue which, in my opinion, is the bigger side of the lose-lose equation.

The Conservatives have shown no leadership on this ethical issue. But wishful thinking aside, the Mulroney scandal is not going to go away on its own.