Like Adscam, the Mulroney-Schreiber scandal would not have legs if it were driven solely by the opposition. Some are interested in clean government and some have less innocent motivations. Regardless of the spin put out by the Conservatives about Mulroney’s liberal media “tormenters”, the list of people interested in the story is not at all limited to those with sentimental attachments to the Liberals, Bloc or NDP.
There are old and strange stories about how Mulroney gathered delegates to ouster former Tory leader Joe Clark and even more about the following leadership convention. It’s the kind of boozy rumour that comes out after a few drinks and often sounds more like the onset of Korsakoff’s disease than the truth. Believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see. But the progressives of Joe Clark’s ilk have been largely frozen out of the current Bush-styled Conservative party, a fact that is not forgotten in the minds of some. And whatever your feelings about the (family values=white power?) Reform party, they were not great fans of Mulroney either and it’s hard not to believe Preston Manning was sincere about cleaning up the lobbying industry and Ottawa graft. Harper’s interests are another issue. Many believe that Harper is primarily interested in staying in power and so the odd on-again-off-again support over the last month for Brian Mulroney I suspect is a reflection of the inner dynamics within his own party more so than a genuine response to the ethical issues. I am not a conservative. I do not know and I do not want to know. The point I am trying to make is that there are people inside and outside the Conservative party who want to hear more about the Mulroney-Schreiber scandal and that interest will move a public inquiry forward.
As I wrote in the first of two posts, I had the good sense to blush during the last election campaign in response to Adscam. The Liberals were put in the penalty box for failing to pay attention to corruption. It’s a good metaphor and one that a lot of people including most Liberals accept. The Liberal government was being careless about minimizing corruption. Although at base, I am still more interested in politics because of issues like global warming and efficient health care delivery, I respect those who are sincerely fighting for clean government whether with their arguments or their votes. For them the Mulroney-Schrieber inquiry is not a vendetta. Why should I argue against them again?
To be honest, I was among those that were content when the story died many years ago because I was just so tired of Mulroney and I thought Liberals and Canada had more important issues to attend to at the time. Granted more incriminating evidence has since been brought to light, still this lazy attitude toward investigating corruption was wrong and is what ultimately led to Adscam. All partisan exaggerations aside, the real problem in Adscam was not that the Liberal party or its membership were corrupt, but rather that there was a pretend-its-not there toleration of illegal activity, a blindness for corruption.
If the lesson learned by lobbyists and public office holders from the Mulroney-Schreiber scandal is that dubious money transactions under the amount of $300,000 are o.k., then the cost of a public inquiry is minimal in comparison to the amount of corruption that we are otherwise inviting upon ourselves.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Mulroney-Schrieber affair, Public Inquiry (Part I)
I have an admission to make. I was glad several years ago to see Mulroney –and his hyperbole and all his theatrics—exit the Canadian political stage. It was a common attitude, I think. People were fed up with the man, just sick to death of hearing and seeing him. So spending a couple million dollars (the cost of the settlement with the former PM) to have him just go away seemed a small enough price to pay. It had less to do with whether I believed Mulroney had done something illegal or not, and more to do with the fact that I didn’t care. What I cared about more was Chretien’s new government which should, I thought, look toward its own future and what it wanted to accomplish. Why waste energy on something that would be perceived as a Liberal vendetta? Again, as I recall it, this was a fairly common view at the time. Seeing Mulroney on television this week brought this all back to mind.
My admission today is: this way of thinking was lazy and, in a certain sense, corrupt.
Fast forward to Adscam. I don’t think that this would have been half the media event that it became if it was not backed by groups inside and outside the Liberal party. There were some that were motivated by a desire for clean government and some that had less innocent motivations. For the former group, I have nothing but respect on this issue even though it is not what interests me about politics. I am interested in such issues as dealing with climate change and an effective policy in Afghanistan. In this sense, I and a lot of others have unwittingly been part of the problem for those who want clean government. The real issue in Adscam, all partisan exaggerations aside, was not that the Liberal party or its membership were corrupt, but rather that there was a toleration of illegal activity, a blindness for corruption. And the public has spoken on this issue quite clearly.
During the last election, I was in the passenger seat of a car winding myself up into a strong defense of the Liberal record. It was already dark when the driver reached over to turn up the radio to hear the news report about the launch of an investigation into Ralph Goodale’s involvement in a potential budget leak. (Although the allegations against the honourable Ralph Goodale were later disproven, the news report played into the ongoing narrative of Liberal corruption. It was really about Adscam). I had the good sense to blush and a few short words came out of my mouth that do not bear repeating here. The outcome of the false allegations are well known. They served to remind people about Adscam. There was a dramatic shift in the polls over the following week and the Liberals eventually lost the election.
I had the good sense to blush.
My admission today is: this way of thinking was lazy and, in a certain sense, corrupt.
Fast forward to Adscam. I don’t think that this would have been half the media event that it became if it was not backed by groups inside and outside the Liberal party. There were some that were motivated by a desire for clean government and some that had less innocent motivations. For the former group, I have nothing but respect on this issue even though it is not what interests me about politics. I am interested in such issues as dealing with climate change and an effective policy in Afghanistan. In this sense, I and a lot of others have unwittingly been part of the problem for those who want clean government. The real issue in Adscam, all partisan exaggerations aside, was not that the Liberal party or its membership were corrupt, but rather that there was a toleration of illegal activity, a blindness for corruption. And the public has spoken on this issue quite clearly.
During the last election, I was in the passenger seat of a car winding myself up into a strong defense of the Liberal record. It was already dark when the driver reached over to turn up the radio to hear the news report about the launch of an investigation into Ralph Goodale’s involvement in a potential budget leak. (Although the allegations against the honourable Ralph Goodale were later disproven, the news report played into the ongoing narrative of Liberal corruption. It was really about Adscam). I had the good sense to blush and a few short words came out of my mouth that do not bear repeating here. The outcome of the false allegations are well known. They served to remind people about Adscam. There was a dramatic shift in the polls over the following week and the Liberals eventually lost the election.
I had the good sense to blush.
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Le Canada Isolé
Le gouvernement Harper semble travailler fort pour isoler le Canada sur la scène internationale.
La Presse: Tous les diplomates, négociateurs et environnementalistes qui ont accepté de parler à La Presse ont en effet soutenu que l’étoile du Canada avait passablement pâli ces dernières années…
« Comme dans toutes les autres sphères internationales, le Canada a toujours eu une importance plus large que nature, précise-t-il [Jacques Bilodeau]. On avait une réputation d’intégrité, de compétence et de sérieux. Si bien que, lorsque le Canada parlait, il était entendu. »
Et aujourd’hui ? Les diplomates ne reconnaissent tout simplement plus le pays.
Un vote pour les conservateurs c’est un vote contre l’environnement et notre bonne réputation.
La Presse: Tous les diplomates, négociateurs et environnementalistes qui ont accepté de parler à La Presse ont en effet soutenu que l’étoile du Canada avait passablement pâli ces dernières années…
« Comme dans toutes les autres sphères internationales, le Canada a toujours eu une importance plus large que nature, précise-t-il [Jacques Bilodeau]. On avait une réputation d’intégrité, de compétence et de sérieux. Si bien que, lorsque le Canada parlait, il était entendu. »
Et aujourd’hui ? Les diplomates ne reconnaissent tout simplement plus le pays.
Un vote pour les conservateurs c’est un vote contre l’environnement et notre bonne réputation.
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Dion Blog… Maybe
My initial reaction to the idea of a Dion blog was negative. But I have been mulling it over for the last week or so because that’s how I think about things and also because Ottlib then Red Tory (Nov. 3rd) brought it up. I wouldn’t agree with everything they write but I have come to respect them enough that it’s probably not a good idea to just dismiss what they are saying completely. So there it is. I hope this admission doesn't cause any head swelling.
The initial image I had was of Dion bickering mindlessly with some anonymous 14 year old conservative troll. How do you respond to crap like “Stephen Harper is not a Leader.” He would end up looking like Peter Van Loan which is to say: not prime ministerial. The leader needs hatchet men and women to deal with the nonsense so he can remain above it. But then again, does the blog need a comment section?
The greatest impact that Dion will have with his principal ideas will still be by delivering them as speeches or by publishing them in the print media like he has done before. Too much could cheapen the newsworthiness. A blog would have less impact although it could fill out his public persona. It would need to be very stylish because blogging is still not mainstreet. If bloggers are honest with themselves they know that outside the smaller world of their friends there are still are a lot of people and of a certain age who view the blogosphere as a geek world populated by lonely socially awkward people. Yes, I know this is largely a stereotype, but it is what it is. When I started this blog, I told a good friend whose reaction was quite telling. She looked at me quizzically (and somewhat disappointedly) and said, “Why the hell would you want to do that?” She meant why would you go online and tell total strangers what you are thinking and feeling. I still like you but you are such a loser sometimes.
Dion definitely has his geeky side there is no pretending. So what I am trying to say is that a potential Dion blog would need to look exceptionally up to date so as not to emphasize possibly negative qualities of his persona. The blog would need to be first of all stylish --if geeky somewhat. Maybe a biweekly or monthly post about events… the backstory from his perspective. It could work to make him more known as a person.
Red Tory in the link above provides some interesting examples from the British political scene.
Oh yeah and by the way, Stephen Harper is not a Leader! ;)
The initial image I had was of Dion bickering mindlessly with some anonymous 14 year old conservative troll. How do you respond to crap like “Stephen Harper is not a Leader.” He would end up looking like Peter Van Loan which is to say: not prime ministerial. The leader needs hatchet men and women to deal with the nonsense so he can remain above it. But then again, does the blog need a comment section?
The greatest impact that Dion will have with his principal ideas will still be by delivering them as speeches or by publishing them in the print media like he has done before. Too much could cheapen the newsworthiness. A blog would have less impact although it could fill out his public persona. It would need to be very stylish because blogging is still not mainstreet. If bloggers are honest with themselves they know that outside the smaller world of their friends there are still are a lot of people and of a certain age who view the blogosphere as a geek world populated by lonely socially awkward people. Yes, I know this is largely a stereotype, but it is what it is. When I started this blog, I told a good friend whose reaction was quite telling. She looked at me quizzically (and somewhat disappointedly) and said, “Why the hell would you want to do that?” She meant why would you go online and tell total strangers what you are thinking and feeling. I still like you but you are such a loser sometimes.
Dion definitely has his geeky side there is no pretending. So what I am trying to say is that a potential Dion blog would need to look exceptionally up to date so as not to emphasize possibly negative qualities of his persona. The blog would need to be first of all stylish --if geeky somewhat. Maybe a biweekly or monthly post about events… the backstory from his perspective. It could work to make him more known as a person.
Red Tory in the link above provides some interesting examples from the British political scene.
Oh yeah and by the way, Stephen Harper is not a Leader! ;)
Sunday, October 21, 2007
La Nation Québécoise
Dans un article paru dans La Presse ce matin une excellente question est posé par Mme Marois, chef du Parti Québécois, par rapport à leur projet de loi qui veut créer deux classes de citoyens au Québec : ceux qui parlent français et ceux qui ne le parlent pas. La deuxième classe de citoyens, ceux qui ont de la difficulté avec la langue dominante de la province, la minorité évidemment, seront privé de certains droits constitutionnels comme par exemple le droit de se présenter aux élections en tant que candidat.
Pauline Marois « Dites-moi en vertu de quelle rhétorique le « nous » canadien serait inclusif et le « nous » québécois, exclusif? Ne sommes-nous pas une nation, reconnue par les partis fédéraux? Alors en quoi l’affirmation de nous-mêmes serait-elle un projet ethnique? »
Dans le sens où le terme « nation québécoise » indique un fait sociologique indéniable, je suis d’accord. Cependant, je reconnais le problème de vendre ce concept aux autres provinces canadiennes, qui eux, soupçonnerait peut-être une signification différente. Or en effet, on voit dans les questions de Mme Marois la migration de ce concept vers un autre sens.
C’est bien Mme Marois, elle-même, qui suggère la solution au manque de francisation des nouveaux arrivés au Québec en répondant aux accusations de Phillipe Couillard, ministre Libéral. « C’est vous, monsieur le ministre, qui créez deux classes de citoyens. C‘est vous qui avez coupé dans la francisation des immigrants… » Alors, pourquoi pas remettre les fonds dans ces programmes, Mme Marois? (L’éditorialiste Nathalie Collard p. 14 en arrive à la pareil conclusion).
Il semble assez clair que le PQ va se servir de cette situation à des fins autres que la francisation.
Comment juger la popularité au Québec d’un tel assaut radical aux droits constitutionnels de certains de nos concitoyens? Le meilleur indice se trouve dans le titre d’un autre article sur la même page du journal : « Le PQ prêt à faire tomber le gouvernement demain matin »
Pauline Marois « Dites-moi en vertu de quelle rhétorique le « nous » canadien serait inclusif et le « nous » québécois, exclusif? Ne sommes-nous pas une nation, reconnue par les partis fédéraux? Alors en quoi l’affirmation de nous-mêmes serait-elle un projet ethnique? »
Dans le sens où le terme « nation québécoise » indique un fait sociologique indéniable, je suis d’accord. Cependant, je reconnais le problème de vendre ce concept aux autres provinces canadiennes, qui eux, soupçonnerait peut-être une signification différente. Or en effet, on voit dans les questions de Mme Marois la migration de ce concept vers un autre sens.
C’est bien Mme Marois, elle-même, qui suggère la solution au manque de francisation des nouveaux arrivés au Québec en répondant aux accusations de Phillipe Couillard, ministre Libéral. « C’est vous, monsieur le ministre, qui créez deux classes de citoyens. C‘est vous qui avez coupé dans la francisation des immigrants… » Alors, pourquoi pas remettre les fonds dans ces programmes, Mme Marois? (L’éditorialiste Nathalie Collard p. 14 en arrive à la pareil conclusion).
Il semble assez clair que le PQ va se servir de cette situation à des fins autres que la francisation.
Comment juger la popularité au Québec d’un tel assaut radical aux droits constitutionnels de certains de nos concitoyens? Le meilleur indice se trouve dans le titre d’un autre article sur la même page du journal : « Le PQ prêt à faire tomber le gouvernement demain matin »
Sunday, October 14, 2007
While you were sleeping...
Parliament has not yet reconvened and Stephen Harper has already goofed twice.
The promise to make every government bill an automatic confidence motion will with time look more and more like dumb bluster. Not only does this directly contradict his previous public statements, there are enough democrats in the country (in every political party) who realize that minority parliaments cannot function under such conditions and, if we are to have more minority situations, Stephen Harper’s promise is a dangerous and unworkable precendent. If an election occurs over a minor piece of legislation, the Harper Conservatives’ carry the full responsibility.
Secondly, the claim that striking a committee of unelected private citizens, who already appear to favour an extension of the combat role in Afghanistan, will neutralize the issue is ridiculous not brilliant. Imagine Stephen Harper’s response during an election Leaders debate to questions about the combat role that has resulted in increased levels of violence and instability in Afghanistan. Will he say that a committee is studying the issue and that election campaigns are not the time to talk about policy? Brilliant. Even those media commentators who loudly applaud Stephen Harper’s every word must be getting tired of being jerked around by the erratic Conservative message machine.
Some have argued that our leader Stephane Dion must have far-reaching, bold, even controversial policy pronouncements. Well what do you think his environmental policy is? The debate has not been settled. Stephen Harper’s government is doing everything in its power to not act and in addition to deceive the public about the costs and Canada’s goals. And targets like those contained in the Kyoto treaty are just an initial step. Media commentators can announce that the issue has been neutralized all they want, but does anyone believe them? Does anyone believe Stephen Harper? On the environmental file, we will witness the spectacle of the Liberals once again dragging the Conservatives kicking and screaming into modernity. These sorts of impressions can last for a generation and more.
I guess the Dion teams’ positioning of the Liberal party on the major issues of the day happened while many were sleeping. I am really pleased by the announcement of corporate tax cuts, a policy similar to “socialist” Sweden, to promote economic growth. The Afghanistan position is reasonable. We will end our combat mission in 2009, although further peace-keeping and aid efforts remain possible. It is time that our other partners in the NATO coalition do their part, otherwise it is not much of a coalition really.
In fact, the party has been positioned in what I think of as a policy sweet spot on most of the important issues. And there is no lack of talent in the federal Liberal caucus to get the message out. In the one-on-one debates of televised political discussion panels, the Liberal representatives leave the Conservatives looking like uniformed angry hacks which is why I would prefer at least another month or so for Liberal MPs to rake the Conservatives over the coals and to get Stephen Harper or one of his bumbling ministers on the record about the Conservative money laundering scandal.
Either way, its up to Stephane Dion to call the plays as he will be the leader for at least the next two elections. The talent and ambition of the current crop of MPs as well as the policies the Liberals are advancing, win or lose, make me proud to be a Liberal. Don’t expect an audience for excuses after the next election. Return victorious or on your shields.
The promise to make every government bill an automatic confidence motion will with time look more and more like dumb bluster. Not only does this directly contradict his previous public statements, there are enough democrats in the country (in every political party) who realize that minority parliaments cannot function under such conditions and, if we are to have more minority situations, Stephen Harper’s promise is a dangerous and unworkable precendent. If an election occurs over a minor piece of legislation, the Harper Conservatives’ carry the full responsibility.
Secondly, the claim that striking a committee of unelected private citizens, who already appear to favour an extension of the combat role in Afghanistan, will neutralize the issue is ridiculous not brilliant. Imagine Stephen Harper’s response during an election Leaders debate to questions about the combat role that has resulted in increased levels of violence and instability in Afghanistan. Will he say that a committee is studying the issue and that election campaigns are not the time to talk about policy? Brilliant. Even those media commentators who loudly applaud Stephen Harper’s every word must be getting tired of being jerked around by the erratic Conservative message machine.
Some have argued that our leader Stephane Dion must have far-reaching, bold, even controversial policy pronouncements. Well what do you think his environmental policy is? The debate has not been settled. Stephen Harper’s government is doing everything in its power to not act and in addition to deceive the public about the costs and Canada’s goals. And targets like those contained in the Kyoto treaty are just an initial step. Media commentators can announce that the issue has been neutralized all they want, but does anyone believe them? Does anyone believe Stephen Harper? On the environmental file, we will witness the spectacle of the Liberals once again dragging the Conservatives kicking and screaming into modernity. These sorts of impressions can last for a generation and more.
I guess the Dion teams’ positioning of the Liberal party on the major issues of the day happened while many were sleeping. I am really pleased by the announcement of corporate tax cuts, a policy similar to “socialist” Sweden, to promote economic growth. The Afghanistan position is reasonable. We will end our combat mission in 2009, although further peace-keeping and aid efforts remain possible. It is time that our other partners in the NATO coalition do their part, otherwise it is not much of a coalition really.
In fact, the party has been positioned in what I think of as a policy sweet spot on most of the important issues. And there is no lack of talent in the federal Liberal caucus to get the message out. In the one-on-one debates of televised political discussion panels, the Liberal representatives leave the Conservatives looking like uniformed angry hacks which is why I would prefer at least another month or so for Liberal MPs to rake the Conservatives over the coals and to get Stephen Harper or one of his bumbling ministers on the record about the Conservative money laundering scandal.
Either way, its up to Stephane Dion to call the plays as he will be the leader for at least the next two elections. The talent and ambition of the current crop of MPs as well as the policies the Liberals are advancing, win or lose, make me proud to be a Liberal. Don’t expect an audience for excuses after the next election. Return victorious or on your shields.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Scott Brison and about time
I was beginning to forget what I liked about Scott Brison so much. He totally clobbered that sack of wind Van Loan on Duffy tonight from start to finish. Scott needs more airtime. We need Scott to have more airtime.
In other news, its nice to hear some positive managed leaks for a change even if they are mixed with negative ones. Check out Diatribes.There will be some housecleaning later in the week?
To present a sense of direction there must be some winners and some losers. Hopefully, those who do not fare as well realize that it is not the end. Its nothing personal and politics is full of well deserved come-backs. Nothing is forever.
We’ll see what happens….
In other news, its nice to hear some positive managed leaks for a change even if they are mixed with negative ones. Check out Diatribes.There will be some housecleaning later in the week?
To present a sense of direction there must be some winners and some losers. Hopefully, those who do not fare as well realize that it is not the end. Its nothing personal and politics is full of well deserved come-backs. Nothing is forever.
We’ll see what happens….
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)