Didn't a Mr. Biden get in some difficulty over this sort of thing?

by kadyomalley on Tuesday, September 30, 2008 9:16am - 96 Comments

Well, gosh. I’m sure there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation for this:

For Immediate Release
September 30, 2008

Harper copied John Howard’s speech on Iraq

TORONTO – Prime Minister Stephen Harper must explain how it is possible that almost half of the major speech he delivered in House of Commons calling for Canadian troops to be sent to the War on Iraq was a word-for-word recitation of the speech Australian Prime Minister John Howard delivered less than a day and a half before, said Liberal Foreign Affairs Critic Bob Rae.

“How does a leader in Canada’s Parliament, on such a crucial issue, end up giving almost the exact same speech as any another country’s leader, let alone a leader who was a key member of George W. Bush’s Coalition of the Willing?” said Mr. Rae.

“How can Canadians trust anything that Mr. Harper says now? The decision on whether to commit troops to join the War on Iraq was by far the greatest test leaders across the globe faced this decade. We now know when Mr. Harper faced that test, he not only made the wrong choice, but he made that choice so blindly and carelessly that he ended up delivering a word-for-word repetition of someone else’s words and thoughts,” said Mr. Rae.

Mr. Rae said it was “shocking” that Mr. Harper had resorted to lifting someone else’s words for such a key speech.

“Liberals have been arguing for over two years that Canada is losing its independent voice in foreign affairs under Mr. Harper,” said Mr. Rae.  ”We just had no idea that Mr. Harper was prepared to borrow the drafting of the actual words he would use from another country.”

A line by line comparison, courtesy of the Liberal Party is here, or  you can “watch Mr. Harper and Mr. Howard deliver their speech” here.

ELSEWHERE IN THE MACLEANSDOTCAVERSE:

The Conservatives’ rapid non-response team weighs in

Aaron Wherry liveblogs a Senior Conservative Source giving the most well-attended virtual background briefing here.

Paul Wells digs through the archives

Bookmark and Share
  • Stephen

    So whats the point, that he “stole a speech” or that he supported Canadian participation in the Iraq War?

    If its the latter, well we didnt and people change minds, why only a few months ago Michael Ignatieff changed his mind from supporting the Iraq invasion to opposing it. Maybe Mr Rae, Mr Dion and Mr Ignatieff would like to get on stage together and explain that, should be fun.

    As for the speech, thats going to depend on whether the Conservatives can co-ordinate a response with the Australians I suspect. If the Aussies say yeah we knew about it, they asked and we said sure then where is the issue? Biden, well it is different if you are making some high falutin rhtorical call to arms that Biden was and likely promoting yourself as a great orator, as Biden was. But nonetheless if you had permission its a small point and even if you didnt you just say, well it shouldnt have been done. And you search like mad for an equivalent of Bob saying dumb things, trust me there are many….Rae isnt the Conservative target nor is Ignatieff, its Dion.

    Oh opne more point, Biden got caught within a week or so of making the speech not 5 freaking years later….what a joke, joke of an attack, joke of Canada’s naval gazing non investigative media, sorry kady but your profession is pretty poor at this stuff in this country. You take all of the parties stuff hook line and sinker…there are exceptions but they prove the rule.

    Generally, its a bit of a loser argument, I know it gets Julie Van Dusen all warm and tingly but most Canadians couldnt care less about a speech in Parliament 5 years ago, sadly they dont care about a speech given yesterday for that matter, on an issue that really is long past.

    If this is the best the Liberals have at this stage, then it really is over. And Rae, well I guess the leadership contest has started 2 days Rae, 2 days Iggy, I suspect it will be 2 days Rae back and forth…..notice how there is no Dion in there. Once again a decent media would be skeptical about the whole thing, and of course a decent media would have caught this 5 years ago…its not like the Australian Conservative/Canadian Conservative connection was a hidden thing. Guess it wasnt important.

  • Austin So

    Plagiarism ain’t that bad…heck everyone does it. Even in school, it’s now okay. I teach and even I do it.

    ARE YOU ALL FREAKIN” SERIOUS ?!

    Un-freakin’-believable.

    Austin

  • http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

    Boudicea – Can you post a link to any blog that spotted this – uh, homage – before today? I didn’t think it was possible to feel more ashamed of our – the media’s, that is – collective failure to notice this at the time than I do right now, but a link to a blogger who *did* figure it out would pretty much do it.

  • James Elton

    I think it’s less an issue of plagiarism as much as coordination between supporters of the war. As much as I agree with Harper’s recent statements on the economy, he just can’t be trusted when it comes to so many other things.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Took the words right out of my mouth, Austin.

  • Austin So

    The silly rationalizations…

    The point is that a leader of a party of Canada, is either

    1. co-ordinating propaganda with other foreign countries and acting as their shill,

    or

    2. completely lacking in morality/integrity that he deems it “okay” (like a lot of people here) to copy almost word-for-word speeches made by others.

    I have no doubt that it will be blamed on a staffer (hats off to SF and PW). And that will just complete the picture of him as the “intellect”.

    ROFLMAO~!

    Austin

  • boudica

    Kady and Just Visiting, I’ll be the first to admit that I didn’t read from a blog. I found out about it this AM. I was, however, told by colleagues that accusations of plagiarism and/or Harper being fed talking points by the White House and Howard had been flagged by bloggers a while ago, specifically on the A’stan file.

    I’ll most certainly ask them for the names.

  • DR

    Do we know if it was even written by an Australian? I wonder…

    I give the Liberals credit – this is a really clever way to bring up his support for the clusterfrak in a way that makes it even worse.

  • http://economics.about.com Mike Moffatt

    “I was, however, told by colleagues that accusations of plagiarism and/or Harper being fed talking points by the White House and Howard had been flagged by bloggers a while ago, specifically on the A’stan file.”

    Considering nothing like this shows up on Technorati nor Google Blog Search, I’ll believe it when I see it.

  • Ti-Guy

    Anyone who doesn’t thinks this is an important issue has got real, serious problems of moral and intellectual bankruptcy. This isn’t like Cindy McCain copying and pasting a cookie recipe from a package of Nestlé’s chocolate chips.

    I hate getting to a discussion like this late, after the Conbots have clogged it up with their hand-waving and tedious false equivalencies.

    I hope the “journalists” get to the bottom of this and don’t take “blaming a staffer” at face value.

  • Jack Mitchell

    “Do we know if it was even written by an Australian? I wonder…”

    That’s a good point, DR. It’s not impossible that John Howard got a hold of Harper’s text beforehand, “scooped” him essentially, and then left Harper to dangle in the wind. Which would explain the 180-degree change in Harper’s Iraq policy. You can’t blame him, really, when they were plagiarising his eloquence.

  • Tom

    The CBC story indicates that the first Tory rebuttal has come in courtesy of Kory T.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2008/09/30/rae-harper.html

    Those of you who placed money on “It’s old, so it doesn’t count” rather than “It was a staffer’s fault” seem to win this round, although who knows if the official explanation will remain this way.

  • Just visiting

    Boudica: I’m thinking that this particular and spectacular bit of plagiarism went unnoticed by media and bloggers in two large countries.

    As well as being a disgrace for Harper, it is also a very bad revelation about our new media.

    As for bloggers, isn’t this the sort of thing that supposedly gets outed by “citizen journalists.”

    So what happened? How did something like this go unnoticed for 5 years?

    (And I note from newsworld that the official CPC strategy is to just pretend the revelation is unimportant. I guess they’ll change their approach only when and if it becomes apparent that the story won’t go away.)

  • boudica

    “Considering nothing like this shows up on Technorati nor Google Blog Search, I’ll believe it when I see it.”

    What don’t you believe, Mike? That Harper could have plagiarised a speech or that bloggers noticed it before today?

  • http://economics.about.com Mike Moffatt

    “What don’t you believe, Mike? That Harper could have plagiarised a speech or that bloggers noticed it before today?”

    The latter.. just because I’ve looked and looked and I can’t find any of these bloggers.

  • Just visiting

    boudica, I think Mike was unbelieving that bloggers had exposed this earlier.

    I am similarly in disbelief because if this apparent plagiarism had been exposed by bloggers, and neither Canadian nor Australian media picked it up, then we are talking about more than just journalistic laziness here.

    In my view, this story matters because of what it says about Harper, and what it days about our news media.

  • LeslieE

    The CPC apologists are out in force today.
    I find it funny that the speech is “old” but the picture of Dion on the home page of the CPC website is … what … current?

  • Jack Mitchell

    As predicted:

    “”We’re not going to get drawn into which staffer wrote which speech five years ago,” he [Baran] said.

  • SERRENDIPPITTY

    comment by Scott Feschuk on Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 10:20 am:

    where are we at in the countdown to harper, who has always loved to boast that he writes his most important speeches himself, inevitable pointing the finger of blame at a lowly staffer?

    I recall Stockwell Day, standing in the mist, after securing the leadership of the Alliance Party … Whereupon, at next election, he stood near the mist, within the mist, and re-directed the flow of the mighty Niagara southward. He was just so damned majestic … almost like Heston, when he raised his staff and parted the Red Sea.

    I was quite critical of Aislin at the time for portraying ‘Stock’ standing between Adam and Eve, in a wetsuit, in The Garden. It wasn’t the images Aislin projected that insulted our senses. It was the fact Aislin had omitted Dino the Dinosaur from his piece.

  • TJ Cook

    jwl: I’m not comparing the two.

    Although to be fair, the issue here isn’t whether a speech was plagiarized (who the hell would possibly care?), it’s Harper’s complete alignment with Bush Blair and Howard on a truly massive mistake. Alignment he’s now trying to keep quiet. Not the same as the sponsorship scandal but pretty damn significant.

    Anyway, it’s pretty comical for the right-wing to declare 5 years to be “ancient history” when it’s their cockup, but still totally relevant in the context of the OTHER party’s scandal. Surely you recognize that.

  • boudica

    Mike and Just Visiting, I’m not sure I understand why that matters. If bloggers didn’t in fact sniff this one out earlier, are we then suggesting that no one in the press could have?

    Then how did the LPC find this information?

  • David

    a bit rich coming from Bob Rae who oversaw Ontario in a period fifteen years ago when feral wolverines ran amok through the streets, eating the children of hardworking immigrant families

    I was wondering where all the hardworking immigrant families’ children had got to, too.

  • DR

    Jack, I was actually thinking of what Potter poste about. The idea that the speech came from a country that neither man calls home.

  • http://economics.about.com Mike Moffatt

    “Mike and Just Visiting, I’m not sure I understand why that matters. If bloggers didn’t in fact sniff this one out earlier, are we then suggesting that no one in the press could have?”

    Well, you were the one who brought it up.

    The only way it does matter is then the press missed it twice – they missed it when it happened AND they missed blogs discussing it.

    There are a lot of people who are going to come out of this with egg on their faces, including the media for not finding it earlier.

    As far as how the LPC found out.. maybe they had someone searching what was being said on Iraq, in particular by Harper (in order to use it in the debates) and managed to stumble across two very similar speeches. Who knows?

  • Just visiting

    boudica, my point is that this revelation points to a HUGE problem in how our media cover politics.

    If bloggers had covered this earlier, then this would mean media not only had media missed the plagiarism, but they also missed blog reports about the plagiarism, or chose not to reveal what bloggers had reported. Which would make the performance of the media even worse, in my view.

    Sop my main concern is with this as a media failure. However, if bloggers missed it, then I ask why that would happen, given that the promise of “citizen journalism” is that it allegedly makes it hard for the MSM to ignore big stuff.

    So that’s why it matters. I’m thinking that if a single blogger caught on to this plagiarism and had written about it then the CPC war room would be trumpeting it now to back their claim that this is “old news.” I think the bloggers missed it.

From Macleans