Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

UPDATED: On second thought, I think I prefer him wrapping himself in the flag …

by kadyomalley on Tuesday, December 2, 2008 3:58pm - 214 Comments

… than attempting to deny its existence.

From today’s Question Period:

(Photo sent out within seconds by the Liberal press office.)

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, as part of the culmination of the machinations of the leader of the NDP, we had these three parties together forming this agreement, signing a document, and they would not even have the Canadian flag behind them. They had to be photographed without it.

They had to be photographed without it because a member of their coalition does not even believe in the country. As Prime Minister it is not my responsibility to turn the keys of power over to a group like that.

UPDATE – Environment Minister Jim Prentice at the post-QP scrums:

Hon. Jim Prentice: Mr. Dion is attempting to subvert the democratic will of the Canadian people. In the last election, people spoke very clearly. To attempt to take over the Government of Canada with a government propped up by a separatist party is not something that was put to the Canadian party.

Question: Is that not how a parliament works?

Question: Is it appropriate in the context of a big debate now that’s unfolding in the country for the prime minister to make a false statement in the House that the Canadian flag was not there behind the news conference when photos show it actually was?

Hon. Jim Prentice: Well, it was clear, I watched the press conference myself, they were not Canadian flags behind the three opposition leaders. There were a number of flags there. And I think the implication was clear that there were not only Canadian flags behind him. That’s the point.

Question: But, Minister, there were Canadian flags. We were there. There were Canadian flags (inaudible) so why did you say there weren’t?

Question: (Inaudible) in the House in the context of a heated debate like this?

Hon. Jim Prentice: Excuse me?

Question: Why wouldn’t you answer that question?

Hon. Jim Prentice: There was a Canadian flag. The point is there were not only Canadian flags behind the opposition parties when they announced —

Question: (Inaudible)

Question: provincial flags.

Question: Are you saying they’re anti-Canadian, Minister?

… and from Indian Affairs Minister Chuck Strahl:

Screencap of the Liberal Party website

Question: Why did you lie about the flag because there were flags behind them?

Hon. Chuck Strahl: The picture that I saw and the picture that I had — actually saw, somebody gave it off the Liberal Party website, shows that there is no flags there.

Tags: coalition government, prime ministerial desparation, so no further comment necessary

More by kadyomalley

danny j

Having (1) blown their shot at a majority by rallying Quebecers against them with cuts to culture programs, (2) squeaked back into power in part by encouraging Canadian voters to have a laugh at the sight of a francophone politician struggling in his second language, and (3) blown up any possibility of a constructive relationship with their Parliamentary colleagues by proposing to bankrupt the Opposition, the Conservatives are trying to salvage their hold on power by rallying the troops around the flag and against an alleged separatist threat.

Problem is, there is no separatist threat – except for the own they themselves are creating.

Only 37% of Quebecers support soverereignty today; however, 76% support a coalition. Moreover, in the recent election the Bloc Québecois did not ask for a mandate to advance the cause of sovereignty. Most trends point to a majority Charest government on December 8, which would confirm the disappearance of any realistic separatist threat from the political landscape for at least the next four years. Duceppe has to know all of this, and he has to know that any attempt by to take advantage of the situation and hold Stéphane Dion and Jack Layton for ransom would be political suicide.

Meanwhile, by getting Gilles Duceppe’s signature on a deal to support a coalition government for the next 18 months, Stéphane Dion has – in his official position as “lame-duck-loser-desperately-seeking-power” – managed to split the separatist movement right down the middle.

And what are the Conservatives doing in response? They’re giving the Bloc and the PQ a five-year supply of video footage of spastic anti-Quebec rants, not-very-cleverly disguised as appeals to save Canada from “the separatists.”

I am Quebec born and bred, bilingual, as proud of my francophone heritage as I am of my country, and I am furious that the Conservatives would dare put the future of my country in play to save their own skins.
RyanD

Dick- “Think about the country, not your political views”

Typically my political views ARE about the country and what I think is best for it, that is kind of the point…

Erin Weary- “I suppose none of you have ever complained about someone getting elected as a member of one party and then crossing the floor without a by-election, right? After all, it’s all perfectly within the rules, we elect MPs not parties, so it’s perfectly legitimate, yadda yadda… ”

Quite right, lets just scrap the rules and go with whatever “feels right.” The rule of gut instinct is far better than the rule of law!

Comparing floor crossing MP’s (who are, in some cases, completely reversing themselves and doing the opposite of what their constituents asked) with a governing coalition that is trying to reflect the wishes of their constituents in the best way possible is what is truely disingenuous. As for it being “unrealistic” don’t look now but it’s all looking pretty real to me (whether you like it or not).
SJ

“Erin Weary
Dec 2, 2008 22:13
Report Abuse

I suppose none of you have ever complained about someone getting elected as a member of one party and then crossing the floor without a by-election, right? After all, it’s all perfectly within the rules, we elect MPs not parties, so it’s perfectly legitimate, yadda yadda…

Don’t you see how disingenuous and unrealistic an argument that is? Christ, it’s like you people have never voted in an election, only read about elections in books. What a joke.”

Ahhhhh, no, thats not right. See, none of the parties are switching sides. No one is crossing the floor. The parties are coming to a compromise for the good (as they see it) of Canada (which I agree with). No one is taking a HUGE shift in policy change. Going from con – Lib, or Lib – con is going from black to white for the most part. At least with a coalition, there is some flexibility and you can pull each party into the grey…. The grey where MOST Canadians fit.

Compromise. Common ground. I know these are foreign words to us when it comes to our Canadian government, but you know what? I LIKE THEM. And with this coalition, it adds value to your vote. It means more of Canadians voices will be heard.

Bring on the Coalition of Cooperation!
Erin Weary

SJ–that’s a joke, right?
Stephane Dion: The NDP would destroy the economy.
Jack Layton: The Liberals would give $50bn to Big Banks and Big Oil.

But no, nobody is giving very much…

You guys are losing, bad. And the Macleans.ca comments are going to be the Coalition’s Last Stand….
RyanD

danny j- you really summed things up very well there. Well said! Cheers!
http://blogginghorse.blogspot.com blogging a dead horse

Flags.
The economic crisis.
The Constiution.
The end of the road for a government with only 38% support.

Is there anything these Conservatives aren’t blind to?
Erin Weary

RyanD–an election is equally within the rules. In fact moreso, because there is infinite precedent for PMs getting dissolution when they ask for it and basically none for this (note: Miller in ON85 advised in favour of the coalition, not in favour of dissolution). A prorogation is also within the technical rules. So the question is really whether this brand new coalition (rejected by its own bloody members in the last election) should be put to the voters in an election, or least should be forced to prove they can stick together for a month waiting for a budget, or whether they should instead just be installed by the Martin appointed CBC journalist GG. Nobody but an obsessive Harper hater can see the last of these as the most legitimate option.
Erin Weary

Dangit. Close tag, Erin, close tag.
RyanD

“You guys are losing, bad. And the Macleans.ca comments are going to be the Coalition’s Last Stand….”

Erin Weary- First, any realistic assesment would suggest that, like it or lump it the Tories are losing this one (at least for now). If that weren’t the case Harper and co. wouldn’t have done all that backpeddling and there would be no talk of proroging parliament (ie. running from a fight he knows he CAN’T win).

Second, if you think that the Macleans.ca comments are where any political movement would make their last stand…ummmm…wow…I like the site and all but that is just absurd! Really, that kind of bluster just comes off as desperate.
RyanD

Erin- There is, in fact, precedent for this. It has already been discussed in this thread. King-Byng in 1926 and Trudeau being asked to form a govt. in 1979 (he declined). The instances of PMs asking for and recieving dissolution rarely, if ever, involved the rejection of an existing coalition with a pretty clearly laid out plan for governance. Thus, calling them a precedent for this situation isn’t really acurate. You make the prorogation thing sound very inocuous (lets see if they can hold on, no big rush) but you are talking about suspending the democratic will of the people for a month because Harper wants more time to attack his opponants and try to break them. That is about Harper, not about what is best for the people or the country. The House gives power to those with confidence. The coalition clearly has confidence. Harper clearly does not. To delay or call an election when there is a workable alternative is rediculous. If the coalition is so toally doomed to failure why not let them have their shot, crumble and then have the election? The only reason to prorog or call an election is the fear (by Conservatives) that once they get in the coalition will work (bad for Tories, good for Canada).

As for being a Harper Hater- your damn straight I am! I he is lier and a bully and I am sickened by the fact that I must exist in the same universe as him let alone have him as PM!
T. Thwim

And if you’d care to examine the positions of the coalition, Erin, you’d see they’ve moderated things somewhat.
but for me

yes danny j, very well said…I can feel the tears welling-up and my knees buckling…but besides all that do you get paid by the bucket for that disingenuous pap?…or if I get you a pony will you feel better?
albin douglas

‘They say that patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings”

Bob Dylan
Martin Levenson

Rhaine- actually, those two glasses of water in front of Layton? Half-full, not half-empty!
danny j

I’m allergic to horses.

And I couldn’t be more serious if my left big toe were caught in a vice grip. Has it not yet occurred to anybody that if the rhetoric gets hot enough it could swing the Quebec election back to the PQ?

By keying on this alleged separatist threat the Conservatives are misleading Canadians about Quebecers’ real intentions in backing a coalition. 76% of Quebecers – English, French, federalist, separatist – want Parliament to work.

I would add that the Conservatives’ strategy is not only dangerous, it is stunningly hurtful to the hundreds of thousands of Quebecers who are passionate about their heritage/history/nation/however they define it within themselves, but who nevertheless want Canada to succeed as a united country, and who want this Parliament to work.
but for me

those two glasses in front of Jacko?…kool-aide…one for Stephie and one for Gillie…oh, what am I saying, their both for Stephie…salut’ Stephie.
SJ

“Erin Weary
Dec 2, 2008 22:48
Report Abuse

SJ–that’s a joke, right?
Stephane Dion: The NDP would destroy the economy.
Jack Layton: The Liberals would give $50bn to Big Banks and Big Oil.

But no, nobody is giving very much…

You guys are losing, bad. And the Macleans.ca comments are going to be the Coalition’s Last Stand….”

Hmmmm, maybe you missed the cooperation bit? The part where they make compromises and work together? I know it isn’t the con way, but it does have a way of working. You must have selective reading. And for that fact alone I guess u can(t) be forgiven.
but for me

Oh oh danny j, ctv’s reporting that Gillie said he’s in the coalition to “advance the seperatiste agenda.”…you were saying something or other about conservatives…Harper…dangerous strategy…oh and by the way, that’s not your big left toe caught in a vice grip…move a bit north from there.
mutti

‘Problem is, there is no separatist threat – except for the own they themselves are creating.’

Maybe we should shake the tunnel vision on Quebec and separatism ( they’ll never leave all our $ behind…. the squeeky wheel gets the grease) and look in the other direction. The West will put up with a banana republic only so long. And if they decide to leave, they won’t dink around….
aac

I see the flags on the liberal site, but no other photo from the event seems to have as many. Where’d they all come from suddenly? Perhaps some photoshop magic?

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081202/coalition_govts_081202/20081202?hub=CTVNewsAt11
sara

The best part about flag-gate is that it is not only the prime minister who made a mistake but that you can see Helena Guergis agreeing with him in the background. Glad to see the whole party was paying attention.
David

You guys are amazing! What kind of logic argues that 62% didn’t vote for Harper therefore we need someone other then him as prime minister, and then supports Mr. Dion as leader of a coalition. Did you ever think of what percentage of Canadians didn’t vote for him?
hosertohoosier

There are signing pictures that contained no flags, or where they were hard to see. The issue is, I think, one of camera angles.

It is very hard to see the flag in this picture, which is from Reuters and was widely spread about (because its Reuters). Harper obviously wasn’t at the signing himself, so he couldn’t have seen that there were flags.

http://www.reuters.com/resources/r/?m=02&d=20081202&t=2&i=7041338&w=450&r=2008-12-02T150304Z_01_BTRE4B115TC00_RTROPTP_0_CANADA-POLITICS

Others did a closeup shot on the leaders that did not show flags:
http://a123.g.akamai.net/f/123/12465/1d/www.calgaryherald.com/duceppe+dion+layton+form+coalition/1017065/1020828.bin?size=620×400

When a thread like this gets over 100 comments, it is no surprise we have such a horrible government. People would rather argue about the presence or absence of a flag (a minor point if true or false) than, you know, look for compromises or structural solutions. I suppose we can’t turn off our inner partisan robots (I will admit, my inner partisan wants to shout the f-word at every one of your talking points. If I listen to him, as most of you have, then frankly we are getting the government we deserve).

I vote no confidence in Harper, the coalition AND the Canadian people!
TK

Shoe wrote: “Conservatives CURRENTLY cannot get a single thing passed through parliament without the support of at least one other party, and in many cases it has been both the NDP and the Bloc that supported the Conservatives in the last parliament, much to the chagrin of the Liberals. At this point, the Bloc and NDP decided they had had enough of supporting right-wing rhetoric and failed public policy.”

I think you should look at the confidence votes in the last Parliament. It was the Liberals that supported the government by either voting in favour or not showing up to vote. To blame the NDP is completely false, they did not support them on confidence measures.
Liz

Ya but, in Pothole or Broomhandle Harper-land, is anyone going to hear or see the actual truth?

Doesn’t matter. Stephen Harper picks up ignorant and misrepresented votes and money like a feral dog picks up fleas. As long as they think they’ve got a dog in the fight, they’re in. It’s like on-line gambling to them: you don’t really have to be there to think you might win. And, as long as you aren’t really there, you can’t collect. Win-win for Harper, just the same as any snake oil-salesman.

There’s a sucker born every minute, and two to take them.

And nice try James Munroe: Prentice, Strahl and any other talking-Harper-head said and did what s/he was told to say or do by Stephen Harper. I also noticed that as soon as ordinary Canadians noticed who was and who was not acting in unison, Harper must have lowered the boom because today all the minority of them were singing from his playbook.

Maybe Clement was off-side, but then he gets his cues from angels.

Frankly, even if they ever became ‘independent’ I wouldn’t trust them as far as I could throw them from the HoC buffet.