Categories: Opinion, Paul Wells

Harper's rut

PAUL WELLS: Suddenly, things aren’t so clear and focused

by Paul Wells on Thursday, March 11, 2010 4:20pm - 179 Comments

“In support of building a stronger Canada,” said the Harper government’s Speech from the Throne, “the government’s agenda will be clear and focused.”

Perhaps I should specify. That’s what they said—or gave unto Michaëlle Jean to say—in their first Throne Speech. Four years ago.

In the latest Throne Speech, earlier this month, Stephen Harper and his crack team of recalibrators had a bit more to say. They pledged to “launch a digital economy strategy.” To “extend support for…prototyping of new space-based technologies.” To “ensure that unnecessary regulation does not inhibit the growth of Canada’s uranium mining industry.”

Harper and his clear, focused team swore to “support a competitive livestock industry” and “defend supply management of dairy and poultry products” while “continuing trade negotiations with the European Union,” never mind that Canada’s continued defence of supply management will gut any trade deal of its substance if it does not simply torpedo negotiations altogether.

The government will “reintroduce legislation to protect Canadian families from unsafe food, drug and consumer products.” It will “respect the wishes of Canadians by reintroducing the consumer product safety legislation.” It will “reintroduce tough legislation to combat the criminal drug trade.” The government will do these things because it believes in them just as much as it did when it throttled the last session of Parliament and killed those reforms the first time.

The Harper government will “look to innovative charities and forward-thinking private-sector companies to partner on new approaches to many social challenges.” The name and the nature of the charities, the companies, and the challenges will have to wait.

The government will “establish a prime ministerial award for volunteerism,” “support legislation establishing Seniors’ Day,” hold “a national day of commemoration” for the last veteran of the First World War, “bring individuals, groups and businesses together to build community war memorials,” “continue to invest in world-class Canadian athletics,” “mark the quadricentenary of the settling of Cupids, Newfoundland and Labrador,” “engage millions of citizens and strengthen knowledge and pride in Canada by commemorating the bicentennial of the War of 1812,” “celebrate the 60th anniversary of the accession of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II,” and “ask Parliament to examine the original gender-neutral English wording of our national anthem.”

In the interest of clarity and focus, the government withdrew that last idea 49 hours after the Governor General read it aloud. The other plans remain. Onward.

Pages: 1 2

Tags: Budget, Canada, National Anthem, Paul Martin, paul wells, prorogue parliament, reforms, Stephen Harper, Throne Speech

More by Paul Wells

Derek Sloan

Hopefully this is either a tack to "please them all" prior to an upcoming election, and not a fall from grace. I had big plans for Stephen, who seemed more of a crusading ideologue than a politician, but alas, who knows??
Tom

If the government is talking about getting tough on the drug trade, which in my opinion is an enourmous problem, and dangerous, why don't they start with that MP who was caught with cocaine in his possession. They should use him as an example and give him a taste of prison. Drug traders are ruining countless lives, starting with high-school children, and they are indirectly resposible for many deaths. Drug traders should be put away for a good length of time (years) for the first offence. Put that MP in prison – take the smirk off his face.

Mike514

Maybe because "that MP" is not actually an MP, but a private citizen? Or the fact that he's not a drug trader, but a drug user?

http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Perhaps, since he got off so lightly, he could help and identify his supplier.

ABarlow

Prohibition has been wildly unsuccessful at reducing drug usage or drug-related crimes. If anything, prohibition has provided a massive black market revenue stream for organized crime, and the harder the police crack down, the higher their net profits are. The United States has tried everything from life sentences for users to bombing suppliers in foreign countries without any successes.

http://intensedebate.com/people/prescott prescott

It will support “the establishment of a National Monument to the Victims of Communism ……”
_____________

This is very odd and very bizarre. Joe McCarthy would be pleased.

biff

So by pointing out that communism killed millions,

you're accusing them of being like someone who accused people of communism because of the most tenous of links.

How so very, very rich.

http://intensedebate.com/people/RunningGag RunningGag

Communist countries have killed lots of people, but then so have Democratic countries. An idea has never killed anyone, its always the implementation of the idea that does it.

I don't know any Canadian monument to the victims of totalitarianism, authoritarianism, imperialism, liberalism, conservatism, etc. It is strange to have a memorial for the victims of a political ideology.

Its the whole, 'Guns don't kill people; people kill people,' argument.

JFD

I agree. We shouldn't have a monument to the victims of fascism either.

Because if we are talking about evils Auschwitz was a copy, not an original – the original was the Gulag and the NKVD.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Well.. if that's what it takes for a monument, we should also be putting one up for the Victims of Religion
http://intensedebate.com/people/prescott prescott

What is so very, very rich, Biff, is that every political movement or party in the world has been responsible for millions of deaths. We can either acknowledge that (and maybe build a monument to the over 1,000,000 who were killed (and are still dying I might add) in what is now Vietnam by democracy's bombs and poisons or maybe Nagasake and Hiroshima ), or move on by encouraging peace and forward-thinking practices. Canada has many home-grown victimes – we don't need to import more and honour their history before our own. Also, there were and are many forms of communism (as is the case with democracies). China is going to be the next big power on this little planet – better to encourage a dialogue and change some of the abhorrent practices through discourse and diplomacy. Let's not be unnescssarily confrontational, especially as few, if any, died from communism while living in Canada. It just doesn't make sense and strikes me as plitical pandering.

biff

It's rich for obvious reasons.

I see that your moral equivalences have reached the loathsome point whereby no mass murder by any regime, is worthy of taking exception to, since every regime is equally bad in your eyes.

I take comfort in the fact that views like that are in the tiniest of minorties.

http://intensedebate.com/people/prescott prescott

"I take comfort in the fact that views like that are in the tiniest of minorties"

Apparently, not, sport, if the 'thumbs up' sign is any indicator. I gather your aim is just to be confrontational and basically you find solace in being a name-caller, which is actually what those proposed monuments are against ——— the name-calling bullies of life. How very, very ironic!

Canadian

Canada is the best place in the world to live. China can take their cue from us.
Canadian

Communism is evil as an ideology because its' focus is on the state rather than the individual. The "State" is the all-important entity and it's prerogatives trump the rights of the individual. (who has none) That's why the history of Communism is tainted by the democide of billions of human beings. (comparatively, deaths attributed to religious wars is a drop in the bucket, unless you count Islam)
The fundamental building block of any good civilized society is "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". (for the individual) Who can disagree with this? If there's any criticism it's because North American society has departed from that foundational goal.

Holly Stick

Actually, in Canada it's "Peace, order and good government." Different emphasis than the US idea, and it produced a better society. Canada is not just some satellite of the US.

Capitalism as an ideology is evil becaase it promostes greed and selfishness.
http://intensedebate.com/people/prescott prescott

Absolutely right, Holly. Too many who are ignorant of Canada's bases for its foundation, often think it's like the American one, which it absolutely is NOT. I wish these same people would sit down with a book and read about our country's wonderful history – a very different beginning than that of the U.S. Just finished reading Champlain's Dream – what a forward-thinking man he was. An incredibly good book and really points out the stark differences in the beginnings of our two countries in the early 1600s. I learned a lot and wish there had been more Samuel de Champlains in the world.
Rob

Holly, I fail to understand your comment that Canada is a better Society than the US. Just take a look around. We have more and more people turning to the foodbanks in order to get by, people shooting up the streets in our Cities, homeless people everywhere, etc. Generally speaking, the only real difference between Canada and the US is the Health Care issue. Make no mistake about it! Capitalism lives in Canada!

Mike514

Oh, Paul. Always so negative. Why not write a happy column once in a while?

http://intensedebate.com/people/PeteTong PeteTong

Yeah Paul! Who are you playing to?
http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Hey, Paul shows a pretty positive side when he writes about music – jazz, opera, rock, even Michael Jackson.

He's just pragamatic when it comes to politics. While the SH government is here, one can't help but be negative.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

"While the SH government is here, one can't help but be negative."

… unlike with past governments such as Paul Martin's, Jean Chretien's, and Brian Mulroney's, during all of which one couldn't help but be skipping through sunlit daisy-filled meadows.

http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Reported for the classless innuendo of a personal nature that Macleans would likely NOT wish to have on its pages.
tenni

I'm inclined to be confused to the purpose of monuments to the victims of communism and the holocaust? What has this to do with Canada? Some immigrants may have come to Canada because of these two events and contributed positively to Canada. I would think that a positive monument to how they contributed to Canada may be a better idea. How much will this cost me by the way during our massive deficit era? Maybe, Stockwell might trim this idea as a foolish and unnecessary waste of my tax money? Put it where the idea about gender neutral O'Canada idea went.

Holly Stick

Good points. Or how about a positive monument to the contributions of women. There are not that many statues of women in Ottawa, though the Famous Five are there now.

On the other hand, better to restore funding to the Status of Women Canada.
jont

i don't disagree with the comment about a positive monument but it seems a little crass to only memorialize one's own tragedies while discounting the import of other's. In addition the Holocaust became our tragedy in many ways.

http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

This is a buzz word speech that says nothing – it's the Seinfeld Throne Speech – all about nothing.

trebal

It must have been something for you to listen..Oh i forgot your from Liberal Ontario…Sorry

http://intensedebate.com/people/RunningGag RunningGag

What an obviously echo-chamber-esque comment.
http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

Brilliant, did it take you long to come up with these words of wisdom?

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Now, now you people, the other day Paul asked us not to attack each other here, just to partake in civil debate.

New Inkless Fan

Establish a "National Monument to the Victims of Communism "
Great.
What are the odds of Harper supporting a National Monument to the Victims of Capitalism or Corporatism? ;)

Mulletaur

The victims of capitalism and corporatism are also the victims of communism. Communism was a reaction and a critique of capitalism. They are two sides of the same coin. One could not exist without the other.

Sigh

Then why put up a monument to the victims of only one side of the coin?

Mulletaur

Because we are capitalist. And we won. Because we are right. We are the right side of the Coyne.

JamesHalifax

New Inkless fan wrote:
"What are the odds of Harper supporting a National Monument to the Victims of Capitalism or Corporatism? ;) "

Victims of Capitalism and corporatism aren't dead…….they just lost money. Mostly through their own investment decisions. That's the risk one takes when one invests.

Communism on the other hand….has killed tens of millions of people.

If you can't see the difference………….then no amount of words will clear it up for you.

http://intensedebate.com/people/RunningGag RunningGag

Communist countries have killed lots of people, but then so have Democratic countries. An idea has never killed anyone, its always the implementation of the idea that does it.

I don't know any Canadian monument to the victims of totalitarianism, authoritarianism, imperialism, liberalism, conservatism, etc. It is strange to have a memorial for the victims of a political ideology.

Its the whole, 'Guns don't kill people; people kill people,' argument.

JFD

You're ideologically deformed.

We have monuments to the victimes of fascism for good reason. And Communism was its necessary forerunner. Was the [Soviet] Gulag Archipelago not primary to Auschwitz? Was the Bolshevik murder of an entire class not the logical and factual prius of the "racial murder" of National Socialism?

http://intensedebate.com/people/RunningGag RunningGag

Can you please reference a monument to the victims of fascism? Certainly we have monuments to the holocaust, etc., but not, as far as I know, to fascism itself. Because it's an idea.

Whether or not the communist revolution in various countries killed people is not relevant. The concept communism did not kill anyone. Nor did the concept democracy kill anyone in the American War of Independence or the French Revolution. These are ideas, not actions. Fanatics hellbent on implementing their version of these ideas on their respective societies are what killed people.

That's like saying religion has caused mass murder throughout history. It hasn't. People have used religion as an excuse for murder, yes. But religion is just a concept; it doesn't have the power to make anyone do anything that they don't already want to do.
Holly Stick

How about a monument to women who have been the vicitims of domestic violence? Plenty of them in Canada.
http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Good one Holistic; I mean Holly.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

I woud beg to differ; there have been many deaths due to capitalism across the world. The privatization that U.S. foreign policy tried to impose on many developing countries over the decades, primarily so US corporations could profit, left large populations without a livelihood, and many died.

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Another sad case of capitalistic greed causing deaths was the case of Nestle and its canned infant formula. I recall a case study in business school in the 80's that Nestle saw the developing world as a huge opportunity for profits. To penetrate the market, they offered free formula to mothers who gave birth in hospitals. The white healthy baby on the label was appealing so, rather than nursing the mothers opted for the formula. Well, their breast milk dried up; then the cost of the formula became too expensive so mothers diluted it with water (often dirty water). The babies became ill, malnourished and often died.

http://www.teachspace.org/personal/research/nestl…
http://www.wearsthebaby.com/articles/nestle.html

http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Another sad case of capitalistic greed causing deaths was the case of Nestle and its canned infant formula. I recall a case study in business school in the 80's that Nestle saw the developing world as a huge opportunity for profits. To penetrate the market, they offered free formula to mothers who gave birth in hospitals. The white healthy baby on the label was appealing so, rather than nursing the mothers opted for the formula. Well, their breast milk dried up; then the cost of the formula became too expensive so mothers diluted it with water (often dirty water). The babies became ill, malnourished and often died.

http://www.teachspace.org/personal/research/nestl…
http://www.wearsthebaby.com/articles/nestle.html

kcm

" Harper carries the weight of his entire government on his shoulders. And it is grinding him into a rut."

Hey, it's not easy waking up everyday, looking in the mirror and seeing Paul Martin on a bad day, and telling yourself that it is only temporary ; that one day you'll start to resemble the guy who once thought Canada was a northern welfare basket case – not a NWBC is just fine if it keeps you in office one more day.

Holly Stick

"The mills of God grind slowly but they grind exceeding small." That's from a story by Edmund Crispin who was probably quoting someone or other. Harper is paying the price of his arrogance and his refusal to work with others. Keep on grinding there, mills!

kcm

Yeah…what was that quote about absolute power corrupting absolutely – Lord Acton i think.

kcm

oops…; that one day you'll start to a again resemble…- i guess a NWBC is just fine if it keeps you in office for one more day.

http://intensedebate.com/people/RunningGag RunningGag

At least that has some consistency, some substance.

I don't know, I would much rather have a tribute to success. Say a tribute to advancing women's lib., or a statue of a prominent womens' rights activist (although, you'd be surprised just how many people at the National Post would hate that one).

It just seems silly to me to have a monument to an idea, or a concept. Its empty and vapid. It serves no purpose other than to be polarizing. But then, I guess, its difficult to build a monument to the all the victims of Communist governments around the world. China and Russia might not play nice over that.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

Good points, but wouldn't Russia and China look askance at a monument to victims of Communism anyway?

Does anyone know why we are intentionally trying to piss those two (plus Cuba, I suppose) off right now? What, other than presumably a shiny new thing, is in it for us? It won't bring those victims back or anything, will it?

Mary in Calgary

Didn't you get the memo about Global warming? I guess you'll have to go looking for it and get back to us.
http://intensedebate.com/profiles/ubersilenus ubersilenus

After reading the first paragraph of promises I translated it into this. We'll sell uranium to shady middle men who are known to hang out with terrorists and then offer to throw their weapons into space where they can destroy the digital economy by setting off nukes in the stratosphere. At which point the digital economy will only have one way to go, up.

Also all clocks will suddenly jump forward by two years, making the celebration of the war of 1812 a logical choice to celebrate this year.
Holly Stick

Hey Paul: "…The Harper government will “look to innovative charities and forward-thinking private-sector companies to partner on new approaches to many social challenges.” The name and the nature of the charities, the companies, and the challenges will have to wait…"

How about this one?:

"…Now consider this figure: CIDA’s Canadian Engagement Fund, destined to become the humanitarian equivalent of the government’s Canada Action (propaganda) Plan, will receive a 370% increase in the next year! No one saw that coming. All that money being spent in Canada while cutting our investments to the poorest of the poor was more than the students could bear last night…"

http://glenpearson.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/the-l…
http://intensedebate.com/people/RunningGag RunningGag

Clearly. Its like the Armenian Genocide thing in the US. It serves no purpose other than rocking the boat.
sakel1m

Oh Paul Wells! Sometimes you have an inexplicable urge to focus in on the substance and forget the peripheral non-issues. In this case, your pedagogical insight is "teach by example". And you did!

Forget the Substance, says the budget's robotic inventor at his desk late at night–whilst Paul's sneaking around checking the punchcard. "Let's focus on the periphery, and, if Canadians are as dumb as I think they are (hell, it only took a few gold medals for the hoi polloi to forget prorogation!), then they'll be eating it up like cake"!

If your column was deliberately written in an attempt to show us the lack of real focus, and contemptuous disregard for the intelligence of Canadians this government cherishes, then you've succeeded 100%!

This scattered budget needs an appointment with a national identity shrink ASAP!

Dismantle central government (and national identity), have the provinces deliver services, and the feds take care of national defense and infrastructure, and you're free to develop a parochial, regressive social agenda that would do Beck and Palin proud. If the robot's Plan 9 from Outer Ottawa succeeds, then, who knows, we may be lucky enough to join our cousins south of the border as their 51st State. And think: Only two indistinguishable parties to choose from.
Less confusion than having to choose among Ignatieff, Layton, May and Duceppe and, of course, our Dear Leader….
http://intensedebate.com/profiles/ubersilenus ubersilenus

Lemme get this straight. Say that we're for everything, throw money at anything inside your own borders, take money away from anything not within your borders, and retract any statements that may upset anyone.

Yup, sounds like Harper's kid wrote this speech when he ran for class president.
ECO Mind.

I don,t understand Harper's Intenton's ,before closing down the House on the Hill,his Recalliberation in the 13 wk break , was not'n more than A Power Ball ,to show more arragance on his Part, as some people may have Read in the Past week ,that most of the money Raised TO Haiti,is not goin to Aid ,It goes back Right into Pockets of Corrutp People. Mr Harper Seems to have A Bad Taste of respect for the Law of the Land in his own Country, leaving noth'n but Dust on his Path, how do you Stop the PM ,by playing Games on People's Rights, I think it,s time for the People's Parlaiment to be Aired out, their is Room for Other Leaders to Govern in a cleaner envoirnment,to much pollution in the country, someone else should take the rein's & Raise the Flag Proudly & Keep the National Antiem. like they say we all need to filter out Rubbish,and turn a new Page.
copinacus

As long as Quebec sends 40 or more members of the Bloc to Ottawa there will be pretty well nil opportunity for ANYONE to form a majority government. If there are 225 seats in total and 40 (say) are taken out by the bloc, a party will have to win 116 seats out of the remaining 185 in the rest of Canada. With the West pretty well Conservative and the Maritimes pretty well Liberal and Ontario pretty well split 50-50, we're not going to see majority government for a long time.
evenflow

Is it true the Canadian government is the largest sub-prime lender in the world? And if it is, than when interest rates go up and families default on their mortgages (which have been secured by the Canadian Government not private lenders) our deficit will increase throwing the Finance minister's forecast off?
David B.

Paul: The " Cat & Mouse" majority game has been first and foremost since the early days of Reform …. and the majority government is a mandate for the power based Reform roots. For any journalist or voter to think otherwise is a mistake. And that ladies and gentlemen you can take to bank!
bkhislop

just think what a great nation this would be if beverly mclachlin and rosalie abella were off the supreme court, human rights commissions were just a bad dream, trudeaupian pieties disappeared with sheila copps' political career, and we actually had a replacement-level birthrate. So much squandered potential
Gene F

We need proportional representation! The last election clearly showed that. How can one million Canadians vote for the Green Party and have zero representation yet 800K Albertans vote in 35 odd PCs??
http://intensedebate.com/people/CanadianSense CanadianSense

Do you have link to confirm it?

On the surface, it would appear Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives have the most to lose if subsidies were cut because they garnered the most votes in the October election. The Conservatives earned $10 million in subsidies, compared to $7.7 million for the Liberals, $4.9 million for the NDP, $2.6 million for the Bloc Québécois and $1.8 million for the Greens.

But because the Conservatives have such a strong fundraising base, their subsidy represents only 37 per cent of the party's total revenues.

By comparison, the subsidy amounts to 63 per cent of the Liberals' funding, 86 per cent of the Bloc's, 57 per cent of the NDP's and 65 per cent of the Greens'.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/26/update-…
Manny

As Harper's popularity rises at the same rate as Paul Well's hatred for the man, suddenly the disconnect between Canadians and McLean's becomes clear and focused.