Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

Principles and secret votes

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, October 14, 2010 6:34pm - 0 Comments

The Prime Minister makes his first comments on the lost security council vote.

“As I’ve said before, our engagement internationally is based on the principles that this country holds dear,” Harper told reporters at an event in eastern Quebec. “It is not based on popularity.”

The Canadian government, Harper said, takes its positions based on the promotion of “our values — freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law, justice, development, humanitarian assistance for those who need it.” ”Those are the things we’re pursuing, and that does not change regardless of what the outcome of secret votes is.”

Tags: Canada, Security Council, Stephen Harper, UN, United Nations

More by Aaron Wherry

Margaret

What a load. ALL the votes are "secret". It's done by secret ballot.

What is "secret" are the conversations between people. Does he seriously think the UAE could have so much influence? If they have that much influence, perhaps he'd be better off paying more attention to what's going on in their world, eh? And if Michael Ignatieff has that much influence, as he was recently accusing him of having — then he should be Prime Minister right off the bat.

Harper ALWAYS has to have a scapegoat. The UAE were only happy to hand him one, because I think they've figured out what he's like. There is no way that he'd ever take responsibility for this himself, oh no.

What an irresponsible, useless, incompetent, spoiled, overgrown brat and bully this so-called Prime Minister is. Get him out of here.

hollinm

Sorry Margaret a lot of Canadians do not agree with you. Look at the Nanos poll. Even the Liberal pollster Frank Graves can't get Ignatieff and the Liberals in first place. You will have to put up with Mr. Harper for another four years after the next election. Minority or Majority he is in for a long time as the Liberals looks for the next messiah. Perhaps it is the Liberal leader who is irresponsible, incomeptent, spoiled and an overgrown brat and a bully. You got the wrong guy lady.

brooster2

A lot of Canadians may not agree with Margaret as you claim but, unless there's a dramatic shift in regional voting patterns, enough Canadians will agree with her to deny Harper a majority for the third time. I sense that the CPC executive, caucus, and membership are too intimidated, in that event, to invite him to explore other career options but shouldn't he be thinking about stepping aside after three cracks at a majority? Perhaps with the exception of the NDP, whom the electorate seems to have relegated to permanent 3rd party status, I can't think of any leader who has stayed longer than three elections in spite of failing to deliver a majority.

So, unless Harper is incredibly stubborn, maybe Margaret won't have to "put up" with Harper for another four years. Or is he that stubborn?

hollinm

brooster2…….Whether Harper wins a minority or majority the fact will be that the Liberals are not the government. That will make many Canadians very happy. They still have not learned their lesson from two defeats. They continue to be arrogant and have offered nothing to the public which would cause the public to turf out the existing government.
Isn't it odd? Since 2008 the government has been dealing with a very significant recession (global) and according to the media has been up to their necks in trouble for prorogation, the long form census, the infamours Afghan detainee issue and now the fighter jets. Not once in all that time has the Liberal party and its faux leader been able to pull ahead of the government in any poll. Not one.
Coupled with that we have a Liberal leader who in his leadership polls on trustworthiness, competence, vision comes in behind Jack Layton.
Anything can happen but the odds are not in favour of the Liberals despite all the name calling which appears to be increasing in its intensity as the polls go against the Liberals.

brooster2

A somewhat rambling critique of the opposition but doesn't address my question: will Harper stick around if he fails on three occasions to win a majority?

Michael

Liberal pollster Frank Graves? You're a moron.

hollinm

If I am a moron then you are an idiot. Now that we got that out of the way we can maybe have a rational discussion where you do not resort to name calling. Shame on you.

Claudia Lemire

Hollinm, I agree with you 100%!

Claudia Lemire

And you are not welcome here if you can respect other peoples opinion, a healthy debate is always encouraged but no name calling!

Dave

What do you mean, "can't get"? Please elaborate.

hollinm

Dave….we know from the lips of Frank Graves himself that he is a small L Liberal. Consequently I believe and I think many others believe that he wants the Liberals to be the government and in fact has been offering Liberals advice on how to beat the government including starting a culture war. Where have you seen a pollster offering advice to the Conservatives on how to beat the Liberals or any other party.
If you look at his analysis which is prominently displayed on the CBC and the Globe he very seldom has anything positive to say about the Conservative party and/or the government.
Therefore it makes sense that he would word his polls in such a way as to give the Liberals every advantage to come out ahead. We know for a fact that polling companies do not approach polling in the same manner. .

Be_rad

A small 'l' liberal is closer to a traditional big 'C' Conservative in Canada.

Greg Arious

Yeah, but, Iggy loves Israel too, now that someone asked him.
austinso

Those are the things we’re pursuing, and that does not change regardless of what the outcome of secret votes is

Minority shmnority, we will do what we damn well…oh…
chet

While Iggy attacking Canada on the world stage,

why that's fearless, and, principled?

I agree that Canada didn't get it, not because Iggy exhibited one of the lowest forms of anti-statesmanship seen in recent memory,

we didn't get the seat because Canada steadfastly exemplifies principles and norms that important voting blocs don't agree with – better and more virtuous principles than the Muslim bloc, and the tinpot dictators bloc.

That doesn't change the fact that Iggy still chose to act against his own country for political gain.

Nor does it change the fact that he now openly chides our great nation as somehow being lesser than these dictatorships as a result of this vote.

On both counts, Iggy sides with himself against Canada.

How fitting for our Canadian-come-lately.

brooster2

"While Iggy attacking Canada on the world stage"

Right, chet…so the leader of the opposition was critical of the government's foreign policies in comments he made before the domestic media…that's the "world stage", is it now?

Have a problem with democratic opposition speaking freely? Isn't that what your guy purports to be defending?
John D

Good ole reliable chet
Histrionic, Much?

Trouble with Chet's "recent memory" is it only seems to go a few years back; it really wasn’t that long ago that Harper & Day publicly faulted _their_ PM in a major US paper (The Wall Street Journal, which is practically an international forum) not only for not joining a coalition (!) but also for not going around the UN (!!) to wage an illegal war against Iraq.
(that letter's reproduced here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/879589/posts

Plus there were various other times Harper's slagged Canada (esp. its eastern provinces) to the US media as being a lazy socialist welfare state, etc. But by all means, carry on with your 'The Civilized, Modern World Began in 2006' conceits.
chet

Whatever faults Harper may have, they pale in comparison to Iggy's. Canadians recognize that running a country can't be done perfectly and they generally loath politicians. So the choice of political leaders is very much a "lesser of two evils" approach. The partisans here quibble with Harper, but by and large he's run the country well, and Canada is by far well ahead of other Western nations in terms of economic stability.

Not only will Canadians not change horses midstream given our relateive prosperity and security, Iggy is simply unpalatable as a leader, and this latest slamming of Canada internationally does nothing to aid this perception (every poll shows his personal approval ratings below all the rest of the leaders).

Canada will never elect Iggy as their leader, and these latest polls (with the CPC again pulling ahead to a near double digit lead) are showing once again.

Amateur Hour

Notice that Chet refuses to acknowledge how wrong his statement is and simply switches his argument when called out.

"While Iggy attacking Canada on the world stage, "

Iggy's comment was made in a scrum in Canada … so your wrong.

As Histrionic, Much? points out, Harper has repeatedly slagged Canada (while in Opposition) and the Opposition parties (while in office) at multiple international gatherings, much to the disbelief of other countries' representatives.

So if your offended by a Canadian politician "running down Canada" abroad, correct your fir and aim your outrage at the Conservatives and Mr. Harper.

kcm

"I guess Germany has no principles. I guess Portugal has no principles" P. Dewar

Bizarre!! He didn't know it was a secret vote going in?
Anon 001

Harper will ignore the result of the next election because all the votes will be in secret.

Plus, he hates Elections Canada.

John W.

Census secret too.

Emily

LOL doesn't matter if it's a secret ballot or they announced it in neon lights….the point is, they didn't want us on there.

Coyboy Copas

Its clear Iggy did not want Canada in that seat because he announced it in neon lights and if they have to introduce Iggy again does this mean his bus trip to the hinterlands of Canada was a failure?

Emily

LOL yes, Iggy is so powerful that 2 sentences on home TV turned the entire UN against us.

Wow…if Iggy was PM he could just order world peace and we'd have it eh?

Mike T.

The current government has a habit of attacking a process when things suddenly don't go there way. Secret ballots are fine until they lose, coalition governments are swell until one could take power from him. Then new conditions are set which he claims makes the situation "illegimate".

Emily

I think that's called 'moving the goalposts'

Coyboy Copas

Like when the coalition tried to move the goalposts?

Emily

There weren't any goalposts…he who commands the confidence of the house is PM

Harper was too scared to try.
MostlyCivil

They didn't have the time to move anything.

Harper looked at the clock, rwalized he was too far behind to win the game, so he picked up the ball and went home. Oops, sorry, I was referring to the prorogue thing. Were you talking about the UN thing?

Holly Stick

Awwww, poor sucky baby just HATES secrecy!
Amateur Hour

Well, Steve, after taking a crap on the UN for much of your Reform/Alliance career, delivering said pantload of crap Iin person or via minions) to various UN fora on the environment and HIV/Aids, etc., then deciding a photo-op at a Tim Horton's was a better use of your time than addressing the UN … you think it took a conspiracy of secret votes to lose you a seat on the Security Council?

I have a feeling that it's not Beatle's lyrics that are coursing through Steve's head:

Girl, I want you here with me
But I'm really not as cool as I'd like to be
'Cause there's a red, under my bed
And there's a little yellow man in my head
And there's a true blue inside of me
That keeps stoppin' me, touchin' ya, watchin' ya, lovin' ya
Paranoia, the destroyer.
MaggiesFarmboy

It was silly to blame Ignatieff for the outcome of the security council vote.

But the real villain of the piece is not Harper, it's the UAE.
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/features/view/feat…

You have to wonder how much the recent threat to shut down blackberry service in the UAE had to do with security concerns, and how much it had to do with the UAE's Emirates Airline business plan.

Emily

Yeah, the UAE has soooo many votes.

kcm

The margin of the loss [ 70 something to 113?] was and is rather shocking. Something else going on there.
MaggiesFarmboy

Um, it has one. But the point is that it has influence. And it used it.

Holly Stick

Considering that Canada has had a base there for years, and never paid any rent, and some Conservative ministers wanted to make concessions, but Harper and Baird had to be tough and arrogant and stupid – I don't blame the UAE, really. Canada used to have respected diplomats.
http://thegallopingbeaver.blogspot.com/2010/10/it…

MaggiesFarmboy

Right. Big favour the UAE did for us.

Because the Taliban and al Qaeda are huge fans of the UAE royal family…

When threatened by their extortion attempt, we really should have caved!
Holly Stick

Didn't bother to read my link, did you MF? If you had you would see that stupid Harper failed to support our troops by pissing away an important base of operations, because he is too arrogant and obnoxious to get along with anyone. Now we have to pay the massive expense of moving off of that base and in future waste more money on extra flying time because stupid Harper pissed off our hosts and lost our military a good base.

Do you understand that or did I type too fast?
MaggiesFarmboy

Sigh. I read the link. I just don't agree that we necessarily should have agreed to their demands. We are in Afghanistan on the UAEs behalf too, in a sense. Bin laden hates the UAE Emirs, and the UAE would benefit from a stable govt in Afghanistan and a defeated al queda (not that that is likely). Their troops aren't fighting and dying in Afghanistan. They should be grateful.
Holly Stick

Why? It's not like the Afghan government is stable. We've had a valuable base in the UAE for 9 years and should express our own gratitutde for that.
MostlyCivil

I don't know. It's a blurry line when you start trading commercial rights for national security measures. It all gets kind of icky, when you start thinking about how far that can go once you open that door.
Jenn_

I agree with you. They've certainly given nine years of good faith to us. Now, I'm not saying that we should have given each airline four more slots per week to Toronto's airport, but I think we could have negotiated for more than one in total. But when you suddenly decide to play hardball and the other side is holding the bulk of the cards, why are you surprised when they play hardball back? And why on earth didn't you think of what that would mean in terms of cost to the Canadian taxpayer, not to mention military security and efficiency, before deciding to play hardball? Why does Harper suddenly hate the troops?

Emily

Yeah hugely influential in the world, that UAE….as bad as Iggy. LOL

Why it turned India, China and the US against us.

Style

Or the UAE could be claiming responsibility to bolster its own image – it's doubtful they have that much influence in global politics, but it doesn't hurt them to suggest they do. As far as cooling the Arab world's enthusiasm for a Canadian seat, I'd say our support for Israel probably took care of that. And that's okay.

MaggiesFarmboy

No doubt that had a lot to do with it, too.

Overall though, I have to agree with Lawrence Martin. the vote said more about the UN than it did about Canada.

And what it says about the UN isn't good.

Style

Too bad talking about foreign policy and international relations isn't allowed in Canada – we are only allowed to read about horse race domestic politics…

hollinm

Of course those on this board continue with their Liberal based rhetoric. This is politics pure and simple. Harper as those on this board have no idea why the vote went the way it did. However, there is one thing for certain Ignatieff is being played like a fiddle by the government for his callous comments based a week or so ago. His comments were disgraceful and partisan and should not have been made. But as is his want he is a political neophyte and he has set himself for the next campaign where the Conservatives will continue to portray him as a man who is only in it for himself. Now go crazy kids but those are the facts. Ignatieff has fallen into the spiders trap and he will pay for it in the next campaign. The talking points have already been set and an ad prepared.

John D

This is politics pure and simple. Harper as those on this board have no idea why the vote went the way it did.

So… the Prime Minister doesn't know any more about international politics than those on this board? You're calling him stupid?
Emily

We know exactly why the vote went the way it did.

And if you think Iggy is that powerful and influential….keep saying so…it'll get him elected no problem
burlivespipe

And when do you stop with the CON based rhetoric? Your screen capture doesn't do you justice, because we can see your lips moving when you type your talking points…
danby

Chantal Hebert, who most will agree is a non-partisan political analyst, offers up her views on the issue here.

The "facts, kids" as you present them are compelling to your cause and I applaud their certainty. The political landscape is always shifting, and the voters mood changing. Knowing the CPC is arrogantly assured that it's politics as usual, and that they are focused on playing Michael Ignatieff like a fiddle when they have so many issues of their own government to answer for, reassures me that they are not on the road to Majorityville.

Confronting issues with "It's Iggy's fault" , "he's an elitist", "he's just visiting "or "Iggy will be worse"
That always works and Canadians will swallow it whole, right?

MostlyCivil

Even the Toronto Sun was mocking the "blame Iggy" idea.

Dost my mouth speak clearly?
brooster2

Sadly, about 33% apparently will, over and over.

hollinm

No Emily…you have the wrong person. It is your statements that get more bizarre everyday.

Emily

Harper is no longer sane.

And we know what kind of people follow an insane leader.

Amateur Hour

"Of course those on this board continue with their Liberal based rhetoric."

Cheeky for a ConBot.

And by the way, Iggy's comments came AFTER Harper had cheesed off the UN at multiple climate conferences, went to Timmy's vs. addressing the UN itself, scuppered a number of resolutions on indigenous rights, etc., and drew down our peacekeeping contributions to a dozen or so folks.

Blaming Iggy is like blaming the person grading your paper for your failing grade.

Amateur Hour

if it wasn't obvious, this comment was intended for hollinm.

albert

Butter Fingers speaks with forged tongue.
Dave

Just like in the good ol' days!

John W.

Yea, but whether secret or public, Harper only gives maple syrup for your vote. In the old days it was something stronger.

chet

Canada is the greatest country on the planet…by a long shot.

That the UN rejected her is a damning indictment of the UN and highlights the power of self interested voting blocs, who care little about the tenets of the UN, of democratic principles, and much about the corrupt means by which they can utilize that body to further their often nefarious goals.

MaggiesFarmboy

For once I agree with you, chet.

MostlyCivil

Careful, he's changing the channel from "We really want to be in the club" to "We don't wanna be in your stupid old club anyway".
Your agreement with chet will only last until the next set of talking points…

Amateur Hour

Andrew Coyne received them this morning.

MostlyCivil

What, he emailed them to himself?

Hey now, ba dum sshhhh…

TJCook

There's nothing like a sanctimonious lecture on values and principles from Stephen Harper to remind one of just how devoid he is of such things.

Holly Stick

Yes. As Chantal Hebert writes in the link danby posted:

"…But it is hard to see what human rights principles guide Canada when it alone of all Western nations allows one of its own to continue to be held in Guantanamo or when its government is willing to padlock Parliament to avoid scrutiny of the country’s treatment of Afghan detainees…"
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/875553…

BCer in Mtl

What I'm wondering is, why didn't Stephen Harper get a rent-a-crowd, stage protests and prorogue the UN General Assembly until he could secure a sufficient number of votes?