Beyond The Commons

 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

When ministers of the crown tweet

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, November 24, 2010 10:06am - 127 Comments

Tony Clement takes on the worldwide statistical conspiracy.

dgardner So what might a professional, independent, disinterested observer think of the Harper government’s #census decision? http://bit.ly/hnzoFU

TonyClement_MP @dgardner Statisticians sticking up for fellow statisticians is your idea of “disinterested”?? You’re kidding, right?

dgardner @TonyClement_MP : No. You think professionals from another continent are biased because they share the profession? You’re kidding, right?

TonyClement_MP @dgardner If they’re from another continent, why are they sticking their noses in Canada’s business? Spare me the righteousness.

dgardner @TonyClement_MP : Oh, lord. Really? Faux populism? Rush Limbaugh territory. Don’t go there.

TabathaSouthey @TonyClement_MP They’re statisticians, not Masons.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Bookmark and Share
  • 20 Characters/Less

    Unseemly.

    • McC_

      are all twitter debates this petty? ugh. Ministers of the Crown have no business engaging in this kind of unthinking and reflexive back and forth garbage.

  • zeemooliscious

    Has there ever been more of a self-righteous, insufferable prick than Dan Gardner? Is he even Canadian (blowhards of this sort usually aren't)?

    • tedbetts

      "Has there ever been more of a self-righteous, insufferable prick than Dan Gardner?"

      Tony Clement, without a doubt. And his boss.

      • zeemooliscious

        You may dislike them, but they both have had long and successful electoral careers. Gardner's whole constituency is Wherry. I still don't know of any blowhard jackass on the level of Gardner.

        • McC_

          Clement did have that rough patch in the middle where he lost a good four contests in a row before winning his federal seat with a "Landslide Annie" vote share in 2006.

          • zeemooliscious

            That's right: subjecting oneself to repeated and prominent unsuccessful electoral contests takes a degree of tenacity for sure, but also a great deal of humility, as Clement's patient and respectful trek through that process, and consequent piecemeal winning over of his constituents illustrated. Gardner just mouths off.

          • Be_rad

            Gardner may be one of the most objective analytical journalists in the country. He comes form a point of bias – in favour of logic and evidence – that colours his work. I just wish more journalists did the same, even if they came to different conclusions, because then I would have somehting to compare agaisnt that at least attempts a degree of rigour.

          • Eas Coas

            Hear, hear!

        • Pat

          You lost me here. How does being elected mean you are not self-righteous and insufferable? How is it that NOT being elected makes you so?

          • zeemooliscious

            It doesn't. I just think that putting oneself through so many tough electoral battles in the public eye usually takes some humility, and Clement demonstrated that at the time.

          • Pat

            Oh I beg to differ. I suggest it takes the ultimate in self confidence to believe people actually want you to represent them. You have to really believe that you are important to do that.

          • Zoboomafoo

            Of course it takes some self-confidence. And in Clement's case that was ultimately rewarded. But it also takes a great deal of humility to go through that process: the vast majority of reporters could never put themselves through it.

          • Pat

            Again, no. There is no humility in thinking people should choose you to represent them.

          • Zoboomafoo

            If you're going to insult people for running for office (since everyone who does so must think that, in some way, people should choose them as their representative), then your problem isn't with Clement, it's with democracy. Anyway, apparently his constituents do think so. Even though it took a lot of humble, though tenacious work. Most journalists will never have the sort of humility that allows someone like Clement to be gracious in defeat, and keep working at it until he's brought enough people around. That's democratic politics for you.

          • Holly Stick

            Was he like Fantino and so many other Conservative candidates, refusing to show up at public forums to discuss the issues? Not very humble behaviour, in my opinion.

          • Zoboomafoo

            Was I talking about Fantino or whomever? No, you're just spouting off randomly.

    • andrew

      I'd like to nominate myself for the title of Self-Righteous Insufferable Prick Worse Than Dan Gardner.

      • zeemooliscious

        Then you have a lot of catching up to do

        • andrew

          As a former campus/community radio DJ, and former employee of a public interest research group, I think I may be neck-and-pompous-neck with Mr. Gardner. I mean, after all, what the heck does he know about Montreal micro-tech house? Yeah.

          • Bryan

            Gardner use to work for the Mike Harris government. He probably has first hand experience in watching actual Self-Righteous Insufferable Pricks in action that he can use to trump you.

    • Colin

      Say we accept your hypothesis – you still haven't shown him to be wrong. Ad hominem is considered a logical fallacy for a reason…

      • zeemooliscious

        Yeah, I don't think that you're quite familiar with the proper meaning of ad hominem. In any case, your own statement is a logical fallacy known as a non sequitur, because I wasn't criticizing this or that specific statement of his. I was just making a general observation about him and his style.

  • John D

    How dare those statisticians stand up for accurate statistics! A bunch of lefty academics, all 108% of them!

    • zeemooliscious

      As a simple comparison of their relative health and vitality will go to show, the EU (which may not even exist in a few years time) has a great deal to learn from Canada; the other way around, not so much. On the other hand, one thing that Canadian citizens and European citizens have in common is not taking the whingings of these sorts of bureaucratic overlords too seriously.

      • tedbetts

        In what way are any of these statisticians "bureaucratic overlords"?????

        • zeemooliscious

          Citizens of European countries have been sick of the EU for a long time. Much of the political life of European countries is controlled by bureaucrats who are not supported or authorized in any way, shape or form by the populations of the countries whose decisions they effect. These statisticians are part of a bureaucratic super-state. If you aren't aware of the objections to that super-state and its effect on the people under its umbrella, then you haven't been paying the slightest bit of attention to the politics of European countries recently.

          • SamDavies

            This publication completely ignores this report from two days ago: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ic1.nsf/eng/06098.ht…

            Instead, why not focus on some asinine twitter posts from the Minister of Industry?

            Instead of reporting on any of the issues/problems related to both Canadian telecom/foreign investment, why not aim for this fluff? It is especially disturbing when you take into consideration that Maclean's is owned by an incumbent telecom giant that has an invested interest in marginalizing discussion of these issues.

            I enjoy my fluff as much as anyone else, but when you look at it in this context, I have to wonder how effectively this is lived up to:

            "Maclean's is Canada's only national weekly current affairs magazine. Maclean's enlightens, engages, and entertains 2.4 million readers with strong investigative reporting and exclusive stories from leading journalists in the fields of international affairs, social issues, national politics, business and culture."

            Would still love to hear some sort of response on these concerns, but am doubting…

          • Jan

            Sa, this is what – the third time you;ve posted this. Write Macleans if you want an answer to this.

          • tedbetts

            You clearly didn't understand the question: in what way are statisticians "bureaucratic overlords"?

            Saying they are a part of a bureaucratic system and that the EU is about to topple over, yadda yadda yadda, is not an answer.

            Statisticians ask questions and provide research into questions asked of them by the government. They are number scientists.

            I'm not aware of any statistician with any real spending or decision making power, things one normally associates with being an "overlord".

          • zeemooliscious

            These statisticians are not part of a "government" strictly speaking. They're part of one big bureaucracy, a bureaucracy which certainly does have decision making power. Like many other things about the EU, these statisticians owe their existence to the maintenance of that super-state.

          • TJCook

            Perfect – by making this evil "bureaucracy" completely amorphous, you can use it as a scare tactic for damn near any purpose at all.

            Classic demagoguery.

          • zeemooliscious

            It's not "evil" but it is a bureaucracy, and bureaucracies are rarely ever slightly, let alone completely, amorphous, as the EU definitely isn't. And it's not a "scare tactic" for "damn near any purpose at all" either": what's scary about it is the form of governance it has provided, as the populations effected by it can and do attest to. And these statisticians are undeniably part of, and dependent on, that bureaucracy. Scary, but not amorphous.

          • Emily

            They complained about bureaucrats in ancient Rome….this is hardly new.

            More like a sport, actually.

          • zeemooliscious

            Not when your economy is being tanked by the bureaucrats.

          • Emily

            Like I said, Romans nattered about the same thing….it's an old tradition.

            Economies have never been 'tanked' by bureaucrats.

          • McC_

            I dunno, I'm pretty sure that bureaucrats tanked the Soviet economy.

          • Emily

            LOL no, not even close. Try the arms race, the outposts, and Afghanistan.

          • zeemooliscious

            What's the Latin word for bureaucracy?

          • Emily

            Bureaucracy is not the problem, it's a strawman.

          • Zoboomafoo

            When the Romans complained about it, what word did they use?

          • Emily

            "The budget should be balanced; the treasury should be refilled; public debt should be reduced; and the arrogance of public officials should be controlled." Cicero.

          • Zoboomafoo

            "Public officials"? What is that in Latin? Anyway, "public officials" in English obviously does not equal "Bureaucrat".

          • Emily

            Quaestor, aedile, praefect etc

            We've had bureaucrats for thousands of years, and in every civilization. They are necessary to organization and administration.

          • Zoboomafoo

            Evidently, you have no idea what actual word was used. Nor do you seem to have any notion of what the functions such as "Quaestor" involved, or you would not be comparing them to modern bureaucrats. Regardless, no one ever said that bureaucracy should be altogether abolished, just that there are specific problems with the EU model, as citizens of European countries are well aware.

          • Emily

            Mmm yeah, they were all bureaucrats. A quaestor supervised the accounting. An aedile looked after public buildings and security. Praefects looked after prisons, civil administration and so on. Same as we have today.

            Same complaints and whining, too.

          • Zoboomafoo

            You know nothing. Moving on.

          • Emily

            Ignorance always flees in the face of knowledge. LOL

          • Zoboomafoo

            Yeah, that happens to you all the time, right?

          • Emily

            Yes and many like you, have tried and lost.

            Hot dogs are everywhere.

          • TJCook

            Fair enough – I suppose a bureaucracy itself isn't amorphous. It's your over-the-top fearmongering that's amorphous.

            Don't forget, a bureaucracy only has the decision-making powers given to it by a government. If you find it scary, your political representation has all the power it needs to rein in the bureaucrats.

            Besides that, attacking the people who supply reliable information to a bureaucracy doesn't make any sense at all. It doesn't redefine or change the bureaucracy in any way, it just makes the bureaucracy less effective at everything, whether you agree with its responsibilities or not.

          • tedbetts

            Sorry Zee. you are making your already weak case even weaker.

            The long form census has been a part of government since Confederation.

            You called statisticians overlords but, by your own admission, they are only so because they happen to be a part of government.

            You imply that any government could operate without a statistician which mind-numbingly ridiculous.

            Statisticians are more like tools of the state and are directed to whatever purpose the government puts them to. They collect and analyze data. That's about it. The function is quite inert in and of itself.

            That data can be used to both increase the size of the state or decrease it. Certainly, as lots of libertarian commenters have noted, it is a significant tool in ensuring government makes efficient and cost effective decisions.

            The Conservatives have made government more wasteful, less efficient with this dumb decision. In other words, classic conservative decision making. Harper and Clement is completely wrong.

          • zeemooliscious

            "The long form census has been a part of government since Confederation."

            "It's been around for a long time" is never a justification for anything.

            "You called statisticians overlords but, by your own admission, they are only so because they happen to be a part of government."

            No, couldn't have admitted this, because I denied that the EU is really a government.

            "You imply that any government could operate without a statistician which mind-numbingly ridiculous."

            Never implied any such thing.

            In any case, you're missing a basic point, which that these are bureaucrats who depend on maintaining a bloated and counter-productive bureaucracy. Not the sort of people I'd trust on this matter.

          • burlivespipe

            Why waste exchanging gunfire with this Zee character, no doubt one of the taxpayer funded Harper brigade bloggers… Instead, focus on how deeper and deeper clement continues to dig, trying to get away from both reasoned and rational evidence on turning a cost efficient and science efficient method to a more carnival barker-style 'guess-my-weight' survey?

        • Ernie Seedhouse

          By inclination

        • Emily

          I like the way that Europe, which has existed for thousands of years, should listen to a 143 year old country….a country that may not exist in a few years time.

          • Zoboomafoo

            "Europe" as a political entity has not existed for thousands of years, nitwit. And its last 143 years have been infinitely more poorly and sometimes disastrously managed politically than Canada's have been.

          • Emily

            Actually, it has…and unlike us it's been populated and civilized for the most part.

            We haven't been around long enough to do anything…but our structure and laws and systems are all European.

          • Zoboomafoo

            Actually, it hasn't. Christ.

            And:

            Canada: 143 years without a Holocaust.

            Anyway, since you don't like your own country (we haven't "done anything", apparently), move to Europe and tell them how to run their affairs. Those of us who think Canada has been a pretty good, and often outstanding, place for the last 143 years will worry about this place.

          • Emily

            Well when Canada gets to be several thousand years old, then you can brag.

            Our reserves would make a good story, eh?

            Until then, either learn some history, or post elsewhere.

          • Zoboomafoo

            Move to Europe.

          • Emily

            My family has been here 7 generations, so I'm hardly likely to do that and leave my country to the ignorant.

      • Ernie Seedhouse

        Right on!

      • P.Q.

        the EU has a great deal to learn from Canada; the other way around, not so much
        Isn't that the point? That Statistics Canada is considered a world leader in statistics and the one all other national stats agencies strive to be like. The EU isn't saying Canada should learn from it. It's wondering why Canada would mess with a perfectly good national statistics program.

        • zeemooliscious

          Maybe they could learn something about that?

          • P.Q.

            Like when you have a government program that is actually effective and efficient, don't let conservatives anywhere near it.

          • tedbetts

            Bingo!

          • Eas Coas

            Sounds great! Please clearly state all the reasons for eliminating the long-form census that rigourously conform to rules of logic, evidence, and reasonable argument. Then the EU will have no trouble conforming to Canada's new standard.

            Aaaand…go!

            P.S. If you cannot supply any such thing, then there's nothing to learn from, wouldn't you agree?

          • Eas Coas

            Looks like Zoboomafoo here has run out of things to say. Will wonders never cease.

          • Zoboomafoo

            There's about 637 other Wherry threads in which this subject has been debated before. Go look them up. I have no interest in going over the same old ground. The EU and Gardner's foolishness are the only original parts of this thread, and so that's all I'll be commenting on, thanks.

          • Eas Coas

            Ah, banking on my laziness, are you? Well…you win.

          • burlivespipe

            Only thing we've learned in this discussion is that you're a perfect idiot. Which is a great line from North by Northwest.

          • Zoboomafoo

            Actually, from your post above I learned that you can't construct a grammatical sentence, and so I would say that the only thing to be learned here is that, while you are an idiot, you're not perfect.

      • Jan

        Our government is on it's way to Greek style stats.

  • Dave

    Perhaps Tony got a hold of a copy of The Protocol of the Learned Elders of Statistics.

  • Anon 001

    Tony Clement. Minister of the Crown, but a 14-year old at heart.

    • John.K

      That appears to be a prime job qualification in this cabinet.

      • Holly Stick

        So the Young Jurks working as Conservative staffers are actually MORE mature than the Cabinet Ministers?

  • wsam

    Tony Clement is correct about statistics.

    • tedbetts

      He hasn't said one correct thing about statistics as far as I am aware. In fact, he's been ouright wrong too often for someone in such an important position of power.

      • wsam

        Clement is just trying to stick up for the little guy. It's how he operates. Like how he gave gazebos to half of Muskoka.

    • Al O'Wishes

      In what way? As far as I can tell, the only thing he's correct about is the spelling of it.

      • wsam

        Spelling is important.

  • Mike T.

    On a somewhat related matter, anybody come up with a Federal initiative as pointless and bufoonish as this census debacle? I await further submissions….

  • PeterboroDave

    I took a few minutes and read his Wikipedia entry because I'm curious to know just what the hell he's going to do with his life once he's through with politics. I mean, who in the hell would hire him in the private sector? Turns out he has not held a job in any other arena other than politics (note- if anyone wants to correct my impression, please do). This is it for Tony- this is as good as it's gonna get- a minister of the Crown. It's all downhill from here for him so what the hell, hang onto it with every ounce of gusto and bravado and sheer fear-driven energy.

    Maybe the only observation I can make about Tony is that there's just nothing there- Please, everyone, lower your expectations.

    • tedbetts

      So like Harper. And Baird. And McKay. etc etc etc.

      Our political betters have no experience outside of politics.

      That would not necessarily be such a bad thing except there are so many of them that lack any real life experience, including the career politician PM.

      • Mike T.

        Wan't Mackay briefly a Crown Attorney? But yes, most of his career has been handed to him by his father, one of Mulroney's top bagmen.

    • Jenn_

      I agree with your basic premise, but I do wish we'd default to respect for a Minister of the Crown (until we find out it's Tony Clement or similar, etc.).

      I take issue with "this is as good as it's gonna get- a minister of the Crown." As if you are comparing the job to an entry-level position anywhere, and the REAL career takes off once you get to banking, insurance, or law firm.

      Just a half-formed thought, but maybe if we treated Ministers of the Crown as if they had our respect to lose, they'd maybe try to keep it.

      • PeterboroDave

        Excellent point Jenn. I would also put forward that we should have default respect for Deputy Ministers- we really should be more familiar with them as they are the ones with the hard jobs. Why aren't more of them household names?

        As for my smart-ass "as good as it gets" I am referring exclusively to Tony's career path. He's currently at the pinnacle and as such I fully expect him to fight tooth and nail to keep that job because for someone like him, it really is all downhill from there.

        Well, on second though, probably not- I'm sure there's a lobbying firm out there waiting for him.

    • burlivespipe

      Maybe he can weave cashmire out of clay…

    • DBM

      If I recall correctly, he had a brief foray as a music critic.

      I'm not sure if this was a 'job' in that it was something he was 'paid to do' but I think he did it.

    • Thwim

      You're forgetting about his burgeoning volunteer lifeguard career.

  • WDM

    I happen to like Tony Clement. I disagree with him on pretty much everything, but he seems like a decent fellow with a good sense of humour. All that being said, he should really stop drawing attention to himself on this file.

    • tedbetts

      It is strange and even belittling of a Minister of the Crown responding to tweets and to do so with such sarcasm and lack of wit.

    • TJCook

      Obnoxious is as obnoxious does.

      I find it difficult to like someone whose actions i deplore, no matter how affable they may be.

      • WDM

        Thats your problem, not his.

        • TJCook

          Well I hardly think he loses sleep over my opinion of him.

          I'm just saying that it's hard to like even a "nice" guy who does sh*tty things.

    • Rob Shift

      Agreed. Too bad he's been the centre of some of the biggest scandals for this government. Plus, it doesn't help that he's supporting Mr. Moore's copyright legislation.

    • E_B_

      Yeah. He always has that "deer caught in the headlights" look that I find so charming.

    • wsam

      Tony Clement kicked my dog.

  • Out There

    Pfui. If Harper were to change his mind tomorrow (unlikely, but bear with me) and reinstate the mandatory long form census, Tony Clement would immediately do a 180 degree turn and loudly praise the Prime Minister for listening to the concerns of the people.

  • zeemooliscious

    There are always a lot of obtuse people in politics, so he needs to learn to deal with it. And if he has such contempt for it, why does spend so much of his energy on it? That speaks poorly of his character. In any case, you won't find examples of "reasonable disagreement" in his writing. Everything is Gardner vs. the morons, and he uses terms like "empirical" in a very non-empirical way: i.e., not to lay out and dissect competing claims, but as a non-specified (and thus unreliable and "non-empirical") rhetorical tool to try and shut down people he disagrees with and not have to defend his own views by the sort of rigorous standards he claims to be upholding (and if he really believed in, he would have to participate in the world of peer-reviewed publications, which I doubt that he is actually competent to comprehend, since they don't serve the rhetorical function of "oh, you non-empirical morons, I'm no scientific and you're not, na na na na na na" – which is about the extent of the substance most of his columns provide).

  • zeemooliscious

    I don't think that Levant takes himself nearly as seriously though. For one thing, even though he's self-righteous, he obviously just enjoys fighting with people. Kind of a pain in the ass, but some people are like that. But Gardner always tries to give off the impression that he's too good for what he's doing, which raises the question: why is he doing it? (My guess is: he's not even remotely qualified to do the sort of actual "empirical" work that he refers to as a rhetorical trick, so he's stuck writing newspaper columns and having contempt for everyone around him.)

    • Rob Shift

      I disagree. If Mr. Levant just wanted to fight with people, he'd actually stick around and debate. Most of what I see is just him trying to get in a punchline. In fact, I watched him on a panel with some guy from Greenpeace, and he was more of a bully than anything else.

      As for Mr. Gardner, my experience with him is mostly limited to Twitter. And he doesn't appear to be have any more contempt than the rest of the pundits. Relative to his cohorts, he's about average.

    • Jan

      Clement is the self-righteous one here – writing off the opinion of an international body of statiscians as being merely self-interested. My non-emperical analysis of Clement – he's a dumbass.

  • Blue

    There I told you to be patient Wherry and Clement would do something that had a hint of inpropriety for you to attack him rather then that imaginery insult you thought he gave to the young NDP`er from Thompson.

    Having said that, he`s probably 100% correct in his assesment of a European group of statiticians sticking their opinionated noses into our affairs.
    However, expect to hear mininum tweets from Tony in the next while. If he hasn`t realized the uselessness of responding to an ideologue like Gardner then someone will discreetly tell him so.

    • Jan

      Well, screw them – we're only negotiating a free trade agreement with them. If they're businesses want to know about us, let them pay for it themselves.

  • tedbetts

    You wouldn't anyway. The census doesn't ask for that information. You've bought into the Conservatives lies.

  • SamDavies
  • zeemooliscious

    Now, that's a very Gardner-esque response for you: don't like something? Say nothing to actually engage it, and just wallow in your own sense of self-superiority.

    • Sigh

      "And if he has such contempt for it, why does spend so much of his energy on it? That speaks poorly of his character. "

      I believe I was paraphrasing you.

      • zeemooliscious

        Ah, but he spent his energy on it in the first place.

    • PeterboroDave

      I said you win. I meant it. What are you, my wife?

  • burlivespipe

    Yeah, leave the masonry stuff to the dimwit Clement-Harper cabal-ists…

  • burlivespipe

    Show me one scrap, even a pin prick of evidence that harper and clement attempted to use logic and evidence in their decision to eliminate the cost-effective and result-effective census in exchange for a more costly, less useful one. Besides a diabolical one, their reasoning amounts to irresponsible lunacy. But hey, one person demanded it so…

    • Zoboomafoo

      This has nothing to do with anything, and your penultimate sentence is incoherent.

      • Holly Stick

        Harper and Clement made a stupid insane decision which is costing us more money for poorer result. Is that clear enough for you?

        I think it's another sign that Harper is retreating into his extremist fundamentalist religion: anti-science, anti-democracy, anti-honesty and anti-reality.

        • Zoboomafoo

          No, burlivespipe's penultimate sentence is still not clear. And you're just "stupid insane".

  • Holly Stick

    Yeah, what is all that money really paying for:
    http://www.thestar.com/news/world/g8/article/8246…

    • burlivespipe

      I wonder how much is that property just south of the bunny trail?

  • auntie-em-m

    It's amazing to think Conservatives accept the cancellation of the mandatory long-form census because of a supposed 'invasion of privacy'. Yet getting a full body pat down in a crowded airport is not an 'invasion of privacy'? Where're the tweets on that? Surely there's a new policy about to be sprung on us, eh?

  • s_c_f

    I'm surprised that the obsessive compulsive Stephen Gordon didn't jump into this one.

  • RunsWithScissors

    It's slowly becoming clear why Stephen harper completely muzzled all his MPs and Ministers when they first came into power. This is what we get from "seasoned" elected people!

  • Emily

    I can only put this down to 'Terrible Twos Syndrome'.

    Cons are still saying NO to everything, even when it's something good.

Previous

Next

From Macleans