Majority Government Allows Conservatives to Release Pent up Desire for Environmental Programs

With the majority government that the Conservatives wanted they should feel more confident about introducing new environmental programs. May 31, 2011.

Austerity vs Simplicity

Greens favor reducing consumption as one means of minimizing damage to the environment, and Conservative have a dysphemism they like to use to describe this approach. It is austerity. I suggest the words:

1. clean
2. light
3. simple
4. elementary
5. manageable
6. uncomplicated
7. unpretentious
8. balanced
9. uncluttered
10. no fine print
11. unadulterated
12. modest
13. controlled
14. uncontaminated
15. spotless

The Important Result of Elizabeth May's Victory in Saanich-Gulf Islands

The most important result of Elizabeth May's victory is that the world did not come to an end. Some voters may have thought that our economic system would collapse with a Green in offiice, but that did not happen. In fact other people may now feel it is safe for them to vote green too.

Who Is Left?

Which party is further left on the political scale Canada's Conservative party or USA's Democrat party? Please share your opinion with me by making a "comment".

Free Trade is Not Free

The blunt logic of free trade cannot be denied, but neither can the complexity of the issue. It can be very efficient for each country to specialize in what it does best. These efficiencies become a little less clear when "true costs" are considered.

Free trade requires transportation, and transportation generates greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gases in turn generate extreme weather events. Extreme weather events cause damage to homes, infrastructure, and crops. (We are not even beginning to calculate the damage of rising sea levels.) Damage from extreme weather events is costly.

On the other hand many environmentalists might find it difficult to accept that driving across town in their hybrids to buy "locally grown" foods might cause more damage to the environment than going to a big box store in their neighborhood to buy imported foods. It's complex!

Across the political spectrum people have mental blocks limiting their thought. We should all work towards a better understanding of all of the complex issues and act accordingly.

Understanding "Why did Conservatives vote Conservative?"

This purpose of this posting is to generate dialog and understanding across party lines. The nucleus of the debate is the question: "Why did Conservatives vote Conservative?"

I thought media news coverage was fair or even biased against the Conservatives leading up to the election. There were stories available that did not present Conservatives in the best possible light. I am referring to stories like contempt of parliament, campaign funding fraud (in-n-out), changed documents, prorogation, muzzling of bureaucrats, etc. Enough material came to the surface that that it seemed the vote would swing in the opposite direction than it did.

With dialog alternate parties could gain a better understanding of Conservatives, and Conservatives could understand better the fears of others.

I am going to initiate the debate by filling in the blanks. I have a suggestion for what I feel is the most likely explanation to come from Conservatives when confronted by their record of unpopular decisions. I have already heard it in my canvasing. Many conservatives say that other parties have their scandals too and nothing leading up to the election was serious enough to make them change their minds about their choice of party.

Here is another reason, and this reason may also be very important. Voters got tired of elections and voted against more elections. This is probably the most important reason Ignatief failed so catastrophically.

Below is my prioritized list of reasons people voted Conservative:

1. The economy.
2. Don't want any more elections.
3. Others are also corrupt.
4. I have always been conservative.
5. Don't believe in abortion.
6. Don't like Ignatief.
7. Want stability.
8. Want a fair system.

I invite you to add to the list, prioritize it yourself in a comment, or edit it at will. I also welcome you to create a list of reasons why people voted for non-Conservatives or to create any other list you think might be interesting.

Larry

Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down

When the North American car companies were deep in trouble the free market response would have been to let them go into receivership even though it would have meant a lot of lost jobs for working people. This issue has grey areas, because many other governments would have stepped in to subsidize or bail out their auto industries. That would have tipped playing field.


Why is it then that North America bailed out its automobile manufacturers? What is your opinion? I would like to know.


This is another complex issue.

Actual Costs Of Nuclear Energy in Saskatchewan

In Saskatchewan it does not appear the actual costs of nuclear energy are being calculated accurately. There is a legacy of environmental damage in Northern Saskatchewan left by the uranium industry. Hot mine sites and tailings ponds have been left behind for others to clean up. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think there is a budget or a fund set aside to pay for the current generation to come around and clean up the damage.

Harper Compared to Bush

In the USA I lived through the reelection of George Bush, and now I am reliving a similar nightmare in Canada with Steve Harper's reelection.

Canadian 2011 General Election Analysis

On May 2, 2011 the Canadian Conservative party received the vote of 17% (5,832,401/34,278,406) of the population of the country (39.62% of the "popular" vote), and yet they will control a "majority" government. What this means is 83% of the country didn't vote, couldn't vote, or voted for other parties.

There were several important issues that Conservative voters were seemingly able to brush aside when they made their choice in the voting booth. Some such issues were the environment, democracy, justice, and Canada's international reputation as a peace keeping nation. Conservatives did not seem to be phased by the Conservative government's environmental record:

Five years of Conservative rule yield no substantive action on climate change, minimal progress in other environmental areas, and minor spending programs with insignificant effects.

Conservatives remained loyal to a government that is compromising democracy:

During his time in office, Harper has been charged with denying Parliament its historic right to documents, shutting down the House, intimidating independent agencies, muzzling the bureaucracy, suppressing research, curbing the access to information system, and other transgressions.

In a twist of justice they rewarded a party with a record of contempt:

MPs voted 156-145 in favour of a Liberal motion expressing non-confidence and citing the Harper government for contempt of Parliament, a first for a national government anywhere in the Commonwealth according to Radio 660 news.

The fall from grace of Canada's international reputation also seems to have been ignored:

We were a pioneer of peacekeeping but under the Harper government Canada is no longer the world’s leading peacekeeper – we’re not even in the top 30 anymore.

I have been pondering why people in Canada have reelected the Conservative party and I have come to the conclusion it is best to ask other people what they think. Please tell me what do you think?

I will point out some things the Conservative campaign did well. They convinced many Canadians that the strength of the economy should be the most important issue in their lives and that the Conservative party is the only party capable of the stewardship of that economy. What is impressive about this is that they managed this feat in spite turning a budget surplus into the nation's biggest ever budget deficit.

Other Details

If you are still with me here are some other interesting details about the 2011 General Election.

The Conservatives only made a tiny increase in their total number of votes yet they enjoyed a big increase in their number of seats. Their votes when compared to the 2008 General Election went from 5,209,069 to 5,832,401. The percentage of the popular vote went from 37.7% to 39.6% (1.9% increase). Conservative seats in the same period rose from 143 to 167 or 46.4% to 54.2% (7.8% increase). Thus the Conservatives increased their popular vote by 1.9% and increased their seats by 7.8% (24 seats). That is a disproportionate and undemocratic result.

Proportional representation would provide for Canadians a more fair and democratic system. Vote Canada has the following to say about the election results:

According to these results, the Conservatives have won 54.22% of the seats with only 39.62% of the votes, one of the least legitimate majorities in Canadian history.

They also say that more than 80 countries are already enjoying proportional representation (PR). One Fair Vote Canada board member I spoke to says that there are only 3 major democratic countries still using the "First Past the Post" method. This method is still used in Canada, USA, and UK. Other countries have moved on, and for the sake of democracy Canada should too.

The Green Party of Canada dropped from 937,613 votes nationwide in 2008 to 576,221 (6.8% to 3.9%). I interpret this to mean that many loyal greens voted strategically by voting NDP or Liberal. This was done in the hopes of defeating the Conservatives. Many voters settled for their second choice to reduce the risk of Conservative victories.

Nowhere was this more apparent than in Quebec. Quebecers had good reason to vote NDP. It is a good party with a good leader and a good platform. The massive migration from Bloc to NDP is not just a vote for NDP but it is also a vote against conservatives.

I will sum up the vote of Saskatchewan Conservative's in one word, rebound. Saskatchewan has a long history of modest existence as a "have not" province. The economy is strong now in SK. "SKonservatives" are enjoying more financial success than ever before. They like it and want more. I have heard that the NDP received anywhere from 33-35% of the popular vote, yet they did not receive a single seat. That is not very democratic.

Elizabeth May's victory indicates that we do have a national conscience and that conscience is becoming more conscious.

Finally, I have pasted below 2 lists from other bloggers of criticisms of the Harper Government. These lists will hopefully provoke people to consider what threshold of scandal is acceptable from a government. I understand that most parties have similar volumes of scandal, but I don't have those lists at my fingertips, sorry.

http://federalelectionblog.ca/2011/04/27/harpers-attack-on-democracy-itemized-by-lawrence-martin/

Harper’s Attack on Democracy, Itemized by Lawrence Martin

April 27th, 2011 Armine Yalnizyan · 16 Comments · Democracy

Lawrence Martin, columnist with the Globe and Mail, has written the best review, so far, of Stephen Harper’s one-man show  The Attack On Democracy.

It’s a must-read on the record thus far, particularly by colleagues, friends and family members who might not much like Harper, but like the other options far less.

One can only imagine where he might it next with sufficient popular support.

Originally appearing on the pages of ipolitics, it appears below in full

Read it and vote. After all, we get the democracy we deserve.

The descent of democracy:
A country under one man’s thumb

Posted on Wed, Apr 27, 2011, 2:25 am by Lawrence Martin

Can we still call this a parliamentary democracy? Or is it something more akin to a democracy of one?

More and more, Stephen Harper’s critics are asking the question. There is a widespread view among political scientists and constitutional scholars that the prime minister, with his l’etat c’est moi methods, has brought Canadian democracy to new lows.

Canadians themselves may be starting to feel that way. Pollster Angus Reid found this week that 62 per cent of Canadians surveyed described our democracy as being in a state of crisis. For the first time in many elections, democracy is a foremost issue.

When Harper was not even two years into his stewardship, a study published in theInternational Political Science Review measured the degree of centralization of power in all parliamentary countries. Canada, the study concluded, was the worst.

Much of our undemocratic condition was a result of the power hoarding of prime ministers who came before Harper, says Peter Russell, the University of Toronto professor emeritus who has studied prime ministerial power since the 1950s. But if our democratic health was bad then, Russell says, it’s now worse — much worse — after Harper’s five years in power.

“Harper is on a course towards a very authoritarian populist government appealing over the heads of Parliament to the people with an enormous public-relations machine. The appeal is to the less educated and less sophisticated parts of society.” What is being fashioned, says Russell, is a presidential prime ministership without a powerful legislative branch to keep it in check.

Lori Turnbull, who teaches political science at Dalhousie University and who is publishing a book on declining democracy, says the system with its loosely defined separation of powers relies on a prime minister acting in good faith. Mr. Harper can hardly be said to have done so, she said. In reference to abuses of power by the Conservative government, she said that “if you put together a list of what he’s done, it’s scary.” (See list below.)

Harper cabinet member John Baird rejects such criticisms. “There was a book written about Prime Minister Chrétien, The Friendly Dictatorship,” he says. “People made the same charges about prime ministers Mulroney and Trudeau.”

Conservatives say the portrayal of Harper as an autocrat are politically motivated — this though many of the same professors and journalists (this writer included) charting the plight of democracy today were highly critical of ethical corruption during the Chrétien years.

During his time in office, Harper has been charged with denying Parliament its historic right to documents, shutting down the House, intimidating independent agencies, muzzling the bureaucracy, suppressing research, curbing the access to information system, and other transgressions.

Awish Aslam, seen here at a 2008 NDP rally, was ousted from a Conservative rally because of a picture of her with Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff was found on her Facebook page. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jacques Boissinot

In the election campaign, people have been barred from Conservative rallies, strict limits have been placed on questions form journalists, Tory candidates have been instructed to stay away from all-candidates debates in their ridings. Liberals and New Democrats say the controversy over the coalition issue is another example of Harper not being able to tolerate the rules of democracy.

Democracy became an election issue after the prime minister was defeated on a confidence motion over contempt of Parliament. Though the Speaker of the Commons ruled there were legitimate grounds for the charges, Harper dismissed them as parliamentary squabbling.

“Who does he think he is? The king, here?” asked Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff. During the televised debates he told Harper, “You are a man who will shut down anything you cannot control.”

When Harper campaigned during the 2006 election, he made promises of a new era of openness and transparency to contrast a Liberal Party plagued by the sponsorship scandal. He brought in accountability legislation, which was applauded by such oversight groups as Democracy Watch for containing many impressive reforms. But a great number of the reforms, the watchdog group found, never saw the light of day.

At the same time the Conservatives were making their accountability promises in the 2006 campaign, they were running a surreptitious money-shuffling operation that became known as the in-and-out affair. It allowed the party to spend more on its campaign advertising than Elections Canada permitted. Earlier this year, party operatives involved in the scheme, including former campaign manager Doug Finley, were charged with offences under election finance laws.

The case for painting Harper as an anti-democrat stems from dozens of actions, catalogued below. They can be roughly divided into three categories: Treatment of the parliamentary process; degree of information control; intimidation of opponents.

TREATMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS

• Prorogations of Parliament:
Other governments have prorogued Parliament many times. But Harper’s prorogations were seen as more crassly motivated for political gain than others. His second prorogation, 16 months ago, brought thousands of demonstrators to the streets to decry his disregard for the democratic way.
• Contempt of Parliament:
The demonstrations did not serve to elevate the prime minister’s respect for Parliament. He refused a House of Commons request to turn over documents on the Afghan detainees’ affair until forced to do so by the Speaker, who ruled he was in breach of parliamentary privilege. More recently, he refused to submit to a parliamentary request, this time on the costing of his programs. The unprecedented contempt of Parliament rulings followed.
• Scorn for parliamentary committees:
Parliamentary committees play a central role in the system as a check on executive power. The Conservatives issued their committee heads a 200-page handbook on how to disrupt these committees, going so far as to say they should flee the premises if the going got tough. The prime minister also reneged on a promise to allow committees to select their own chairs. In another decision decried as anti-democratic, he issued an order dictating that staffers to cabinet ministers do not have to testify before committees.
• Challenging constitutional precepts:
During the coalition crisis of 2008, Harper rejected the principle that says a government continues in office so long as it enjoys the confidence of the House of Commons. To the disbelief of those with a basic grasp of how the system works, he announced that opposition leader Stéphane Dion “does not have the right to take power without an election.”
• Lapdogs as watchdogs:
Jean Chrétien drew much criticism, but also much help for his cause, as a result of his installing a toothless ethics commissioner. The Harper Conservatives have upped the anti-democratic ante, putting in place watchdogs — an ethics commissioner, lobbying commissioner, and others — who are more like lapdogs.
The foremost example was integrity commissioner Christiane Ouimet, who was pilloried in an inquiry by the auditor general. During her term of office, 227 whistleblowing allegations were brought before Ouimet. None was found to be of enough merit to require redress.
The Prime Minister’s Office saw to it that she left her post quietly last fall with a $500,000 exit payment replete with a gag order.
• The Patronage Machine:
To reduce checks on power it helps to have partisans in the right places. Harper initially surprised everyone with a good proposal to reduce the age-old practice of patronage. It was the creation of an independent public appointments commission. But after his first choice of chairman for the body was turned down by opposition parties, he abandoned, in an apparent fit of pique, the whole commission idea.
Since that time he has become, like other PMs before, a patronage dispenser of no hesitation.
One of the latest examples was the appointment of Tom Pentefountas as deputy chair of the CRTC. His only apparent qualification was his friendship with the PM’s director of communications. Mr. Harper also had good intentions on Senate reform but it, too, has remained a patronage pit. One of his first moves as PM, having long lashed out at the unelected body, was to elevate a senator, Michael Fortier, to his cabinet.
• Abuse of Process
  Another less noticed infringement of the democratic way came with the 2010 behemoth budget bill — 894 pages and 2,208 clauses. It contained many important measures, such as major changes to environmental assessment regulations, that had no business being in a budget bill. Previous governments hadn’t gone in for this type of budget-making, which is common in the United States. The opposition had reason to allege abuse of process.

INFORMATION CONTROL

• The vetting system:
In an extraordinary move, judged by critics to be more befitting a one-party state, Harper ordered all government communications to be vetted by his office or the neighbouring Privy Council Office. Even the most harmless announcements (Parks Canada’s release on the mating season of the black bear, for example) required approval from the top.
In most instances, forms known as Message Event Proposals had to make their way through a bureaucratic labyrinth of checks for approval.
Never had Ottawa seen anything approaching this degree of control. In one of many examples a bureaucrat, Mark Tushingham from Environment Canada, was barred from giving a talk about his book on climate change — even though it was a work of fiction. The muzzling policy of the government extended to the military brass. It led to a split between the prime minister and Chief of the Defence Staff Rick Hillier.
• Public service brought to heel:
In asserting his individual will in the nation’s capital, it is of central importance for the chief executive to have a compliant bureaucracy. Under Harper, who suspected the bureaucracy had a built-in Liberal bias, the public service was stripped of much of its policy development functions and reduced to the role of implementers.
The giant bureaucracy and diplomatic corps chafed under the new system. Their expertise had been valued by previous governments. In the Harper democracy, it was shut up, don’t put up.
As for independent agencies, the level of distrust was much the same. As part of her distant past, Nuclear Safety Commission head Linda Keen was seen to have Liberal affiliations. It was among the reasons she was unceremoniously dismissed.
• Access to information:
  The government impeded the access to information system, one of the more important tools of democracy, to such an extent that the government’s information commissioner wondered whether the system would survive. Prohibitive measures included the elimination of giant data base called CAIRS, delaying responses to access requests, imposing prohibitive fees on requests, and putting pressure on bureaucrats to keep sensitive information hidden. In addition, the redacting or blacking out of documents that were released reached outlandish proportions. In one instance, the government blacked out portions of an already published biography of Barack Obama.
• Supression of research:
Research, empirical evidence, erudition might normally be considered as central to the healthy functioning of democracies. The Conservatives challenged, sometimes openly, the notion.
At the Justice Department they freely admitted they weren’t interested in what empirical research told them about some of their anti-crime measures. At Environment Canada, public input on climate change policy was dramatically reduced.
In other instances, the government chose to camouflage evidence that ran counter to its intentions. A report of the Commissioner of Firearms saying police made good use of the gun registry was deliberately hidden beyond its statutory deadline, until after a vote on a private member’s bill on the gun registry.
The most controversial measure involving suppression of research was the Harper move against the long-form census. In his democracy, critics alleged, knowledge was being devalued. The less the people knew, the easier it was to deceive them.
• Document tampering:
It was the Bev Oda controversy involving the changing of a document on the question of aid to the church group Kairos that captured attention. But in Harperland, document tampering was by no means an isolated occurrence.
During the election campaign it has been revealed that Conservative operatives twisted the words of Auditor General Sheila Fraser in order to try to deceive the public. They made it sound like she was crediting them with prudent spending when, in fact, what she actually wrote applauded the Liberals.
As part of their vetting system, the Conservatives tried to institute a policy, until Fraser rebelled, whereby even her releases would be monitored by central command. The re-ordering of documents extended to the Harper economic-recovery program. The Conservatives got caught putting their own party logos on stimulus funding cheques, which were paid out of public purse. They were forced to cease the practice.
• Media curbs:
Though having stated that information is the lifeblood of democracy, the prime minister went to unusual lengths to deter media access. He never held open season press conferences, wouldn’t inform the media of the timing of cabinet meetings, as was traditionally done, limited their access to the bureaucracy, and had his war room operatives, using false names, write online posts attacking journalists. In one uncelebrated incident in Charlottetown in 2007, the Conservatives sent in the police to remove reporters from a hotel lobby where they were trying to cover a party caucus meeting.

INTIMIDATION OF OPPONENTS

• Afghan detainees:
As a reflection of the governing morality, the detainees’ file is one the Conservatives would hardly wish to showcase.
They attempted to tar the reputation of diplomat Richard Colvin, who contradicted their position. On the same file, they tried to deny Parliament its historic right to documents. On the same file, Defence Minister Gordon O’Connor got caught misleading the House, had to apologize, and later resigned. On the same file, the Conservatives terminated the work of Peter Tinsley, the Military Police Complaints Commissioner, whose inquiry was getting close to the bone. Tinsley’s commission was denied documents for reasons of national security — even though all his commission members had national security clearance. Lastly, it was this same file which played a large role in the prime minister’s decision to again prorogue Parliament.
• My way or the highway:
The prime minister had once criticized Paul Martin’s Liberals, saying that when a government starts eliminating dissent, it loses its moral right to govern. In a variety of punitive ways, Harper moved against NGOs, independent agencies, watchdog groups, and tribunals who showed signs of differing with his intent.
In some cases he fired their directors or stacked their boards with partisans. In others, he sued them or cut their funding. The targets of such tactics included the Rights and Democracy group, Elections Canada, Veterans’ Ombudsman Pat Stogran, Budget Officer Kevin Page and many more. His party’s smear tactics — sometimes resembling those of right-wing Republicans — included labelling the Liberal party anti-Israel, calling Dalton McGuinty the small man of Confederation, trying to link Liberal MP Navdeep Bains to terrorism, and calling for reprisals against academics such as the University Ottawa’s Michael Behiels for questioning their policies.
• Personal attack ads:
Beginning when Stéphane Dion was elected Liberal leader, the Harper Conservatives became the most frequent deployer of personal attack ads — many of them blatantly dishonest — of any government. Before the Conservatives’ arrival, such ads were seldom, if ever, used in pre-writ periods. They made them a common practice.
• A democratic party?
Though he came from the Reform Party, Harper, as his mentor Preston Manning once said, never showed much interest in power sharing. His Conservative Party has become a reflection of his command and control style. Tom Flanagan, Harper’s former strategic guru, helped the leader evolve the Tories into what Flanagan calls a garrison party. It basically exists, he said, to go to war against opponents, raise money, and bow at the leader’s feet.
Helena Guergis, the excommunicated MP, is one of the latest to find out what one’s rights within the party amount to. Under Mr. Harper, the rank and file have had little say in policy formation. At the riding level, no dissonance with central command is tolerated. Last year, when constituents in Rob Anders’ Calgary riding tried to organize to contest his renomination, party operatives descended like a commando unit, seized control of the riding executive, and crushed the bid.
• Legal Threats:
The Conservatives ran from accountability by running to the courts. No government has resorted to legal threats and challenges to intimidate opponents as much as this one.
In the so called Cadman-gate affair, wherein the Conservatives were accused of trying to bribe independent MP Chuck Cadman for his vote, the party resorted to suing the Liberals. They went after Tom Zytaruk, who wrote a book on the affair, alleging Mr. Zytaruk’s tape of an interview with Harper was altered.
The party sued Elections Canada in connection with the in-and-out affair and it is using legal channels to try to block information gathered by the Military Police Complaints Commission on the Afghan detainees’ affair.
In other cases, the Conservatives chose to circumvent their own laws. In the interest of making democracy fairer, Harper brought in a welcome measure — a fixed-date election law. PMs no longer had the advantage of setting election dates at their own choosing. But in 2008 Harper ignored his own law and went to the Governor General to call an election.
The government’s perspective in democratic/legal rights area was illustrated when Harper went so far as to appeal a Canadian Federal Court  decision asking the United States to repatriate the Canadian Omar Khadr from Guantanamo. Harper was reluctant to speak out against the judicial travesties at Gitmo. The Conservatives shut down the Court Challenges Program, which provided funding for Canadians to defend their Charter rights. They fought hard to deport Iraqi war resisters and they went to extremes to crush protests at the G-20 summit.

………………………………….

The story of increased concentration of power in the prime minister’s office is one, as charted by Donald Savoie and other specialists, that has been ongoing for decades. But the experts are hard pressed to find another prime minister as obsessed with control as the current one.

Finance Minister Paul Martin points toward Prime Minister Jean Chretien while responding to a question during Question Period in the House of Commons in Ottawa, Oct. 31, 2001. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Tom Hanson)

Chrétien was driven, at times, to authoritarian measures because of his longstanding bitter feud with Quebec separatists. They posed a challenge to him in his own riding, so he went to unusual lengths to secure support there. He bestowed on it largesse by the barrelful, leading to the Shawinigate controversy. At the province-wide level he was determined to ward off secessionist threats. Excesses in pursuit of that goal resulted in the sponsorship scandal.

When he faced an internal rebellion in the party, led by Paul Martin, Chrétien sometimes resorted to extraordinary measures of control as well. And there were other heavy-handed tactics, as seen when Chrétien shut down the Somalia inquiry and used tactics to drown out protests at the APEC conference in Vancouver in 1997. But in day-to-day governance he delegated much power to his cabinet and the public service. He was never personally driven to try to control Ottawa like Harper.

Lorraine Weinrib, a professor of law and political science, says Harper is intent to construct his own constitutional framework. His actions, she said, align with “an all-powerful executive that makes its own rules on a play-by-play basis.” Those actions “reveal an understanding of democratic engagement that barely tolerates the dispersal of power.”

If a healthy democracy requires some degree of balance of power between the executive branch, the legislative branch and other power sources, there is little such balance today. The Harper effect has been to enfeeble the other constituent parts. The state of democracy now is such that the civil service is subjugated, the committee system weakened, watchdogs anemic, independent agencies intimidated, information less available, the prime minister’s own party in servitude, political parties soon — if Harper gets his way — to be stripped of public funding.

Consultant Keith Beardsley who worked in the Harper PMO, said the initial plan in 2006, when the party was new to power and insecure, was to put the hammer down — exert maximum control — for about the first six months. The six months came and went, he said, but the hammer was never lifted.

Critics fear it never will be, that we may just be seeing the beginning, that Harper will see an election victory as vindication for authoritarian methods and that more will follow.

The remarkable thing, as professor Russell notes, in looking at the way this prime minister has overpowered the system, is that he has done it all with only a minority government. Even prime ministers with big majorities have never been able — if indeed it was ever their intent — to bring the system to heel to the extent of the minority man.

© 2011 iPolitics Inc.

http://www.sowhatdidimiss.blogspot.com/

41 Reasons in this 41st Election to vote ABC

My last political post before the election cutoff.  Here's the sum up the current government's ethics (or lack of them).  Basically, reasons not to vote for Harper.  Thanks to all who checked out this resource and shared it with others - there were over 40,000 views and a ton of tweets on this site in just a few weeks. The most popular post was the one listing the candidates skipping debates - I guess people were checking up on candidates in their own riding.  Here's hoping for the best - for us all. (in no particular order):

No. 41: Harper campaigns in support of asbestos exports
No. 40: Harper's former speech writer declares youth bad for vote
No. 39: 57 Conservative Candidates Currently Skipping Debates
No. 38: Harper cuts aid to needy African nations
No. 37: Harper lies about lobbyist reform
No. 36: Harper undoes agreement to improve lives of First Nations
No. 35: Harper doesn't read what he signs
No. 34: Harper's subsidies to tar sands companies
No. 33: Unelected Conservative senators kill climate bill
No. 32: Harper signs up for jets that don't come with engines
No. 31: Harper claims Canada has no history of colonialism
No. 30: Conservatives try to steal the election - literally
No. 29: Harper to create government-run media centre
No. 28: Tories mislead gov't on millions spent on G8
No. 27: Conservative admits Tory ridings favoured with cash
No. 26: Conservatives spending billions on jails as crime drops
No. 25: Economic action plan signs made in U.S.
No. 24: Conservative party redistributes tax payer money with prop cheques
No. 23: Harper buys short range planes built for long range country
No. 22: Canada loses seat on security council due to lacklustre record
No. 21: Harper cuts almost all funding for women's groups
No. 20: Harper admits Conservative party attempted to bribe dying MP
No. 19: Harper limits amount of total questions from reporters
No. 18: Harper tries to control which reporters ask questions
No. 17: Harper falsely claimed on FOX News that Canadians support Iraq war
No. 16: Harper claims Saddam has WMDs and writes US papers to complain
No. 15: Conservative party ejects students for facebook photos
No. 14: Harper condemns coalition, ignoring fact he asked for one too
No. 13: Harper's last minute decision to host G20 in Toronto       
No. 12: Harper recites exact speech given by Australian Prime Minister
No. 11: Government hires unlicensed Utah company for security
No. 10: Despite $930 Million in security, cops told to stay away
No. 9: "Conservative" Harper wastes over $1 Billion on G20 summit
No. 8: Government lies about complaints in order to hide evidence
No. 7: Despite stats showing otherwise, government wants more jails
No. 6: Tory handbook on obstructing and manipulation
No. 5: Conservatives charged with breaking election rules
No. 4: Government withholds incriminating evidence
No. 3: Public Integrity Commissioner fails to do job
No. 2: Government found in contempt
No. 1: Conservative Minister lies to parliament

Sunday, 1 May 2011

No. 42: Harper Can't Stop Lying - Even About What He Did Last MONTH

In an interview just days before the election, Stephen Harper says: "I cannot go around the country telling people I'm the best guy to have a beer with.  That's the other guy."

Which leads one to wonder - when did Jack Layton ever say that?  The answer is, he didn't.


Which also leads one to wonder - hey, didn't Stephen Harper also go out on the campaign trail this election and share some pints?  Yes, he did. On March 31st he visited both the Alexander Keith's Brewery and the Red Stag Tavern in Halifax, both photo ops to show him serving and drinking beer with the common folk.  


This man can't stop lying!

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/on-the-campaign-trail-the-daily-photo-recap/article1965719/

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/story_print.html?id=4705554&sponsor=

Friday, 29 April 2011

No. 41: Harper Takes $12 Billion Surplus, Turns It Into $45 Billion Deficit

The most important fact leading up to the election date is this:

Stephen Harper's ridiculous claim that he and the conservatives are the only ones that can steward the Canadian economy safely, is absolutely false.

In reality, he has added $57 million in new debt on the backs of Canadian taxpayers since his government has been in office.  This includes wasting $1 billion on frivolous G20 spending and handing out corporate tax cuts totalling $6 billion while in a recession.  When Paul Martin left office, he left Stephen Harper a surplus of $12 billion.  The projection this year is a deficit of $45.5 billion.

Worse, Harper's future plans include wasting $24 more billion on jets and $1 billion on jails.  In contrast, he only plans to spend $5 million on education.  For reducing the deficit, $11 billion in savings comes through yet unnamed cuts to services including $4 billion in reducing "inefficiencies", a suggestion that has been by discredited by leading economists.


From the author:

The truth is, Stephen Harper has not been a good steward of Canadian taxpayers' money, so for him to point the finger at everyone else shows he is either in a state of denial, delusion or just thinks he's way more awesome than he is.  Yes, some spending was necessary during the economic downturn, but that's certainly the WRONG time to be wasting wads of cash on fake lakes, gazebos, outrageous amounts of security and continuing to subsidize the tar sands, to name a few things.  Further, his solution to get out of the deficit he has created will have a huge impact on most Canadians who are not extremely wealthy.


If history is any indication (and it usually is), the next step after all massive spending by conservative governments is to then demand cuts to social services with the deficit they created as the excuse.  When Mike Harris was premier of Ontario, this was called "creating a crisis".  When Ronald Reagan was President of the U.S., it was called "starving the beast".  Harper has already pledged to cut $11 billion in unnamed services - if he is elected PM, it won't be long before the other shoe drops. 

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2008/10/28/martin.html

 http://www.financialpost.com/news/economy/Budget+deficit+will+shrink+Harper/4458384/story.html

 http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/decision-canada/issues+platform+Harper+ducks+questions+deficit+plan/4591491/story.html

Wednesday, 27 April 2011

Harper's Treatment of First Nations, Inuit and Metis

Harper's record providing help to First Nations, Inuit and Metis is abysmal. One apology does not make up for destroying their land and livelihood. Setting up a tribunal to deal with their concerns means nothing if not a single case is tried in THREE years. All smoke and mirrors.

Tuesday, 26 April 2011

No. 40: Harper campaigns in support of asbestos exports despite cancer risks and ban in Canada

Canada’s leading medical authorities have all pleaded that the export of asbestos is medically and morally indefensible and will lead to an epidemic of asbestos-related disease and death overseas.  Harper is the only national leader in the Western world to promote asbestos.

Ironically, asbestos is being removed from schools, the House of Commons and even 24 Sussex Dr., where the Prime Minister resides with his wife and two children.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/980449--harper-defends-asbestos-exports-despite-cancer-risks?bn=1

Monday, 25 April 2011

No. 39: Harper's former speech writer declares youth bad for vote

I would like to see the research this man bases these comments on - except there isn't any:

"Is it a wise idea to encourage young people to vote who aren't well informed on politics and current events to begin with. For instance, there is a political radicalism among youth -especially the type of youth who would stay home on election day -that could lead to many fringe parties receiving votes. This is good for democracy, but not necessarily for political stability. While no one is expecting all young people to have PhD-level understanding of the Canadian political system, a decent amount of knowledge would be nice.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/decision-canada/Vote+mentality/4659482/story.html

57 Conservative Candidates Currently Skipping Debates

Either this is a brazen contempt for voters or an attempt to hide an embarrassing ineptitude at public speaking – neither of which is the hallmark of a suitable candidate. One Conservative candidate, Jilian Saweczko said she could not attend due to "planned emergencies".  Kind of reminiscent of "unreported crimes"?

Candidates who have missed debates (57 CPC, 5 NDP, 4 Bloc, 1 Lib): 
(Click on names to link to articles)

Alberta

- Deepak Obhrai (CPC) - Calgary East

- Rob Anders (CPC) - Calgary West (Radio station launches contest to locate him)

- Michelle Rempel (CPC) - Calgary Centre-North

- Jason Kenney (CPC) - Calgary South East

- Stephen Harper (CPC) - Calgary South West

- Devinder Shory (CPC) - Calgary North East

- Dianne Ablonczy (CPC) - Calgary Nose Hill

- Jim Hillyer (CPC) - Lethbridge

- Peter Goldring (CPC) - Edmonton East

- Laurie Hawn (CPC) - Edmonton Centre

- LaVar Payne (CPC) - Medicine Hat

Ontario

- Julian Fantino (CPC) - Vaughan

- Peter Kent (CPC) - Thornhill

- Aijaz Naqvi (NDP) - Mississauga-Streetsville

- Terence Young (CPC) - Oakville

- Susan Truppe (CPC) - London-North Centre

- Stephen Woodworth (CPC) - Kitchener Centre

- Diane Finley (CPC) - Haldimand—Norfolk

- Royal Galipeau (CPC) - Ottawa-Orléans

- Theresa Rodrigues (CPC) - Davenport

- Leanna Villella (CPC) - Welland

- Kevin Moore (CPC) - Toronto Centre

- Elie Salibi (CPC) - Ottawa South

- Pierre Lemieux (CPC) - Glengarry-Prescott-Russell

- Terry Anderson (CPC) - Hamilton Mountain

- Marty Burke (CPC) - Guelph

- James McLaren (NDP) - Ottawa South

- Ed Holder (CPC) - London West

- Patrick Brown (CPC) - Barrie

- Peter Braid (CPC) - Kitchener - Waterloo

- Chris Alexander (CPC) - Ajax-Pickering

- Larry Miller (CPC) - Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound

- Corneliu Chisu (CPC) - Pickering-Scarborough East

- Fred Slade (CPC) - Sudbury

- Damian Konstantinakos (CPC) - Ottawa Centre

- Phil McColeman (CPC) - Brant

- Jilian Saweczko (CPC) - York-South-Weston

- Dave Van Kesteren (CPC) - Chatham-Kent-Essex

- Dr. Marie Bountrogianni (LIB) - Hamilton-Mountain

- Terry Anderson (CPC) - Hamilton-Mountain

- Bev Shipley (CPC) - Lambton-Kent Essex

- Kassandra Bidarain (NDP) - Aurora-Newmarket

Manitoba

- Wally Daudrich (CPC) - Churchill

- Rod Bruinooge (CPC) - Winnipeg South

- Bev Pitura (CPC) - Winnipeg Centre

New Brunswick

- Rodney Weston (CPC) - Saint John

- Robert Goguen (CPC) - Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe

British Columbia

- Ronald Leung (CPC) - Burnaby-Douglas

- Dona Cadman (CPC) - Surrey North

- Mark Strahl (CPC) - Chilliwack - Fraser Canyon

- John Koury (CPC) - Nanaimo-Cowichan

- John Duncan (CPC) - Vancouver Island North

- Jennifer Clarke (CPC) - Vancouver Centre

- Ronald Leung (CPC) - Burnaby-Douglas

Nova Scotia

- Gerald Keddy (CPC) - South Shore-St. Margaret's

Saskatchewan

- Randy Hoback (CPC) - Prince Albert

- Kelly Block (CPC) - Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar ("As elusive as Bigfoot")

Northwest Territories

- Sandy Lee (CPC) - Western Arctic

Quebec

- Daniel Petit (CPC) - Charlesbourg-Haute-Saint-Charles

- Sylvie Boucher (CPC) - Beauport-Limoilou

- Claude Pilote (Bloc) - Roberval-Lac-Saint-Jean

- Roger Pomerleau (Bloc) - Drummond

- Richard Côté (Bloc) - Portneuf-Jacques-Cartier

- Nicolas Dufour (Bloc) - Repentigny

- Nancy Brassard-Fortin (CPC) - Hull-Aylmer (Missed 3 debates in 3 days!)
- Isabelle Maguire (NDP) - Richmond-Arthabaska
- Ruth Ellen Brosseau (NDP) - Berthier-Maskinonge

http://www.westonweb.ca/
http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/apicazo/2011/04/election-2011-debate-absenteeism

Saturday, 23 April 2011

Video #1

Monday, 18 April 2011

No. 38: Harper cuts aid to needy African nations, shifts money to countries that make more money

“It's very abrupt and sudden, and no proper reason was given,” says Emma Kaliya, chairwoman of an independent Malawian organization that had worked on women's-rights issues with Canadian aid.

Instead of Malawi and the seven other African countries, where most people are so desperately poor that they earn less than $2 a day, a bigger share of Canada's foreign-aid money will flow to middle-income places such as Peru, Colombia, Ukraine and the Caribbean, where Canada's commercial interests are more attractive.

Harper has mandated Afghanistan to become the largest recipient of Canada's largesse. This led world-renowned development economist Jeffrey Sachs to complain, "…the money going to Afghanistan and Iraq is really not development aid but security spending."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/banned-aid/article1160311/

No. 37: Harper lies about lobbyist reform, as former aide lobbies for Taser

In 2006, Harper claimed that "politics will no longer be a stepping stone to a lucrative career lobbying government.''

Soon after however, a Tory election strategist and former adviser to both the prime minister and public safety minister became a lobbyist for Taser International - the company who provided the weapons that killed Robert Dziekanski.  Boessenkool was a senior adviser to now Prime Minister Stephen Harper and played key strategic roles in the 2004 and 2006 Conservative election campaigns.  Boessenkool lists Day's department and the RCMP as potential points of contact in his filing with the Registrar of Lobbyists.

http://toronto.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20071214/taser_lobby_071214?hub=Toronto

No. 36: Harper undoes agreement to improve lives of First Nations

The Kelowna Accord was designed to eradicate poverty in First Nations communities and make Canada a better place," Phil Fontaine of the Assembly of First Nations said.  "This budget suggests to me that we won't be able to move ahead on those commitments." Even conservative Alberta Premier Ralph Klein expressed his disappointment, saying the Kelowna deal went a long way toward addressing the needs of First Nations and Métis peoples.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/aboriginals/undoing-kelowna.html

No. 35: Harper either doesn't read what he signs, or doesn't know the difference between India and First Nations people

The mix-up prompted a sharp response from the president of the Ontario Federation of Indian Friendship Centres, Rick Lobzun.  "This is 2004, Mr. Harper, not 1492 - the last time a man got lost looking for India," he wrote in a letter dated Wednesday.

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20040227/harper_gaffe_040226?hub=TorontoHome

Sunday, 17 April 2011

No. 34: Harper's subsidies to tar sands companies larger than entire Environment Canada budget

More of our money is going to subsidize oil companies’ destruction in the tar sands than there is in the combined 2008 budgets of Environment Canada ($1.12 billion) and Alberta Environment ($403 million).

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20070302/oil_sands_070302/

http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/Blog/government-subsidies-to-tar-sands-companies-l/blog/28184

No. 33: Unelected Conservative senators kill climate bill passed by elected officials

The Conservatives have used their clout in the Senate stacked by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to kill an NDP climate change bill that was passed by a majority of the House of Commons.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/tory-senators-kill-climate-bill-passed-by-house/article1802519/

VIDEO: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/video/senate-vote-on-climate-bill-angers-ndp/article1803303/?from=1802519

No. 32: Harper signs up for jets that don't come with engines - cost almost doubles

The multi-million dollar F-35 stealth fighter that the Conservatives want to purchase comes with all the accoutrements of a high-tech aircraft — everything, that is, except an engine.

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Canada+Engines+included/4629251/story.html

Friday, 15 April 2011

No. 31: Harper claims Canada has no history of colonialism

Stephen Harper claimed at a G20 summit that "We also have no history of colonialism. So we have all of the things that many people admire about the great powers but none of the things that threaten or bother them," he said.  

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/26/columns-us-g20-canada-advantages-idUSTRE58P05Z20090926

No. 30: Conservatives try to steal the election - literally

Several students and a Liberal scrutineer present at the polling station allege Marty Burke’s director of communication, Michael Sona, attempted Wednesday to grab a ballot box in an effort to stop voting at the U of G polling station.

http://www.guelphmercury.com/news/local/article/517455--elections-canada-rules-votes-stand-from-u-of-g-special-ballot-session

Wednesday, 13 April 2011

No. 29: Harper to create government-run media centre: report

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been working on a secret project to build a $2-million government-controlled media centre, a newspaper reported Monday.

 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2007/10/15/media-pm.html

Monday, 11 April 2011

No. 28: Tories mislead gov't on millions spent for cities far from G8 summit

The draft reveals that a local “G8 summit liaison and implementation team” — Industry Minister Tony Clement, the mayor of Huntsville, and the general manager of Deerhurst Resort which hosted the summit — chose the 32 projects that received funding. It says there was no apparent regard for the needs of the summit or the conditions laid down by the government.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/972725--tories-come-under-attack-over-ag-s-shocking-g8-spending-report

Thursday, 7 April 2011

No. 27: Conservative admits Tory ridings favoured with cash

It is "normal" for Conservative ridings to receive more cash from Ottawa than those with opposition MPs, a high-profile Tory candidate in Quebec said Thursday.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/04/07/lac-saint-louis-riding-campaign-liberals-conservatives.html?ref=rss

Tuesday, 5 April 2011

No. 26: Conservatives spending billions on jails as crime rates falling

The government says it will spend $2 billion over five years to absorb more prisoners due to stiffer sentencing provisions in new legislation.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/919371--critics-say-harper-government-throwing-prison-expansion-money-away

No. 25: Economic action plan signs made in U.S.

The signs promote the $8 million federal-provincial economic stimulus plan, which is supposed to provide work for small and medium sized B.C. businesses, said Conroy.  Instead the roads signs were made by Zumar Industries from Tacoma, Wash., which has received more than $1 million in work from the B.C. government in the last four years, she said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/11/09/bc-us-signs-canadas-economic-action-plan.html

No. 24: Conservative party redistributes tax payer money using prop cheques

Everyone likes a big cheque when it comes to handing over money. It makes a dandy prop for MPs to stand beside and take credit for.  The practice did not break the ethics code for MPs nor the Conflict of Interest Act, but was deemed "inappropriate."

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/660206

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/politicalbytes/2009/10/big-cheque-big-logo.html

No. 23: Harper buys short range planes built for aircraft carriers for the 2nd largest country in the world that owns no aircraft carriers

It's not clear that fighter jets should be at the top of Canada's procurement list. The CF-18s were acquired to intercept Soviet bombers during the Cold War; today, Russia is a member of the G8, the Arctic Council, and a soon-to-be member of the WTO. It's largest trading partner is the European Union, which is made up mostly of NATO states.  Canada's most desperate procurement need is for fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft that could be built in Canada by Bombardier.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/836959--16-billion-for-the-wrong-planes

No. 22: Canada loses seat on security council due to lacklustre record, Harper blames Ignatieff

Despite pouring money and countless hours into the election effort, Canada failed to win a seat at the security council for the first time in history.  Afterward, the Harper government placed the blame for the loss in a seemingly strange place: on Michael Ignatieff.

The suggestion was bizarre.  Several ambassadors who emerged from the vote made no mention of Ignatieff's remarks; one had never even heard of him.  Instead, the loss was perhaps due to Canada's recent move to freeze all aid to Africa.  Or maybe, it was because Canada has reduced its UN peacekeepers to a historic low to pour resources into Afghanistan. Or it could have been due to Canada's lacklustre performance at December's climate conference in Copenhagen, and its failure to meet its Kyoto protocal obligations.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/13/canada-michael-ignatieff

No. 21: Harper cuts almost all funding for women's issues, ironically named chair of UN Women's Health Fund

Since Canada’s Conservative Government took power in 2006, significant budget cuts have been made to Canadian gender equality, political justice, social policy and research programs including the virtual elimination of a Canadian government department devoted to Women’s equality and women’s issues.

http://aprilreign.breadnroses.ca/politics/were-in-safe-hands-with-stephen-harper-and-other-conservative-lies/

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20100504/Harper-womens-funding-100504/

http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/7900-canadas-harper-to-chair-un-womens-health-fund.html

No. 20: Harper admits Conservative party attempted to bribe dying MP

Harper was Opposition leader when two party operatives offered Cadman, who had terminal cancer, a million-dollar life insurance policy.

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/307996

No. 19: Harper limits amount of total questions from reporters to 5

B.C. Conservative staffer Tony Phillips says limiting the PM’s media questions to five a day is “stupidity.”  Phillips, communications director for Surrey North MP Dona Cadman last election and a staffer on her re-election campaign this time around, has openly questioned the scheme to limit Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s media entourage to just five questions a day.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Harper+question+limit+stupidity+says+Conservative/4557956/story.html

No. 18: Harper tries to control which reporters ask questions

Soon after taking control of the Government of Canada, Harper tries to control the media. By demanding that he select who asks questions (and thus what questions are asked), the Press Gallery rejects him, and so Harper refuses to answer any questions at all. Then he lies to Canadians about the whole issue.

VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvE9EN4YPGM

No. 17: Harper falsely claimed on FOX News that majority of Canadians supported going into Iraq

In an interview with the American TV network, Harper said he endorsed the war and said he was speaking "for the silent majority" of Canadians. Only in Quebec, with its "pacifist tradition," are most people opposed to the war, Harper said.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20030404/harper_fox_interview_030404/

http://25461.vws.magma.ca/admin/articles/torstar-24-03-2003c.html 

No. 16: Harper claims Saddam has WMDs and writes Wall Street Journal to complain about Canada not being in war

Harper stood in the House of Commons in January 2003, to remind MPs that as early as the previous October, "I noted that there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein operates programs to produce weapons of mass destruction. Experience confirms this. British, Canadian and American intelligence leaves no doubt on the matter." Yet as soon as the Iraq adventure went sour, Harper put as much distance as he could between himself and his erstwhile allies, Bush, Tony Blair and Australia's John Howard.

http://www.macleans.ca/columnists/article.jsp?content=20070129_139786_139786

Monday, 4 April 2011

No. 15: Conservative party ejects students for facebook pics

About 30 minutes after arriving and signing in, the two girls were asked by a man to follow him out of the rally, Aslam said. Though confused, they complied.  In a back room, Aslam said he ripped off their name tags, tore them up and ordered them out.  "We were confused. He said, 'We know you guys have ties to the Liberal party through Facebook'. He said ... 'You are no longer welcome here.'"

http://www.torontosun.com/news/decision2011/2011/04/04/17873621.html

No. 14: Harper condemns coalition, ignoring fact he pushed for same in 2004

When Conservative leader Stephen Harper arranged a private meeting in a downtown Montreal hotel about two months after the 2004 election, he asked his counterparts from the Bloc Quebecois and the New Democratic Party to sign a letter.
Addressed to the governor general of the day, the letter reminded Adrienne Clarkson that she didn't need to dissolve Parliament and call an election if the newly minted minority government of former prime minister Paul Martin lost the confidence of the House of Commons. Harper, along with Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe and NDP leader Jack Layton, eventually signed the document, which noted there were alternatives to holding another general election.

http://www.canada.com/news/Harper+Layton+Duceppe+sought+opposition+2004+letter/4511865/story.html#ixzz1Htw6yDVP

No. 13: Harper's last minute decision to host G20 in downtown core costs Toronto

Harper made a last-minute decision to include the G20 in downtown Toronto (he gave the City all of 15 minutes’ notice before the public announcement) and then refused to consider options, even after Toronto itself expressed major concerns about costs, loss of revenue, security, and a multitude of other real problems for Torontonians.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontog20summit/article/830274--toronto-s-advice-ignored-on-g20-miller-says

No. 12: Harper recites exact speech given by Australian prime minister

A Conservative campaign worker has quit over damaging revelations that a major 2003 speech by Conservative leader Stephen Harper, then leader of the Opposition calling for support for the Iraq war, copied almost word-for-word a speech just two days earlier by Australian Prime Minister John Howard.
Hours after the Conservative campaign had refused to deny or rebut the charge of plagiarism, or acknowledge who wrote the speech, a statement released by Owen Lippert, a former foreign policy advisor in Harper's OLO office at the time, admitted the speech was ripped off.

http://www.thestar.com/article/508742

Video montage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h87Z9uM8KXI

No. 11: Government hires unlicensed Utah company for G20 security, eventually charged

“Any of our security companies could have completed this contract for half of the cost paid out to Contemporary,” he said. “Why was double the amount was paid when it did not have to be? Heads should roll but we need to find out which heads?”

http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/joe_warmington/2011/04/01/17845816.html

No. 10: Despite $930 Million in security, cops told to "stand down" and not stop vandals

Police officers were trained to stop the Black Bloc anarchists, were appropriately equipped and massively manned. Yet as downtown Toronto witnessed burning police cars and a small group of thugs on a rampage, a police source says the only thing that stopped the officers from doing that was an order telling them not to.  They say they could have rounded up all, or most of them, in no time.
An officer said that eventually there was "a clear order from the command centre saying 'Do not engage' "and, at that point, smelling weakness and no repercussions, the downtown was effectively turned over to the vandals while police, up to 19,000 strong, were ordered to stay out of it.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/joe_warmington/2010/06/30/14564416.html

No. 9: "Conservative" Harper wastes over $1 Billion of Canadian taxpayer money on the G8 and G20 summits

The G-20 and G-8 financial summits leave taxpayers footing a whopping bill.  A report released says the two summits are expected to cost Canadians C$930 million (US$893 million) in security alone, including more than C$500 million for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Together with other hosting costs — including nearly C$2 million for a marketing and media pavilion in Toronto that includes a "fake lake" — the total tab will run well north of C$1 billion.

"There's a nagging sense police, public servants and politicians are wallowing in a bottomless trough they figure Canadians will constantly replenish," columnist James Travers wrote in the Toronto Star, the country's biggest newspaper.  Bruce Schneier, an internationally renowned security technologist and author of several books on the topic, calls the security bill for the three-day affair "ridiculous."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37901237/ns/world_news-americas/

Friday, 1 April 2011

No. 8: Government lies about complaints in order to kill long-form census

Industry minister Tony Clement has repeatedly said that the threat of imprisonment for not filling out the mandatory long-form census played a large part in the government’s decision, even though a Canadian has never been jailed for refusing to fill out the form.

He then argued that Canadians believed the form was too invasive.  This was not borne out by Canada’s privacy watchdog who reported that it had received just three complaints about the census in the last decade.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/census/article/918433--conservatives-relied-on-a-few-complaints-to-scrap-the-census?bn=1

No. 7: Despite stats showing otherwise, government claims crime rates actually rising due to "unreported crimes"

Harper government suppresses research that contradicts ideologically-driven policy, for example data that show crime rates to be fallingin order to justify spending on prisons.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/crunch-the-numbers-crime-rates-are-going-down/article1913808/

No. 6: Tory handbook on obstructing and manipulating Commons committees leaked

Having come into office on campaign promises of greater transparency and accountability, Harper has silenced civil servants and diplomats and cynically published guidelines on how to disrupt hostile parliamentary committees.

http://www.thestar.com/article/215532

No. 5: Conservatives charged with breaking election spending law

Four conservatives were charged with exceeding campaign spending limits in the 2006 election that put Harper into power. A minister used public office and material to pursue party-political goals of courting ethnic vote banks for the conservatives.

http://www.canada.com/business/Conservatives+charged+with+breaking+election+spending/4343480/story.html

No. 4: Government withholds incriminating evidence of human rights violations - suspends parliament to avoid issue

When a foreign service officer blew the whistle on the Canadian military handing over detainees to Afghan security forces, in likely violation of international humanitarian law, the government tried to destroy him and refused to give documents to a parliamentary inquiry. The Speaker reminded the government parliament controlled cabinet, not the other way round.

After the last elections, when the opposition parties were close to agreement on a coalition majority government, rather than face the house in a vote of confidence, Harper talked the governor-general into shuttering parliament for a month until he shored up his own support.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2010/04/27/afghan-detainee-documents-speaker-milliken-privilege-ruling.html

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2009/12/30/parliament-prorogation-harper.html

No. 3: Public Integrity Commissioner fails to do job, rewarded with $500,000 to go away quietly

During her three years as public integrity commissioner, Ouimet investigated only seven of the more than 200 complaints her office received and never found any wrongdoing against whistleblowers.  That is, a public servant paid by the taxpayer was financially gagged by yet more taxpayer money to stop taxpayers finding out what was going on.

http://www.globalnews.ca/aboutus/Integrity+commissioner+failed/3951821/story.html 

http://www.therecord.com/news/canada/article/497558--outrage-grows-over-integrity-commissioner-s-severance-package

No. 2: Government found in contempt for refusing to disclose information about big spending

Following rulings by Speaker Peter Milliken, for the first time in Canadian history, the government and a minister have been found to be in contempt of parliament for withholding information and misleading the house.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/957379--committee-finds-harper-government-in-contempt

No.1: Conservative Minister lies to parliament - and is supported by the government

A minister told parliament she did not know who had altered a document that cut funding to a foreign aid group. Later, she admitted to ordering the changes, but did not know who had carried out the order. Lying to parliament, a cardinal sin of Westminster-style democracy, has become a political tactic.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/cida-memo-doctored-on-ministerial-orders-bev-oda-admits/article1906584/