Voice of the Association

Columnist Lorne Gunter wrote in today’s National Post:

“Somewhere around Nov. 1, Stephen Harper’s government became the longest serving Conservative minority ever — by a factor of three. No other Conservative minority — there have been four previous ones since Confederation — has managed to last as long as seven months. In early November, Harper’s entered its 21st month. It is now almost 23 months old.

The longevity of the Harper minority was the most under-reported political story of 2007; and not just its longevity, but its effectiveness despite its minority status, too.”

“Before Harper’s, Canada’s Conservative minorities produced almost nothing other than (usually) a brief timeout between Liberal majorities.

Harper’s, though, is already the fourth-longest surviving minority since Confederation and the reason for its success is the prime minister’s strategic genius. He has mastered the art of manoeuvring his opponents into corners from which they cannot escape and without their noticing until it is too late.”

“Despite its minority, the Harper government has cut taxes, changed childcare policy, backed us away from draconian Kyoto emission targets in favour of made-in-Canada reductions, curtailed the federal spending power, increased provincial autonomy and tried to end the ridiculous leniency of our criminal justice system.”

“But what makes its achievements all the more remarkable is that the Harper minority is the smallest of the 10 minorities Canada has had. According to the Library of Parliament, the average lifespan of a Canadian minority government is one year, three months and 29 days. Come Feb. 6, Mr. Harper’s government will have been in office two years. And with a minority of 60 seats, it is far and away the smallest minority ever. Even when the gap between the government and the opposition is calculated as a percentage of the total number of seats in the Commons, this is our smallest minority ever (19.5%).

Mr. Harper also has no ideological allies among the opposition, unlike Liberal minority prime minister’s who can always count on the NDP to prop them up.

It is remarkable that a Tory minority has lasted this long and, with qualifiers, achieved so much.”

In an article today entitled “Harper stood our in lacklustre Parliament of 2007,” columnist Don Martin wrote the following for the Ottawa Citizen:

“BEST POLITICIAN

It has to be Prime Minister Stephen Harper.”

Mr. Martin pointed to PM Harper’s “shrewd appointment of former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley” and finding a way of “making a minority Parliament function” as hallmarks of the Prime Minister’s acheivement. He concluded by saying, “this bold…prime minister was at his tactical best.“

Although he tempered his remarks with some criticisms, there was no question about who this respected columnist sees as number one.

In the post game news conference, Bill Belichick (coach of the NE Patriots) displayed an almost open contempt for the assembled media. One of the early questions was about two back-to-back plays in which the Patriots were successful and the reporter asked Coach Belichick if they were essentially the same play; “No they were comletely different, ” responded Belichick, “they were not even close!” Throughout the news conference he appeared agitated, sighing heavily at times and looking like he could barely tolerate the questioners. When someone asked a question he thought was silly, he treated the reporter with open contempt.

What relevance does this have to a political blog? Only the fact that some of the most competent and successful leaders often do not have the most advanced social skills. There is no question that Coach Belichick is outstanding among his peers. He just finished coaching a team that is arguably the best in football right now to a perfect 16-0 season. When it comes to dealing with the media however, he makes PM Stephen Harper look warm and fuzzy.

If you look at financial greats like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, neither of them have a great “presence” in front of a microphone. Sometimes great leadership and charisma go hand in hand (like with Gen. Rick Hillier), but often those who are focused on important matters of responsibility place little value on embracing the room with a hug and a smile. Dazzle and charismatic warmth are perhaps more valuable to actors than to leaders; but we want someone with substance guiding our nation, not just a role-player.

After viewing the PM’s bevy of year-end interviews, most fair minded people would conclude that Mr. Harper is an honest and sincere man who is trying to do his best for the country he loves. When he is not in an openly hostile environment, he is actually quite engaging (e.g. his interview with Lloyd Robertson and Bob Fife).

The media often becomes inordinately fixated on what is in their own best interest. Rock star appeal and charm attracts viewers; and after all, that is the name of the game on TV. When it comes to print media, pithy quotes and one-liners sell newspapers and make the reporters’ jobs easier. If that were the only reason they were so critical of PM Stephen Harper, they could almost be forgiven, but alas it seems that they purvey an atmosphere of open contempt which is difficult not to reciprocate (we are reminded of Richard Brennan - press gallery president - asking the PM at the close of his last news conference there, “Do you think that any of us seriously believe you…?)

Perhaps if the PM could trust the media not to skewer him by distorting his words, there would be a little more love in the room. Oh and, way to go Patriots and Bill Belichick! Congratulations on another display of determined teamwork and outstanding leadership. With results like that, we’ll cut you a little slack on your manners with journalists.

Addendum - 30 December 2007: Wow, we were right! Today’s Toronto Sun carried an article by Greg Weston which stated in part: “In our 10-minute interview that stretched to almost 20, Harper was disarmingly friendly, engaging and relaxed, at times funny and self-deprecating. To be sure, he presented as a kinder, gentler PM than the overly partisan Mr. Nasty so often featured in the daily Commons soap opera. For the most part, Harper was also refreshingly frank, if only to say he hadn’t yet made up his mind on a particular subject.” This is a magnanimous admission for one of the defenders of the Press Gallery universe. If some of his hard-core detractors are softening, perhaps we will see the real Stephen Harper in the media after all.

In what is likely to be one of the last poitical polls of the year, an Angus Reid poll from mid-December puts Conservative support at a steady 33%. The Liberal party remains stuck 5 points behind at 28% and the NDP is unchanged. These numbers are essentially where they were in similar polls conductes in July, August and October of this year.

Other poll highlights reflect PM Harper’s approval ratings are more than double those of Stéphane Dion, and Canadians prefer Stephen Harper as Prime Minister almost 3:1 over M. Dion (33%:12%) If the Liberals want to engineer an election in the spring, they will have to get up off their hands and use them to blind their eyes from reality.

In the summary of the poll, Angus Reid referenced comments by the Liberal leader on the issue of Arctic sovereignty. M. Dion has not yet learned to appear quiet and thoughtful when the Conservative government is so far out in front on such important issues. Quoting from a Canadian Press story, M. Dion reportedly said, “We are in the 21st century and we will not shoot the Danes or the Russians to impose our sovereignty.” (Does this not conjure up images of Liberal ads in the last election - “Soldiers with guns in our streets…”)

M. Dion’s own proposals on the other hand were predictably thin. “…he refused to detail his military plans,” Bob Weber (CP reporter) wrote. “…saying an announcement would come sometime in the new year. ‘Before the election, we’ll add,’ he said. ‘We have to have some surprises for the election.’ He said the Liberals will re-examine plans for Arctic patrol vessels, which have been criticized because they would only be able to sail through first-year ice.”

Simon Fraser University’s Canadian American Strategic Review was likewise critical of Dion’s plans. “This rather thin proposal deserves to be more fully fleshed out… this thin Liberal plan needs to be better thought through.” they stated. In a telling summary of Dion’s agenda, the article stated “Because he was flying on to Bali, Indonesia, where an international conference is debating the effects of climate change, M. Dion addressed the damage that polar warming is doing to the infrastructure of the Arctic.  He mentioned buildings and roads, but the real lifeline to the more remote Arctic communities are the airstrips.”

Stéphane Dion’s statements reveal why Canadians prefer PM Harper nearly three to one in areas of leadership. He simply does not know what he is talking about! Like them or not, the advertisements are right - Stéphane Dion is not a leader.

The opposition leaders love to link Prime Minister Stephen Harper to US president George Bush in an effort to tack the latter’s unpopularity onto Canada’s Prime Minister. They are indeed both conservative minded individuals, but there the likeness pretty much ends.

Although this is not well understood by the media in Canada, people in the rest of the world “get” Stephen Harper. In a recent Angus Reid world poll, the most admired world leader is Prime Minister Stephen Harper! Following closely behind were Angela Merkel (conservative - Germany), Yasuo Fukuda (Japan), Nicholas Sarkozy (conservative - France) and Gordon Brown (Great Britain). All of these leaders are friends of George Bush, but seen as distinct from him.
Although some have speculated that Britain’s new Prime Minister would distance himself from relations with America, Gordon Brown had this to say: “We will not allow people to separate us from the United States of America in dealing with the common challenges that we face around the world. I think people have got to remember that the relationship between Britain and America and between a British prime minister and an American president is built on the things that we share, the same enduring values about the importance of liberty, opportunity, the dignity of the individual. I will continue to work, as Tony Blair did, very closely with the American administration.”

The poll surveryed respondents in Canada, China, Great Britain, India, Israel, Italy, Russia, Turkey and the United States. Worldwide, the admiration gap between Stephen Harper and George Bush is almost 2:1. In Canada respondents noted the difference at greater than 2:1. Even in the US, people expressed admiration for Stephen Harper almost 2:1 over George Bush. The margins held true in most of the rest of the world.

The point is two-fold: First of all, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has earned the respect of the world in less than two years in office. Secondly, the only ones who don’t seem to “get it” are those who have a partisan political bias and refuse to give the man a fair shake. Stephen Harper is no more George Bush than Stéphane Dion is Hugo Chavez. It’s time that all those complicit in the fear-mongering took a dose of honesty before mounting their next attack.

As we enter into the final weeks of 2007, we want to wish all and sundry Season’s Greetings. Next week many Canadians will celebrate Christmas and one of the traditions we all enjoy most is the lighting of the tree. Those of us who are older still receive the vicarious joy of seeing a child’s face light up in reflection of yuletide joy. Many thanks to our friend NB Torylady who gathers some great photos for her blog; this picture of Prime Minister Harper, wife Laureen and daughter Rachel is typical of the warm Christmas spirit that many Canadians feel at this time of year.

As we celebrate important days to each of us throughout the year, we are reminded of what is perhaps most important to the unity of our nation - family, friends and the fraternity of a diverse neighbourhood of humanity bound together by the hope of peace and good will toward men.

No matter what our disagreements; no matter what our differences of politics, religion or background - we are Canadians, this is our country, and here we must stand together. So along with our Prime Minister and all the representatives in different levels of government across this land - Happy Holidays!

Prime Minister Harper has always been impressive in the way he fields questions and portrays the leadership that Canadians expect from their chief office holder. When the PM spoke before the Council of Foreign Relations in New York earlier this year, even the Canadian media remarked how relaxed and confident he was. Then he surprised that same group by holding a press conference in Ottawa with one of his chief critics (Richard Brennan) sitting to his left.

Once again the PM was relaxed, confident and knowledgeable about a wide range of issues. Perhaps his strongest answers were in areas where he would be perceived to be vulnerable. On the hard questions, PM Harper really shines. He doesn’t duck, dodge or avoid; he answers straightforwardly and sincerely.

As the round of year-end interviews with major media outlets goes to air, we were once again given reason to be proud of our Prime Minister as he fielded questions from CBC news anchor, Peter Mansbridge. (To watch Peter Mansbridge’s interview with the Prime Minister, follow this link.)

Questions touched on the Mulroney-Schreiber affair, Afghanistan, the nuclear isotope crisis and the possibility of an imminent election after the holidays. The responses that really stood out however were in answer to questions on the Bali Conference and the environment. The PM was very clear that although previous governments had failed to act, the Conservative government is committed to bringing in mandatory targets in the new year. He was also very forthright in warning all Canadians that real reductions in actual emissions cannot be achieved without real cost.

“There’s a reason why previous governments at all levels have avoided setting mandatory emissions targets“ he said. “As soon as you are dedicated to actually reducing emissions, that imposes costs on the economy. There are going to be very real costs, (we believe those costs are managable); but there is no way of getting emissions down without facing the reality of short-term costs.”

He went on to assert that making the necessary cuts “is going to be a challenge for the Government because it’s going to impose some costs and it’s going to provoke some reaction - but it has to be done. I’m going to ask your viewers to think of that whenever they have other people out there saying we should be doing more,” said Mr. Harper, “because once these things start biting, the criticism is going to be that we’re doing too much.”

Perhaps the most poignant and striking fact related by PM Harper in his environmental responses was this quote: “If all the developed countries in the world entirely eliminated their greenhouse gas emissions (100% over the next 40 years); world greenhouse gas emissions will double.“

Just as it is clear that 100% reductions are unreasonable, so it is unreasonable to believe that Canada can achieve any real reductions in global emissions by itself. Canada produces about 2% of global emissions. China, the United States, India and Russia together produce 52% of the world’s emissions. NONE OF THESE LAST FOUR COUNTRIES IS REQUIRED TO CUT EMISSIONS UNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL!

What Stéphane Dion claims as his crowning achievement is an absolute farce. It’s like offering to help a homeowner eliminate their debt by buying them a new coffee table, when there’s a $200,000 mortgage on the house it’s sitting in. Canada can lead the way by doing our part in our country, but our portion of the world’s emissions deficit is so small as to be almost insignificant.

The Canadian government’s stance at Bali was absolutely correct. Until the major emitters like China, the US, India and Russia are equal partners in the process, any further climate talks are just what M. Dion presided over in Montreal (2005) - ALL TALK and NO ACTION! If the Suzuki Foundation, the Pembina Institute, Sierra Club and Climate Action Network were really serious about reducing emissions, they would drop their partisan rhetoric and deal honestly with the substance of the issue. Thankfully, that is exactly what Stephen Harper and the Conservatives have done.

Canada’s Conservative government today invested millions of dollars to promote peace in the middle east.

“I am pleased to announce that Canada will commit $300 million over the next five years to build security, governance and prosperity,” said Minister Bernier. “The Israelis and Palestinians have committed to negotiations to be concluded in one year. While ambitious, I believe this is attainable. To improve security, we will increase our participation in reform of the Palestinian security system in areas including the civilian police, justice and corrections…

To improve governance, we will support institution-building in the Palestinian Authority and help build a better public service for all Palestinians. We will also work with Canadian and local non-governmental organizations, other actors and the Palestinian Authority to promote tolerance and combat hatred and the incitement of violence. And to improve prosperity, we will help to stimulate the Palestinian economy through its private sector.“

The Minister went on to make it clear that Canada’s funding is not unconditional. “We will need to see demonstrable progress in negotiations by both sides, as well as progress in Palestinian democratic reforms.” Minister Bernier said. “As the peace process moves forward, Canada will be there, ready to support the parties in doing the essential work that only they can do to achieve our common goal—a viable Palestinian state that is democratic, accountable, and living in peace and security as a neighbour to Israel.” The government also provided a backgrounder with more information on accountability for this investment.

Today the Honourable Diane Finley, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, announced new federal commitments to assist in the settlement and integrations of newcomers to Canada. This new money brings the total investment to more than $1.4 billion since last year’s budget.

“The Government of Canada is committed to helping newcomers and their families succeed. Since 2006, we have substantially increased funding in every province to support programs and services that can make a real difference in their lives,” said Minister Finley. “With this new funding, we will continue to respond to the needs of newcomers to help them become part of our community and our economy. Ultimately, their success is our success as we continue to build and strengthen our country.”

Citizenship and Immigration Canada supports a number of programs and services that help newcomers settle and eventually integrate into Canadian society. Some of these programs and services include those which provide information and orientation to newcomers, language training, and support in establishing networks and contacts.

This means especially good news to New Brunswick, which is actively trying to attract immigrants to boost population in the province. New Brunswick will be receiving $1.8 million for 2007-2008 and $2.7 million for 2008-2009, in addition to funding allocated for Enhanced Language Training (ELT), Portal and Anti-Racism initiatives. This new funding by the Conservative Government represents and increased investment of 168% from the time the Liberals were in power. This is particularly good news for families who want to immigrate to New Brunswick.

If you know someone who has recently immigrated (or is planning to), here are some helpful links:

Information for Newcomers; Foreign Credentials Referral Office; Immigrating to Canada; International Adoption

Some made a big deal over federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty telling municipal leaders recently that they should “quit whining.” While it may have been impolitic, his remark was nonetheless accurate.

Like with the summer jobs program earlier this year, the complaints stem more from lack of communication than lack of funding. The new Conservative government has a proven track record of streamlining the bureaucracy and getting money more efficiently to the people who need it.

The previous Liberal government had taught the municipalities to follow the lure of the fed’s “direct funding to cities.” The Liberals were trolling the cities like children with candy. This was the Liberals’ way of circumventing the traditional stream of funding through the provinces. Perhaps in the confusion, municipal leaders didn’t realize that the money was actually there - they were perhaps looking for it in the wrong place.

Suddenly there appears in our newspapers an announcement that our NB provincial government has lots of money for infrastructure and roads this year. What most reports fail to mention is WHERE THAT MONEY CAME FROM. We believe that credit goes to where credit is due.

On December 8, 2007 Minister Greg Thompson (regional minister for NB) signed a framework agreement with the province of NB which “will help propel New Brunswick towards have-province status, Premier Shawn Graham said.” The $541.6 million dollar investment by the Conservative government “is a long-term plan that will help address infrastructure needs and priorities in New Brunswick.“

Over $211 million was allocated to community infrastructure, with $178.5 million of that total to flow directly to municipalities. After a meeting with Premier Graham and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, Minister Greg Thompson said, “We went over joint priorities and there appears to be no disagreements on those, and now we’ve got the funding in place to do the things that both we and the premier want to do.“

That means that Riverkeepers and the Times & Transcript should quit whining about restoration of the Petitcodiac. The federal government has given approval for the project to proceed, and Premier Graham is happy that he has been given the federal support necessary the for New Brunswick government to pursue its priorities. If tearing down the causeway is really a top priority for Mr. Graham, he now has what he needs to get it done.