It is hard to decide what is more astonishing: Prime Minister Stephen Harper's inconsistencies and course corrections, or the fact they have done no serious damage to his standing in the polls.
His original appeal - even to those who don't share his vision - rested on his image as a solid, personally incorruptible, straight shooter. Said what he meant, meant what he said. Limited in life experience, uncompromising in his free-market views; but principled and predictable.
An incomplete portrait, as it hap-pens.
He accused critics of wanting to "cut and run" in Afghanistan, but, after nearly a decade of futile struggle, conceded the war was unwinnable and began withdrawing Canadian forces. He was never going to downplay China's human rights abuses in the name of the "almighty dollar" - until it became useful, recently, to ardently court China as a customer for tarsands oil.
There were other surprises: Mulroney-style Senate appointments, the unsavoury Chuck Cadman affair, the creative use of G8 funding to help Tony Clement secure re-election, the inexcusable defence of an EI watchdog agency that has done no work, has no immediate work to do, yet has already cost the treasury $3.3 million, with no end in sight.
As for Harper's promise of ac-countable, open government - no one is available to comment. Ever.
It is said voters are willing to overlook egregious examples of Conservative pork-barrelling and selective frugality (defunding ideologically suspect aid agencies; expanding PMO staffing) because Harper is skilfully managing the economy.
To be sure, he is successfully surfing on earlier Liberal decisions to tighten bank regulation and pay down deficits; he repeated this refrain in Davos this week.
But overwhelming his promise of new jobs (and the reality of weak employment gains) is the threat of lost jobs - high-quality jobs in the federal public service, in the high-tech hub of Kitchener-Water-loo where RIM is struggling, and among young Canadians whose skills don't match emerging needs. For them, Harper's economy is un-welcoming.
Harper's answer - his econom-ic-actionplan. 2 - is the Northern Gateway Pipeline. Selling Canadian energy to the highest bidder, ship-ping unrefined product and jobs to other places seems to be as complicated as it gets. Despite his talk of innovation, Harper's Canada is a vast reservoir for a resource-thirsty world.
But, then, he has never believed in meddling in the market - until he does. Favourable tax treatment to the oil industry, weakening environmental reviews (coming soon) and trash-talking foreign environ-mentalists don't count as interference, apparently.
At the same time, the prime minister is embarked on a new moral crusade: Iran.
True, that country's leadership is hateful, deluded and possibly dangerous. But Harper's apparent readiness to back multinational military action unless Iran abandons its nuclear program should worry Canadians.
Military intervention didn't work in Afghanistan; it exacted a terrible price in Iraq; and Iran's military is far superior to Libya's.
His original appeal - even to those who don't share his vision - rested on his image as a solid, personally incorruptible, straight shooter. Said what he meant, meant what he said. Limited in life experience, uncompromising in his free-market views; but principled and predictable.
An incomplete portrait, as it hap-pens.
He accused critics of wanting to "cut and run" in Afghanistan, but, after nearly a decade of futile struggle, conceded the war was unwinnable and began withdrawing Canadian forces. He was never going to downplay China's human rights abuses in the name of the "almighty dollar" - until it became useful, recently, to ardently court China as a customer for tarsands oil.
There were other surprises: Mulroney-style Senate appointments, the unsavoury Chuck Cadman affair, the creative use of G8 funding to help Tony Clement secure re-election, the inexcusable defence of an EI watchdog agency that has done no work, has no immediate work to do, yet has already cost the treasury $3.3 million, with no end in sight.
As for Harper's promise of ac-countable, open government - no one is available to comment. Ever.
It is said voters are willing to overlook egregious examples of Conservative pork-barrelling and selective frugality (defunding ideologically suspect aid agencies; expanding PMO staffing) because Harper is skilfully managing the economy.
To be sure, he is successfully surfing on earlier Liberal decisions to tighten bank regulation and pay down deficits; he repeated this refrain in Davos this week.
But overwhelming his promise of new jobs (and the reality of weak employment gains) is the threat of lost jobs - high-quality jobs in the federal public service, in the high-tech hub of Kitchener-Water-loo where RIM is struggling, and among young Canadians whose skills don't match emerging needs. For them, Harper's economy is un-welcoming.
Harper's answer - his econom-ic-actionplan. 2 - is the Northern Gateway Pipeline. Selling Canadian energy to the highest bidder, ship-ping unrefined product and jobs to other places seems to be as complicated as it gets. Despite his talk of innovation, Harper's Canada is a vast reservoir for a resource-thirsty world.
But, then, he has never believed in meddling in the market - until he does. Favourable tax treatment to the oil industry, weakening environmental reviews (coming soon) and trash-talking foreign environ-mentalists don't count as interference, apparently.
At the same time, the prime minister is embarked on a new moral crusade: Iran.
True, that country's leadership is hateful, deluded and possibly dangerous. But Harper's apparent readiness to back multinational military action unless Iran abandons its nuclear program should worry Canadians.
Military intervention didn't work in Afghanistan; it exacted a terrible price in Iraq; and Iran's military is far superior to Libya's.
Nor will our motives be pure this time: Harper is aware that any disruption in Iranian oil supply could advantage Alberta's tarsands. Climate change, tragically, doesn't enter the conversation.
Conservative-minded voters will be pleased with this - and with Harper's intervention at Davos, where he chastised Europe for clinging to unaffordable social pro-grams and hinted at some future downsizing of public pensions at home.
What about everyone else? Many have given up - in cynicism or despair. They turn their back on politics, don't bother to vote, even imagine it is fashionable to remain aloof.
They claim all politicians are the same, but they aren't. They claim it doesn't matter which party holds power, but it does.
If Occupiers had simply voted en masse in May, we wouldn't have a majority Conservative government today.
The media aren't to blame. We hector from the sidelines (guilty!), or, more usefully, uncover hypocrisies and small scandals. Op-position MPs - notably Bob Rae, Charlie Angus, Elizabeth May; but others, too - advance persuasive arguments, based on evidence, de-bunking Conservative crime policy, and other initiatives.
Nothing seems to penetrate public indifference - to Harper's benefit.
"It is a deliberate strategy to turn people off," says NDP leader-ship contender Nathan Cullen, who points to "voter suppression" as a popular right-wing tactic. "He either bores people to death, or uses wedge politics. People don't see themselves in the conversation."
But Cullen thinks Harper's government has overstepped himself in its shrill defence of the Northern Gateway - that this might mark a turning point, an awakening of slumbering anti-Harper sentiment.
The alternative - waiting four more years for Conservatives to self-destruct - isn't a strategy. It's a confession of impotence.
Conservative-minded voters will be pleased with this - and with Harper's intervention at Davos, where he chastised Europe for clinging to unaffordable social pro-grams and hinted at some future downsizing of public pensions at home.
What about everyone else? Many have given up - in cynicism or despair. They turn their back on politics, don't bother to vote, even imagine it is fashionable to remain aloof.
They claim all politicians are the same, but they aren't. They claim it doesn't matter which party holds power, but it does.
If Occupiers had simply voted en masse in May, we wouldn't have a majority Conservative government today.
The media aren't to blame. We hector from the sidelines (guilty!), or, more usefully, uncover hypocrisies and small scandals. Op-position MPs - notably Bob Rae, Charlie Angus, Elizabeth May; but others, too - advance persuasive arguments, based on evidence, de-bunking Conservative crime policy, and other initiatives.
Nothing seems to penetrate public indifference - to Harper's benefit.
"It is a deliberate strategy to turn people off," says NDP leader-ship contender Nathan Cullen, who points to "voter suppression" as a popular right-wing tactic. "He either bores people to death, or uses wedge politics. People don't see themselves in the conversation."
But Cullen thinks Harper's government has overstepped himself in its shrill defence of the Northern Gateway - that this might mark a turning point, an awakening of slumbering anti-Harper sentiment.
The alternative - waiting four more years for Conservatives to self-destruct - isn't a strategy. It's a confession of impotence.
Original Article
Source: ottawa citizen
Author: Susan Riley
No comments:
Post a Comment