quote:Originally posted by The Fish Assassin
An interesting artical.
2008: The prime minister's year of living arrogantly
By Janet BagnallJanuary 2, 2009
Economic turmoil is not the only detritus from 2008 that will follow Canadians into 2009. There is also the matter of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's thwarted political ambitions -- for which, if 2008 is any guide, we will pay dearly in 2009.
Harper seems to be a man in thrall to what he thinks of as his destiny: The leader of a majority government beholden to no one, free to choose what principles to uphold or promises to honour.
Throughout 2008, evidence piled up about the kind of leader Harper would be, unfettered by minority status.
Belittling the opposition parties at every opportunity, he passed a fixed-date election law in 2007 -- to prevent others from crassly manipulating the electoral calendar -- then overrode his own law.
He insisted he would not stack the Senate with fundraisers and party stalwarts, but did. His government was to be a model of transparency and openness, yet isn't. His Supreme Court nominees would be vetted and reviewed by a parliamentary committee, but he didn't bother with any of that when he appointed Nova Scotian Thomas Cromwell this month.
A five-year no-lobbying rule was brought in, ostensibly to head off Liberal riff-raff and grafters. It did nothing to prevent Harper's former chief of staff Ian Brodie from signing on with one of the country's top public-relations firms.
Looking back from New Year's Eve, precious little of the Conservative high ground remains. In fact, there seems scant reason to assume that Harper means anything he says.
Take fixed election dates. His government actually went to the trouble in 2007 of passing an amendment to the Canada Elections Act, fixing future federal elections to the third Monday of October, four years after the previous election. Under the amendment, we should have had an election on Oct. 19, 2009.
Instead, as soon as Harper felt he stood a chance to win a majority, a moment of optimism that came to him this year, he called an election. He briskly jettisoned the "level playing field" and the "clear rules" that he claimed a fixed date conferred on electoral contests. Was the Oct. 14 election even legal? Scholars debated the question.
One of the most serious reversals concerns Canadians' access to information about the workings of their own government and its various regulatory and oversight bodies.
A listeriosis outbreak this summer at a Maple Leaf Foods packaging plant in Toronto was linked to 20 deaths and 53 additional cases of poisoning.
If ever there was a case in which Canadians have a clear interest in finding out what went so badly wrong with their food-inspection process, this is it.
Yet, according to CBC News, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is withholding files about its handling of the outbreak.
The agency is claiming there are too many requests for information, CBC said, and is seeking to delay releasing its records for another year.
Canadians cannot turn to the country's Access to Information law for help. This fall, a report by a member of the Canadian Association of Journalists found that federal delays in responding to requests for information were at a "crisis level."
Canada trails other countries when it comes to openness and transparency, the report said. The Conservative government had originally promised to update the 25-year-old law but its efforts went in quite the opposite direction. In April, auditor-general Sheila Fraser charged that the Harper government had proposed to vet statements she made to the media.
An elected Senate was, in theory, a principle the Conservatives held dear. Harper had introduced legislation limiting Senate terms to eight years and requiring that "consultative" Senate elections be held. The bills died on the order paper when Harper called the Oct. 14 vote.
Constitutional scholars were outraged when Harper announced the appointment of 18 new senators this month.
McGill professor Desmond Morton told the Toronto Star that the appointments -- under the parliamentary circumstances -- were a scandal.
"He has the power to do it, but he shouldn't have the gall," said Morton.
True, but if 2008 has taught us anything about Stephen Harper it's that he has mastered the art of barrelling past his own contradictions, sanctimony to the fore.
Take only what you need.