The
Globe and Mail’s political columnist Lawrence Martin has never been a fan of Stephen Harper and here, in a column reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s
Globe and Mail, he discards the last shreds of objectivity and blasts Harper and his other arch-fiend, Dion (because he lost the last election):
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081205.wcomartin08/BNStory/politics/home
Our Robert Mugabe moment, and other unpleasant memories
LAWRENCE MARTIN
From Monday's Globe and Mail
December 8, 2008 at 12:00 AM EST
From the nine Ottawa days that shook and debased our little political world, there was madness and mischief and moments that won't, unfortunately, abandon the memory for a good deal of time.
Our Robert Mugabe moment
Surely whoever made this comparison was joking. But read the headlines in The New York Times, on CNN, in papers across the globe: "Canadian leader suspends Parliament to stay in power." Would Robert M. approve? A prime minister promises the Opposition a confidence vote. A prime minister sees he will lose that vote. A prime minister moves to shut down the House of Commons, lock the doors of Parliament.
Maybe you wouldn't get much argument from the African strongman. We were told our House was dysfunctional in August when the PM overturned his own fixed-election-date law to go to the polls. We were effectively told again last week it was dysfunctional when, like then, it wasn't.
And did a great rush of disgust from our citizenry greet the lockdown?
Not really. As polls suggested, most Canadians, beholding the ineptitude of the opposition Liberals, applauded.
Governor-General zips her lips
The G-G makes a decision of historic proportion. She decides, in effect, that Stephen Harper remains in power. She issues not a word of public explanation. No one complains about her cone of silence. It's convention, we are told. In this democracy, we are not entitled to hear the reasons. Simple as that. And everyone rolls over and lets the convention stick. Back to your tea, G-G.
The Hogwash Hall of Fame
Falsehoods being a leader's best friend, our Prime Minister rolled out at least a half dozen complete canards, some of which should be candidates for the Hogwash Hall of Fame: He claimed there was no flag at the coalition ceremony, that the opposition would be allowed a confidence vote, that it was forming a separatist coalition, that the Liberal leader was not entitled to form a government, that the Bloc had a veto over the coalition, that the Bloc was promised seats in the Senate.
All dead wrong.
But so what if the bullshine meter goes off the charts? We're so used to politicians putting the truth to death that it doesn't matter any more.
If it's commonplace, it's not news. The PM paid no price. He won last week's PR campaign in a walk.
Demagoguery pays
Canadians democratically elect MPs to their federal Parliament. Whether they be separatists, botanists, or snow boarders, they have a perfect right and responsibility to partake in our governing process.
Bloc Québécois MPs have performed responsibly in the House of Commons for 15 years. They reached an agreement not to bring down an NDP-Liberal coalition for 18 months. In high dudgeon, the PM portrayed the opposition grouping as a separatist coalition, as the next closest thing to a separatist takeover. The Liberals were out "to destroy Canada." He stoked anger across the Prairies, revived the long-silent separatist issue, and skillfully changed the debate terrain from his pilloried economic statement to national unity. It showed again - remember his painting all Liberals as anti-Israeli and non-war supporters as pro-Taliban - that demagoguery works. Oversimplify, hyperbolize, prey on people's base instincts. Score big.
Liberals as losers
For all Stephen Harper's handiwork, the performance of Stéphane Dion, who must resign now, was worse. The Liberals had the government on the run. They let the occasion pass them by - and won't get another chance like it.
Through their ineptitude, they brought Gilles Duceppe, having said he wasn't a coalition member, to the coalition-signing agreement.
For a critical national TV broadcast, they brought in an embarrassing video of their dazed leader. They kept star player Michael Ignatieff in the shadows. They let Stephen Harper set the terms of the debate.
In the Commons they were pitiful. When it was apparent that Mr. Harper would break his vote promise and cut and run to the Governor-General for mercy, they could have had him. Like the Conservatives who used most every question in the House to lambaste a separatist coalition, they should have used every question to label Mr. Harper a coward, a leader too scared to face the music, a leader who was indeed about to dip into Third World tactics - going beyond even his own dirty-tricks handbook - and shut down Parliament. They could have had him so embarrassed by week's end that he would have looked shameful in running off, tail between his legs, to Rideau Hall.
But they don't know how to mount an attack. They stood there with their chins primed for clobbering - and got clobbered.
The nightmare before Christmas ended up with them - not the prime minister who can't master his demons - at the top of the loser line-up.
Despite my personal distaste for the management of the past couple of weeks, neither proposing a coalition nor proroguing the House was
unconstitutional; the
Mugabe moment remark is so over the top that the rest of the column can barely be taken seriously.
I will not bore Army.ca members with more of my thoughts on
conventions but someone, Sheila-Marie Cook (the GG’s secretary), Stephen Harper, Peter Hogg (a constitutional expert brought in to advise the GG), Michaëlle Jean or Kevin Lynch - the only people in Rideau Hall who knew who said what to whom, did give Martin’s colleague Michael Valpy
a blow by blow account of the proceedings. Mme Jean was well and properly advised by
Mr. Hogg as PM Harper was by Mr. Lynch. Martin, and
others may not like the decision she made but it is unfair, dishonest even, to insinuate that by following the 150 year old
convention that conversations between the head of state and her head of government are absolutely private Mme Jean has, somehow, broken faith with the people of Canada.
There have been lies aplenty over the past two weeks, beginning with the whopper of all whoppers: “We’re not doing this because Harper threatens to bankrupt us – it’s all about a (missing) stimulus package.” That’s the key lie; Harper is an amateur compared to Dion/Duceppe/Layton.
Changing the debate is legitimate – especially now. It is true, as
Zell_Dietrich has pointed out, that there is nothing constitutionally
unconventional about the idea of a coalition and we do, indeed, elect individual members who, in their turn, decide who should govern and for how long. But our understanding of
civics is, doubtless, informed by US conventions and laws and practices and we are atuned to the idea that we should elect both a government and a prime minister.
I have no doubt that many, if not most Canadians voted, in Oct, for (or against) Stéphane Dion, Stephan Harper, Jack Layton, etc and not for (or against) their local candidate. It may be time for that idea – we elect governing parties – to become
conventional.
At last, some truth from Lawrence Martin: Dion and the Liberals are the big losers. Dion grossly miscalculated the hay that could be made from Harper’s gross miscalculation. That will cost him Stornoway and he will ensure that Edward Blake is not left to be the only Liberal leader who never became prime minister.
