Under this PM, the state is everywhere
Lawrence Martin | Columnist profile | E-mail
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2011 2:00AM EST
What does the Grey Cup football game have to do with the Canadian military? Not much, you say. True enough. But chalk up another public-relations triumph for the governing Conservatives. They turned the opening ceremonies of our annual sports classic into a military glorification exercise.
For our part in the NATO Libya campaign, the Defence Minister took bows on the field. A Canadian flag was spread over 40 yards. Cannons boomed.
More related to this story
•A three-peat for prorogation? Bring on reform
•A tale of two democracies: Harper steamrolls, Obama grinds gears
•Tories take over as party of Big Government
Photos
Leak in the bucket The blending of sport and the military, with the government as the marching band, is part of the new nationalism the Conservatives are trying to instill. It is another example of how the state, under Stephen Harper’s governance, is becoming all-intrusive.
Conservatism, as defined by Ronald Reagan, was about getting government off the backs of the people. Conservatism, as practised by team Harper, is more akin to an Orwellian opposite. State controls are now at a highpoint in our modern history. There is every indication they will extend further.
The propaganda machine has become mammoth and unrelenting. The parliamentary newspaper The Hill Times recently found there are now no fewer than 1,500 communications staffers on the governing payroll. In the days of the King and St. Laurent governments, there were hardly any. In recent decades, the numbers shot up, but Mr. Harper is outdoing all others, a primary example being his institution and maintenance of a master control system wherein virtually every government communication is filtered through central command.
In his minority governments, the rationale was that tight controls were necessary for survival. With a majority, it was thought that the controls that brought on parliamentary shutdowns and contempt of Parliament rulings would ease up. Those who thought that way didn’t know Stephen Harper.
In recent weeks, the government has invoked closure or time limits on debate at a record-breaking clip. The limits have come on key legislation, driving the combustible New Democrat Pat Martin to proclaim, “There’s not a democracy in the world that would tolerate this jackboot [expletive].”
On the propaganda ledger, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney put on a show in committee last week. In what may have been a first, his spinners set up a billboard behind him replete with bright Conservative blue colours and flags. Everything except a marching band.
In the message-massaging department, news has arrived that the government is imposing new communications controls on the RCMP. The same is being done with the Defence Department. Secrecy surrounds the government’s plans to spend a whopping $477-million on a U.S. military satellite.
State surveillance, the rationale being security, is being taken to new levels. The Conservatives are bringing in legislation that will compel Internet service-providers to disclose customer information. A Canada-U.S. agreement is on the way that will contain an entry-exit system that will track everyone.
In Parliament, more and more ministers are showing up for Question Period with prewritten answers. If the scripted stuff is far afield of the questions posed, it doesn’t matter. In our shining democracy, they use it anyway.
Research that contradicts the government line is discarded. Civil liberties fade, new jails proliferate. Those who speak out better watch out. When the NDP’s Megan Leslie stated an opposing view on the Keystone XL Pipeline, she was accused by the government of treachery.
In that conservatives cherish freedom, it’s rather strange. For a book on the government, Harperland, I chose the subtitle The Politics of Control. I now plead guilty to understatement. With their populist nationalism and drive for domination, these guys are everywhere, even on our football fields.
82 comments
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
29 November 2011 End of Wheat Board
steven chase
OTTAWA— From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published Monday, Nov. 28, 2011 6:44PM EST
The Harper government has flexed its majority muscle to push through the Commons a controversial bill that will forever change the lives of 70,000 Canadian grain farmers.
With this, the Conservatives fulfilled a long-promised goal of stripping the Canadian Wheat Board of control over western grain sales – a move that the agency’s dissenting chair has warned will ultimately doom the Prairie institution.
More related to this story
•Senate plans extra sittings to pass budget, Wheat Board bills before Christmas
•Wheat Board bill gets pre-screening – and debate limit – in Senate
•Sound and fury as Tories limit debate on packed agenda
Video
Wheat Board files suit against Ottawa Conservative MPs easily outvoted their NDP and Liberal rivals Monday evening to pass the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act in the Commons. The vote passed 153 to 120.
As of Aug. 1, 2012, western Canadian farmers will be free of the wheat board’s monopoly and no longer forced to sell their wheat and barley through the agency.
Instead, for the first time in nearly seven decades, they will be able to negotiate their own deals.
“This is a tremendous day; this is a movement forward; this is what we have been waiting for, [for] decades,” Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said Monday.
“For far too long, western farmers have been shackled by an outdated monopoly and today they got one step closer to having the marketing freedom they want and deserve.”
The Conservatives and their predecessor parties, including Reform, had long campaigned against the board as a symbol of big government gone awry – a nanny state intrusion into the lives of farmers that, like the gun registry, the Tories were determined to end.
Before it can become law and take effect, the legislation must still be approved by the Senate, where the Tories also outnumber their rivals and can ensure its passage.
Western Canadian farmers are sharply divided on the legislation, plebiscites conducted by the board show.
The Conservatives have been adamant about passing the bill before year end so that millers, maltsters and farmers can begin negotiating contracts for summer 2012 delivery.
The wheat board debate is fundamentally a battle between individualism and collectivism – over whether, in 2011, these farmers should be obliged to pool their grain to seek a better price or whether they should be free to pursue their fortunes alone.
Interim NDP Leader Nycole Turmel predicted farmers would suffer when producers are free to exit the board. Those who wish may stick with the board but it will no longer have the selling volume to command as much influence in the market.
“For generations, farmers relied on the wheat board to get the best possible price for their grain and to support their families,” Ms. Turmel said. “But this government ignored them and now that stability is gone.”
More related to this story
•Ottawa accused of hoarding wheat board fund
•‘It’s beyond Big Brother,’ Ritz says of wheat board
•Wheat-board chief fears final harvest if Harper has his way
•Canadian Wheat Board sues Tories over plan to dismantle monopoly
•Wheat Board takes fight to the people
•Wheat board directors broke ranks with lawyers to sue Ottawa
•Farmers slap Canadian Wheat Board with countersuit
•All farmers are equal – but some are more equal than others
•Canada’s Wheat Board wars: The future of farming cut two ways
•End of wheat-board monopoly bolsters Tory stand against regulation
More
OTTAWA— From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published Monday, Nov. 28, 2011 6:44PM EST
The Harper government has flexed its majority muscle to push through the Commons a controversial bill that will forever change the lives of 70,000 Canadian grain farmers.
With this, the Conservatives fulfilled a long-promised goal of stripping the Canadian Wheat Board of control over western grain sales – a move that the agency’s dissenting chair has warned will ultimately doom the Prairie institution.
More related to this story
•Senate plans extra sittings to pass budget, Wheat Board bills before Christmas
•Wheat Board bill gets pre-screening – and debate limit – in Senate
•Sound and fury as Tories limit debate on packed agenda
Video
Wheat Board files suit against Ottawa Conservative MPs easily outvoted their NDP and Liberal rivals Monday evening to pass the Marketing Freedom for Grain Farmers Act in the Commons. The vote passed 153 to 120.
As of Aug. 1, 2012, western Canadian farmers will be free of the wheat board’s monopoly and no longer forced to sell their wheat and barley through the agency.
Instead, for the first time in nearly seven decades, they will be able to negotiate their own deals.
“This is a tremendous day; this is a movement forward; this is what we have been waiting for, [for] decades,” Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said Monday.
“For far too long, western farmers have been shackled by an outdated monopoly and today they got one step closer to having the marketing freedom they want and deserve.”
The Conservatives and their predecessor parties, including Reform, had long campaigned against the board as a symbol of big government gone awry – a nanny state intrusion into the lives of farmers that, like the gun registry, the Tories were determined to end.
Before it can become law and take effect, the legislation must still be approved by the Senate, where the Tories also outnumber their rivals and can ensure its passage.
Western Canadian farmers are sharply divided on the legislation, plebiscites conducted by the board show.
The Conservatives have been adamant about passing the bill before year end so that millers, maltsters and farmers can begin negotiating contracts for summer 2012 delivery.
The wheat board debate is fundamentally a battle between individualism and collectivism – over whether, in 2011, these farmers should be obliged to pool their grain to seek a better price or whether they should be free to pursue their fortunes alone.
Interim NDP Leader Nycole Turmel predicted farmers would suffer when producers are free to exit the board. Those who wish may stick with the board but it will no longer have the selling volume to command as much influence in the market.
“For generations, farmers relied on the wheat board to get the best possible price for their grain and to support their families,” Ms. Turmel said. “But this government ignored them and now that stability is gone.”
More related to this story
•Ottawa accused of hoarding wheat board fund
•‘It’s beyond Big Brother,’ Ritz says of wheat board
•Wheat-board chief fears final harvest if Harper has his way
•Canadian Wheat Board sues Tories over plan to dismantle monopoly
•Wheat Board takes fight to the people
•Wheat board directors broke ranks with lawyers to sue Ottawa
•Farmers slap Canadian Wheat Board with countersuit
•All farmers are equal – but some are more equal than others
•Canada’s Wheat Board wars: The future of farming cut two ways
•End of wheat-board monopoly bolsters Tory stand against regulation
More
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Tony Clement's G8 Spending Spree
2 November 2011 Greg Weston
The federal minister responsible for cutting government waste is being called before a parliamentary committee Wednesday to explain how his own Ontario riding became paved in $45 million of political pork.
Treasury Board head Tony Clement certainly has a lot to answer for.
The $45.7-million spending spree was supposed to provide essential facilities to host last year's G8 summit of world leaders in Clement's riding in Muskoka cottage country north of Toronto.
Instead, almost all of the money was scattered across Clement's electoral domain for local pet projects that had little or nothing at all to do with the summit — everything from a $17-million community centre expansion to a $100,000 gazebo in the middle of an empty lot an hour's drive from the meeting site.
So far, Stephen Harper's government has successfully stonewalled all attempts by the opposition parties to get to the bottom of the great Muskoka pork barrel.
That may help to explain why the Conservative government's master of political bafflegab, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, will be seated next to Clement at the committee hearing.
At the time of the G8 spending, Baird was the minister responsible for managing billions of dollars of infrastructure money, allegedly including giving final sign-off on what is unaffectionately known in political circles as Tony's Porkfest.
With Clement and Baird in the hot seat at committee, opposition MPs will be after answers to five key questions:
Auditor General Sheila Fraser, in her final report released just after she retired in June, revealed that the $50 million used for the so-called G8 legacy projects in Clement's riding had been wrongly, if not illegally, taken from funds Parliament had approved for Canadian border crossings.
Question: Exactly who in government approved the pilfering of the border improvement fund, and given the severity of the auditor general's findings, what disciplinary action has been taken against those responsible?
The auditor general also reported that public servants were not involved in selecting the 32 projects in Clement's riding that received the $50 million.
Question: Who selected the projects, by what criteria, and who authorized those responsible to circumvent all of the normal government funding procedures in place to ensure the prudent use of taxpayers' money?
The auditors who dug into the G8 spending were unable to find any of the usual government documentation showing how the projects were selected for funding.
Question: What happened to all the paperwork, and if it was destroyed, has the government called in the RCMP?
Documents obtained by Postmedia journalists and NDP researchers suggest Clement was personally involved in getting at least one friend hired to work on a G8 contract, and the minister may have also tried to pressure federal officials not to conduct a routine review of G8 spending.
Question: How do Canadian taxpayers benefit if a minister becomes involved in nepotism and meddling with officials trying to protect the public purse?
As head of the Treasury Board, Clement is now responsible for ensuring the Conservative government adheres to stringent rules intended to get the best value for Canadian taxpayers in all federal spending.
Question: Given all that has happened on the G8 spending file, if Clement cannot clearly and convincingly answer all of the above questions, why should Canadians trust him in such a pivotal cabinet role?
The federal minister responsible for cutting government waste is being called before a parliamentary committee Wednesday to explain how his own Ontario riding became paved in $45 million of political pork.
Treasury Board head Tony Clement certainly has a lot to answer for.
The $45.7-million spending spree was supposed to provide essential facilities to host last year's G8 summit of world leaders in Clement's riding in Muskoka cottage country north of Toronto.
Instead, almost all of the money was scattered across Clement's electoral domain for local pet projects that had little or nothing at all to do with the summit — everything from a $17-million community centre expansion to a $100,000 gazebo in the middle of an empty lot an hour's drive from the meeting site.
So far, Stephen Harper's government has successfully stonewalled all attempts by the opposition parties to get to the bottom of the great Muskoka pork barrel.
That may help to explain why the Conservative government's master of political bafflegab, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird, will be seated next to Clement at the committee hearing.
At the time of the G8 spending, Baird was the minister responsible for managing billions of dollars of infrastructure money, allegedly including giving final sign-off on what is unaffectionately known in political circles as Tony's Porkfest.
With Clement and Baird in the hot seat at committee, opposition MPs will be after answers to five key questions:
Auditor General Sheila Fraser, in her final report released just after she retired in June, revealed that the $50 million used for the so-called G8 legacy projects in Clement's riding had been wrongly, if not illegally, taken from funds Parliament had approved for Canadian border crossings.
Question: Exactly who in government approved the pilfering of the border improvement fund, and given the severity of the auditor general's findings, what disciplinary action has been taken against those responsible?
The auditor general also reported that public servants were not involved in selecting the 32 projects in Clement's riding that received the $50 million.
Question: Who selected the projects, by what criteria, and who authorized those responsible to circumvent all of the normal government funding procedures in place to ensure the prudent use of taxpayers' money?
The auditors who dug into the G8 spending were unable to find any of the usual government documentation showing how the projects were selected for funding.
Question: What happened to all the paperwork, and if it was destroyed, has the government called in the RCMP?
Documents obtained by Postmedia journalists and NDP researchers suggest Clement was personally involved in getting at least one friend hired to work on a G8 contract, and the minister may have also tried to pressure federal officials not to conduct a routine review of G8 spending.
Question: How do Canadian taxpayers benefit if a minister becomes involved in nepotism and meddling with officials trying to protect the public purse?
As head of the Treasury Board, Clement is now responsible for ensuring the Conservative government adheres to stringent rules intended to get the best value for Canadian taxpayers in all federal spending.
Question: Given all that has happened on the G8 spending file, if Clement cannot clearly and convincingly answer all of the above questions, why should Canadians trust him in such a pivotal cabinet role?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
