PROROGUING PARLIAMENT AGAIN....SHAMEFUL!

One of the great things about this country is our tradition of parliamentary democracy and the freedoms the people have in determining their political destiny. The power of the people as represented by those we elect to govern is supreme over the power of any individual, no matter his/her position in our great nation. The vote of parliament is supreme on every issue.

The Prime Minister apparently doesn't get it!

Many despots throughout history first achieved political power through the popular vote and then started centralizing this power in themselves once power was attained only to start reaping havoc on their nation and the world. We have to look no further than the two "great" wars for examples of this.

It seems to me that Stephen Harper has developed an attitude that he is bigger than the long parliamentary traditions we have developed.

He has centralized power so completely in his office even to the point of muffling his cabinet ministers who must seek permission for their public utterances.

All of this, of course, with a minority parliament. Think of his possible actions if the people gave him a majority.

Hopefully this is a possibility that the Canadian people never have to face.

Harper has undermined our traditions enough. Let us not give him opportunity to do more damage to our Canadian "consensus way" of doing things.

And incidentally, despite Harper's statements that proroguing parliament again is not an issue with Canadians, I want to inform the Prime Minister that visits to this site have exploded over the last week.

People do care!

Background information

Tories Consider Proroguing Parliament
Little Support for Proroguing Parliament---Poll
The Top 10 Reasons Harper Prorogued Parliament
Prime Minister Prorogues Parliament
Calgarians against proroguing parliament
The Economist Editorial...Harper Prorogues Parliament
Facebook Page---Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament
The Varsity--Proroguing Parliament illustrates Harper's Hypocrisy
Globe and Mail...Harper to Prorogue Parliament
National Post---Shutting down Parliament Routine...Harper
Harper prorogues parliament...again!
Critics say anger is growing over Harper's "Imperial" style♦
Disatisfaction grows with prorogation in Canada---Angus Reid Poll
Proroguing shuts down investigation
Siddiqui: Harper acting like an elected dictator

Did Harper learn any lessons at Obama's political knee ?

So Superstar Obama has just taken off. While in Ottawa, "hermit" Harper tried to sequester Obama from the public and all but a few chosen politicians. Harper wanted to celebrate the President's trip here all by himself trying to minimize his exposure to the Canadian people while maximizing his own exposure with Obama. He even had Obama meet with the Governor General and the Opposition Leader at the airport rather than in the Parliament Buildings...perhaps over the lunch held in the Senate Speakers Dining Hall.

"Real" politician, Obama, however, asked Harper if he minded if he waved to the crowd once he arrived at Parliament Hill. Harper acquiesed and followed Obama's lead in acknowledging the people...the real purpose of being for a politician. And then, of course, the President detoured his entourage through the Byward Market to sample a famous "Beavertail". Could you imagine Harper doing this?

So why would Harper want to script Obama's visit here as tightly as he scripts his own interaction with the Canadian Press and the Canadian People? It's just one more proof that Harper is a "control-freak" one-man show.

In the TV coverage, however, it was obvious that Obama was the superstar politician while Harper looked like a little puppy at the master's political knee. Obama comes across as thoughtful, honest, open, and sincere while Harper acts, talks, and looks scripted. The President was even able to call press conference questioners by their names whereas Harper didn't seem at all interested in relating to them in any kind of warm or friendly way. Of course, he always tries to keep his distance from the press unless he has total control over the questions and the interaction.

Harper did seem to make a major turnaround over the environmental carbon footprint. While he bad-mouthed Dion's poorly sold "Green Shift" during the election saying it was a tax increase on everything, he now seems to have come "full-circle" on the importance of limiting carbon emissions with his signing of a "Clean Energy Agreement with the President. Too bad he didn't "come clean" over the importance of this issue during the election. This was blatant dishonesty with the Canadian people combined with "scare tactics". If Harper didn't agree with Dion's plan, he should have at least acknowledged the importance of the issue and proposed his alternative solution.

Hopefully, this meeting with President Obama is close to the end of the road for Harper's and his flight into the limelight.

To survive as a politician in the future, hopefully voters will be looking to cast their votes for more "Obama-like" politicians. To that end, Harper, if he hopes to survive, will have to cast aside his evangelical right wing dogmas which attempts to destroy opposition rather than involving or listening to them.

Please, Mr. Harper, no more tax cuts

TORONTO STAR LETTER TO THE EDITOR, Jan. 25, 2009
Brigitte Nowak, Toronto


I don't want tax cuts. My taxes pay for my government to provide social services so that I can maintain at least a minimal standard of living. I also don't want tax cuts for corporations so that they can provide their shareholders with a "good return," usually at the expense of workers who are being asked to do more and more to ensure a profit, and fired whenever executives' bottom line might suffer.

I'm still trying to find my last tax cut – the penny off the GST. All I know is that under Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty, Canada has gone from a multi-billion dollar surplus, to this year's projected $35 billion dollar deficit. Had we not had previous tax cuts, would our economy not be in much better shape to weather the current recession?

It is anticipated that the deficit might reach $100 billion – more than wiping out our hard-fought deficit reduction strategies.

I hope the impending budget is not a plot by Harper and his ilk to gut our much-needed government services in the name of "fiscal responsibility."

A Study in Contrasts---Hitting the Road Running vs Hitting the Road Hiding

Barack Obama has not yet been sworn in as President, but he's taken off his jacket, rolled up his sleeves, and gotten to work. He realizes in this deepest economic meltdown since the depression that immediate and effective action is needed to stop the slide. He realizes that consumption has to be stimulated in the economy to save jobs. That means money has to get in the hands of Main Street, not Wall Street!

Obama Early Frenetic Action


Prime Minister Stephen Harper provides a study in contrasts.
In the six weeks leading up to the election, Stephen Harper was telling Canadian people that the economy was strong, that the Canadian government would be running budget surpluses for 2009, and that he would never lead the Federal Government into deficit budgets. Amazing how his positions changed immediately following the election. He calls himself an economist! Some economist if he didn't see the economic realities media worldwide were reporting...or did he...and just didn't come clean with the Canadian public.

Harper must be more like George Dubya Bush than Obama. He is out of date in this new age of honesty and integrity in politics.

In many ways, Harper's election statements and fear-mongering would not meet the standard of truth demanded by National Advertising Standards in this country.

Harper's initial solutions to the worldwide recession presented in his government's first economic statement on November 27, 2008, served to inflame opposition parties with measures to 1) Cut political per vote subsidies introduced to move political parties away from corporate donations which tended to produce legislation favourable to donors, 2) Prohibit strikes by Federal Civil Service, and 3) Limit pay equity legislation guaranteeing women equal pay for equal work.

Harper's government has recently introduced Tax Free Savings Accounts to stimulate savings...exactly the wrong policy to introduce now. This policy tends to rob the economy of consumption dollars at a time when consumption has to be stimulated. Further, over his history as Prime Minister, he has favoured general tax cut policies which favours the rich. Only the rich can afford savings, and only the rich have enough income to generate meaningful tax savings. While the rich might profit from tens of thousands of dollars from tax cuts, most Canadians save only pennies. How much did you benefit, for example, from Harper's 2% cut in the GST? How about 20 bucks for every thousand you spent on GST taxed purchases? Would that make a difference to your expenditure? Would that stimulate your spending to get the economy back on track?

So while Obama rolled up his sleeves and got to work, what did Harper do?

Harper's frenetic action to shut down parliament in its first weeks


He rolled down his sleeves, put on his baby blue sweater, put on his blinders, put his head in the sand, put mufflers on his MP's and Cabinet, and shut down Parliament for two months..of course, hoping his problems would go away.

So what is leadership? You tell me!

Author's Preamble About the Cause and Resolution of Canada's Constitutional Crisis

From the title of this blog, it is obvious that it supports installation of the Liberal/NDP Coalition Government with the 18 month support of the Bloc. This is an unusual position for me, a former Federal Conservative Candidate in my riding, and so explanation is necessary.

As a Conservative, I must confess that I was more “progressive” than “conservative” occupying a position on the left end of the Tory Spectrum that would be classified as a “Pink Tory”…one who believes in individual initiative in success but also one who believes in strong social policies for the weak, poor, and disadvantaged working to provide equal opportunity for all, no matter the accident of birth.

With the coalition of the “Reform Party”, the “Alliance Party” and willing “Progressive Conservatives”, a new Neo-Con party was formed which deserted my belief systems, leaving me very concerned about the health of our country and its future with “one-man-band” Stephen Harper in charge.

Canada from it’s very beginning has always been a country of compromise and consensus, a quality not possessed by the present Prime Minister who has one position, "my way or the highway". He has silenced his cabinet and government members and all decisions of government come not from the cabinet table, but from the chosen few in the Prime Minister’s Office. Harper is head of a dictatorship!

For public consumption, he has tried to moderate his image with his pastel blue sweaters camoflaging the real Stephen Harper until he gets a majority government. The real Stephen Harper is the Reform/Alliance Policy Advisor who wants to Americanize Canada with more powerful provincial governments, a smaller less important federal government with smaller taxes and reduced Federal responsibilities. This jeopardizes programs such as the Canada Pension Plan, Medicare programs, and transfer payments to universities creating a “Canada for the rich” and limited opportunity for the poor…he wants to create a “land of privilege”. Like, perhaps the worst American President ever, George W. Bush, the tax cuts Harper implements favours grand decreases for the rich and little for the poor. Witness a 2% cut in the GST. If you spend little like the poor, you benefit minimally. If you spend a lot like the rich, you benefit maximally. The similar situation is true for general tax decreases. Tax credits like those for children’s participation in sports programs again at maximum for the rich who can afford to have their children participate and nothing for the poor who cannot. He also implemented huge corporate tax decreases to improve the bottom line for the investors but nothing for the workers who produced all the wealth. In all ways, Harper benefits the rich, does little for the middle class, and virtually nothing for the poor.

In his recently disclosed fiscal update delivered by Finance Minister Flaherty on Nov. 27, 2008, he has stated his intention to outlaw strikes by the civil service, eliminate pay equity provisions of the country which insure pay equity for women, and to eliminate the $1.95 “kickback” per vote each party receives in a Federal Election. This subsidy was introduced to limit large donations by those who would want to benefit significantly from their donations…a bribe for “scratching their back”, to put it bluntly. The cutbacks to political party funding reduced their ability to hire researchers to provide an effective opposition, which was key to Harpers Plan…reduce the effectiveness of the opposition while giving Harper’s Government free rein with the use of government researchers and department expert staffs all paid for by the taxpayer. His strategy…silence the opposition and make it ineffective so he could steamroll unopposed!

Further, Harper has proven he is not a person of integrity in this new Obama age, when personal honesty, integrity and justice seem to be the new political order of the day, Harper has:

1) Repeatedly referred to a so-called negative ethic of making a deal to overthrow a minority government with the help of the BLOC, whom he says want to break up the country. In fact Harper signed a similar agreement with the BLOC to overthrow the Martin Government in 2004 and in TV presentations of December 4, 2008, repeatedly referred to the BLOC in his English message as SEPARISTIST (a negative connotation for that audience) and in his French message as SOVREIGNISTS (a positive connotation for that audience). Why a different message to different audiences?

2) Harper says that the only way the Liberal/NDP coalition can take over the reins of government is with a vote of the people in another General Election. This is blatantly untrue. Canada’s Constituition names the Prime Minister as the person who can command the “confidence of the House of Commons—Parliament”. Harper knows this and thus is the reason why he actually signed an agreement with the BLOC and the NDP in 2004 in an attempt to wrest control from the governing Liberals. If it was okay for Harper in 2004, why is it not okay for Dion in 2008?

3) Harper says the people elected him to be Prime Minister…again, blatantly untrue. Harper’s name only appeared on one ballot in the country in the riding of Calgary-Southwest, the only group of people that elected him. Similarly, all other ridings in the country elected someone on their unique ballot to represent their interests in Parliament. It’s true that each candidate for office had a party affiliation but this is incidental to who forms the government. If any MP who was a member of a party opposed his party vote, he could be responsible for turfing his party out of government according to the constitution as this may result in his former party losing the confidence of the house. Similarly, party numbers, and thus the government, may change when a member crosses the floor after election to support another party. This may result from blatant enticements and inducements such as cabinet appointments made by the party needing another member (Liberal Emerson from Vancouver who accepted a Cabinet Appointment from the Harper Government in 2006 to prop up the Conservative minority in Parliament, and the “reported” insurance benefits offered to the dying Chuck Cadman in trying to entice him to support Harper in attempting to replace the Paul Martin Liberal Government on a critical confidence vote. There have, of course, been movements from the Conservatives to Liberals at recent critical times (Scott Brison and Belinda Stronach come to mind)…but the point is, it is the majority members of the House of Commons quite irrespective of which party they supported when they were elected, that determines who governs. This is Proof that the members themselves are more important under the constitution rather than the parties they represent which is incidental to the fact under the constitution.

4) Harper questions the ethics of the Liberal/NDP/BLOC coalition, when in fact, his present government is a coalition of REFORM/ALLIANCE/PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE parties although this alliance under the banner of the Conservative Party did get electoal support as a minority government.

5) Harper argues the BLOC is out to destroy Canada and thus the Liberal/NDP Coalition should not be in any agreement with the BLOC to support their coalition budget and confidence without saying that he has sought their support over his term of power and in fact the BLOC have voted with Harper’s Government over 100 times including supporting his budgets on 14 occasions…Did Harper think they were destroying Canada then?

6) We are in critical economic times and Harper in two months since the election has not come up with a plan to stimulate the economy and in fact did not intend to have a budget until the end of January. The economic statement he had the Finance Minister read on Nov. 27, 2008, was combative, non conciliatory, and its contents only served to inflame the opposition.

So where do I think the present crisis is going to lead?

1) Harper will undoubtedly try to prorogue parliament suspending all action to intervene in our economy till the end of January. Hopefully, the Governor General will not agree to allow Harper to fiddle while Rome burns, economically speaking. This request though should lead to a credibility problem for Harper for trying to cling to power by asking that Parliament be suspended at this time of economic meltdown. I don’t believe that the Governor General will agree to this.

2) Secondly, Harper will call for another election. Again, I don’t think the Governor General will agree to this as we’ve just had an election.

3) I believe she will call on the Liberal/NDP coalition to form a government. I believe this government will be very socially progressive realizing that given the opportunity , the NDP and its forerunners have had profound influence on National Social Policy. Both Canada Pension and National Health Care were Tommy Douglas inspired and Petro Canada was Ed Broadbent inspired.

4) I further believe that the Liberal/NDP Coalition will give rise to a new political party, The Liberal Democrats, which will govern into the next decade or so. I believe also that this new party will sheppard in new eras of integrity, co-operation and consensus under which our people and our economy will flourish.

5) I believe that Conservatives will call a leadership convention at the earliest possible time to replace Stephen Harper as there is no place in Canadian Politics for an uncompromising demagogue.

6) I believe the resulting socially conscious coalition government will introduce such social policies as called for in my site www.fairjobs.ca.