Thursday, April 13, 2006

George Stroumboulopoulos on Stephen Harper ... from The Hour - The redux ...

I've been thinking more about our PM Stephen and accountability. Last night, George pointed out the irony in the PM cutting short a news conference on the accountability measures of his government because his pre-arranged reporters schedule got messed up by the will of the press corp, and I applauded him for it. I'm still applauding, thats not what I've been thinking more about, lol .

But Harper himself has a LONG history with questionable accountability. It didn't just start yesterday, lol, and people really shouldn't have been surprised by his actions. You can look back to the birth of the new Conservative Party for the start of it. Granted, Peter Mackay's 'masterful' and Machiavellian take over of the old PC's on public promises not to merge with the Alliance, only to merge with them months after winning, is the main issue with accountability there, but Harper was still willing to do business with the man. Hardly a good sign when the birth of your party comes on a deal with a man who has just betrayed the people who elected him ... how is one to trust THAT foundation, I wonder?

Next came the Peter and Belinda show, lol, when Belinda Stronach, Peter Mackay's (who ofc was rewarded for betraying the people who elected him by getting a deputy party leader position) VERY public girlfriend crossed the floor at a critical time to join the ruling Liberals and save a government from collapse. The betrayal of Peter read almost like sweet justice after his election to PC party leader, but it was also a direct slap to Harper, and another question of his judgment and accountability.

One could almost have been forgiven for believing the world was out to get Stephen ... that he just had the bad luck to have treacherous people around him, but he was nice enough to dispel those myths after the election recently. The cabinet post for Emerson shows clearly he has no concern for party ethics or will of the electorate, especially after his 'serious concern' over Stronach's floor crossing in the past. In that instance, he strongly criticized Stronach for ethical lapses because of a political decision to cross the floor. In the Emerson case, he makes a political decisions to give a cabinet post to someone made a political decision to join a different party than the one his voters voted for. I frankly see them both as examples of serious ethical lapses.

Harper's problem isn't so much that He has an ethics problem, at least not one thats publicly demonstrable. Its that he seems to ALWAYS bring people to him in highly questionable circumstances. Like Peter and David, he brings people in with a history of party treason, and through incidents like the Stronach affair, he shows his own hypocrisy in the application of party ethics.

Anyone who's watched Harper for the past few years wasn't at all surprised to see him walk out ... if anything, we were surprised he hung around for even a few questions from reporters he didn't plan on. His accountability issues will get worse before they get better, IMO.


Post a Comment

<< Home