- - - - - - - Langley Free Press Welcomes Your Comments - - - - - - - - - Name Email URL is optional
Has the leopard changed its spots?
Interesting article in today’s Toronto Star by David Crane, which summarizes the discomfort felt by many at Harper’s apparent “evolution” (as Harper describes it). Some extracts follow (my capitalization):
“Crane: Has Harper really moved left?
Jan. 20, 2006. 07:48 AM
DAVID CRANE
.... Yet big questions remain about what a Harper government would be like. Has Harper really changed from a right-wing ideologue to a middle-of-the-road Conservative? IS THE NEW HARPER MORE THAN SKIN DEEP? OR IS HIS CAMPAIGN SIMPLY AN EXPEDIENT RESPONSE TO INTENSIVE CONSERVATIVE POLLING?
Harper's history is of a strong believer in small government and especially a weak national government, devolution of power to the provinces, as well as being a social conservative seemingly more in tune with the religious right than mainstream Canadian values.
In a telling profile by Marci McDonald in Walrus magazine of members of the so-called Calgary School, a group of Alberta academics who have an almost pathological dislike of both the federal government and Ontario, Harper's neoconservative credentials as part of that group are spelled out. THE ARTICLE QUOTES TED BYFIELD, A LEADING VOICE OF A QUASI-SEPARATIST WESTERN CANADA AND HARPER SUPPORTER AS SAYING AFTER THE 2004 ELECTION, "THE ISSUE NOW IS: HOW DO WE FOOL THE WORLD INTO THINKING WE'RE MOVING TO THE LEFT WHEN WE'RE NOT."
On Canada-U.S. relations, he says he would "demand" the United States repay the duties on Canadian softwood that it illegally collected. But what does that mean? Harper has said he would have supported the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Iraq, has talked of a customs union with the United States, shares the Bush administration's opposition to the Kyoto accord and other strong action to deal with climate change, and would review Canada's position on ballistic missile defence.
On the big issue of the fiscal structure of Canada — the division of spending and taxing powers of the federal and provincial governments — Harper believes in reducing the role of Ottawa and handing over powers and revenue to the provinces. He calls this correcting the "fiscal imbalance" but is vague on what this would mean.
The danger is that it could end up meaning a much weaker national government able to act on behalf of all Canadians.
The single most damaging promise he has made is to replace Canada's initiative on early childhood development and replace it with a family allowance of $100 a month for every child under 6. Harper's plan is based on the idea that women should stay at home and not work, since they are the main beneficiaries of his proposal, while early childhood development is about ensuring youngsters are ready to learn when they enter the school system.
In many respects we are entering uncharted territory. It would be easier if we knew which is the real Stephen Harper.”
Curiousity, You bring up the question that most informed Progressive voters worry about and that we wrote about in http://www.kimrichter.com/Blog/2...s-
moderate.html
Guess we will find out the hard way under Prime Minister Harper!
I scratched my head when I read this one. What investment in B.C. by the Liberal Government I ask? If you want to see real investment by past Liberal government you will have to go to Quebec. What we have seen here is a pitance by comparison. Get real.
Can't argue with that Pianoman. But we did get more investment here than in previous years, but probably not as great as Quebec.
It's worse than most imagine. The last time that I checked, a vehicle could use any road, and cross any bridge without toll. There are plenty of both, and the feds have kicked in big time. When I see plans for additions and improvements in B.C. lately, there's talk of a tolls with all of them.
Example: Does anyone remember the year when the Vancouver Port Authority made $25 million using good business management? The total amount went to Montreal's equivalent organisation, which then reeked of every type of coruption known to the business. It blew over as though it never happened.
Our governments of the past chose to feed the alligator well, hoping he would eat them last.
Commenting by HaloScan
