Actions Speak Louder than Words:
In the first part of this article, I focused on two key facets of the Harper "persona" and how they shaped his party's values. With absolute power over a party that is Conservative in name only, I highlighted the fact that when Harper mentions Conservative Values, he is really referring to his own. I also talked about Harper's devout Evangelical faith and how the Harper-Con values are firmly rooted in right-wing Christian Fundamentalism. Of course, I had to contrast the Harper-Con against the Canadian Values I grew up with and why the two are absolutely nothing alike.
As I mentioned in Part One, Canadians are generally considered to be a pretty "stoic" lot. It comes with our harsh extremes of climate I suppose. One can't change the weather so one might as well make the best of it. Also born of that stoicism is our "live and let live" attitude toward life and those with whom we share the planet. As such, we tend to be a very egalitarian bunch. It's cool to be, think, look like or believe in anything we desire. It's even cool to share in and partake of our diverse range of human experiences. It is very un-cool however, to force anyone to think, live or be anything or anyone they don't want to be such as the social order the Harper-Cons seem hell-bent on inflicting upon our country. That in a nut shell is oppression. And nothing awakens us from our stoic existence to dizzying heights of unequaled passion, like the glorious fight against oppression....that and a hard fought game of hockey of course.
So because of our attitude towards life and our "Earth-Mates", Canadians tend to have a good reputation through out the world as being good citizens not just of Canada, but of the global community as well. And we put such stock in being good citizens and maintaining good relations with almost everyone, that these concepts are introduced and reinforced in our schools. We try to "teach" what it is to be a good citizen. And central to the concept, is "ethics".
The Canadian concept of ethical behaviour is really nothing new. Many of our most treasured values can be found in the Ten Commandments. Don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal, don't kill and don't covet your neighbor's ass. So noble have we come to think of these basic tenets, that they have become measurements or guide posts for our existences. Whether we succeed or fail in our endeavors is not as important as how we go about achieving them. Or in the Hockey sense, "it's not whether you win or lose, but how you play the game".
Now all of this is of course, a glorious generalization. Not all Canadians would agree with or adhere to the notions I have just expressed. But I think that if we were hard-pressed to describe our National Value Set to say... a race of aliens, they would look pretty similar to what I've described. They are the noble ideals that we aspire to and try to teach our children to embrace.
Now all of this brings me back to Stephen Harper and his values as opposed to those of the average Canadian . Leave us not forget that the Prime Minister asserts that the Conservative and therefore his values are Canadian values. This is where the actions of Stephen Harper and his subordinates comes into play.
We tend not to like liars in this country. It goes against one of the basic tenets of our way of life. Lying is a human failing to be sure, an easy fall back for any person who finds themselves in a tight squeeze with no other way out in sight. But telling the truth no matter what, is one of those noble attributes we all aspire to. It makes us better people and better citizens. It's an enlightened plateau we never stop trying to achieve.
Now the Harper-Cons, if you will recall, were not long ago, found to be in contempt of Parliament. It's what caused the 41st Canadian General Election. But what did this contempt look like? What did it consist of? Well for one thing, it involved money as most conflicts do. The Government of Harper failed to divulge to total cost of certain aspects of it's budget and expected the members of the House of Commons to vote on it. They did not say, all the figures were not there, they merely tabled the budget as it was and expected it to be passed. And when it was found out that there were some significant figures missing, The Government of Harper continued to refuse to divulge these numbers sighting Cabinet Privilege. So was this lying then? Is it inherently dishonest to give only half of a story and expect that others will perceive it to be the whole truth?
And this brings us to the famous "Not Girl", Bev Oda. International aid agency "Kairos" had it's funding denied by Stephen Harper via Cabinet Minister Oda. It appeared that a memo had been initially issued stating that Kairos had qualified for funding, but mysteriously, the hand written word "not" was inserted into the sentence that changed the agency's funding status from "approved" to "not approved". At first, Ms. Oda told Parliament she had no idea who doctored the already signed document. It later was revealed that She not only knew who doctored the document, she authorized them to do so. Bev Oda lied outright to Parliament, and with the full support of Stephen Harper.
In the end, the Prime Minister asserted that the Contempt of Parliament was a political move by the opposition parties who out voted him, and by the Speaker of the House who was a Liberal. Even if the most cynical political observer were to believe this, it does not take away from the fact that the Government of Harper lied both through omission and by commission. And this is only one example of the Harper-Cons dishonest handling of affairs. It does not even touch on the Afghan detainee issue, the G8/G20 fiasco nor the true burden on the environment of Harper's love child, the Alberta Tar Sands.
But what about cheating? Well one only needs to look at the fact that four top Harper-Cons are under investigation regarding the mis-allocation of advertising funds during the 2006 election. This is being referred to as the "in and out" scandal. Again, Harper contends that this is a simple administrative misunderstanding. But most involved in this scheme to divert money to the Conservative national ad campaign in 2006 believe it seemed underhanded and verging on fraudulent. One of the most powerful propaganda weapons in Harper's 365 days a year campaign is his television ads. And in 2006, he found a way to be able to spend more money than the other parties on television ads during the campaign, which is expressly against the rules as laid out by Elections Canada. Whether it had a discernible impact upon the election or not, Harper cheated.
And stealing. Tony Clement, one of the most senior Minister's in Harper's inner circle was able to redirect $50,000,000 to his own riding that was supposed to be money allocated for either G8 infrastructure money or Border security enhancements. The vast majority of the money went into projects that had nothing to do with the G8 and Mr. Clement's riding is several hundred miles away from the nearest border. And there is no paper trail which seems to indicate a knowing "contravention" of the rules. This was taxpayers money that was deliberately and underhandedly redirected to Mr. Clement's home riding. In effect, it was stolen.
And while we're on the subject of theft, how about Michael Sona's attempted theft of an Elections Canada ballot box from a special poll at Guelph University. It was only the quick actions of an Elections Canada scrutineer that prevented the theft. Mr. Sona, Communications Director for the local Conservative candidate was never arrested or charged in this attempted theft.
So in summary, given the examples of Harper-Cons lying, cheating and stealing, and let us not forget, Stephen Harper is the New Conservative Party, the actions of his party have frequently been unethical and bordering on, if not out right, illegal. And the above is a mere handful of the "too numerous to list in one place" transgressions. So the actions of the Harper-Cons demonstrates a value set that is far from the noble Canadian values that have evolved over the years. They are not setting the example of what it means to be ethical in all things and unlike the "it's how you play the game" attitude we attempt to teach our children in an effort to pass on our legacy of good Canadian values and ethical behaviour, the Government of Harper espouses a "the ends justifies the means" philosophy. And their behaviour is anything but ethical and thereby, completely out of sync with the traditional values that Canadians hold dear.
In Part Three (and hopefully last part) of this run-on blog post , I will examine The Harper-Cons bullying behaviour and why their many transgressions don't stick to them.
In the first part of this article, I focused on two key facets of the Harper "persona" and how they shaped his party's values. With absolute power over a party that is Conservative in name only, I highlighted the fact that when Harper mentions Conservative Values, he is really referring to his own. I also talked about Harper's devout Evangelical faith and how the Harper-Con values are firmly rooted in right-wing Christian Fundamentalism. Of course, I had to contrast the Harper-Con against the Canadian Values I grew up with and why the two are absolutely nothing alike.
So because of our attitude towards life and our "Earth-Mates", Canadians tend to have a good reputation through out the world as being good citizens not just of Canada, but of the global community as well. And we put such stock in being good citizens and maintaining good relations with almost everyone, that these concepts are introduced and reinforced in our schools. We try to "teach" what it is to be a good citizen. And central to the concept, is "ethics".
Now all of this is of course, a glorious generalization. Not all Canadians would agree with or adhere to the notions I have just expressed. But I think that if we were hard-pressed to describe our National Value Set to say... a race of aliens, they would look pretty similar to what I've described. They are the noble ideals that we aspire to and try to teach our children to embrace.
Now all of this brings me back to Stephen Harper and his values as opposed to those of the average Canadian . Leave us not forget that the Prime Minister asserts that the Conservative and therefore his values are Canadian values. This is where the actions of Stephen Harper and his subordinates comes into play.
In the end, the Prime Minister asserted that the Contempt of Parliament was a political move by the opposition parties who out voted him, and by the Speaker of the House who was a Liberal. Even if the most cynical political observer were to believe this, it does not take away from the fact that the Government of Harper lied both through omission and by commission. And this is only one example of the Harper-Cons dishonest handling of affairs. It does not even touch on the Afghan detainee issue, the G8/G20 fiasco nor the true burden on the environment of Harper's love child, the Alberta Tar Sands.
But what about cheating? Well one only needs to look at the fact that four top Harper-Cons are under investigation regarding the mis-allocation of advertising funds during the 2006 election. This is being referred to as the "in and out" scandal. Again, Harper contends that this is a simple administrative misunderstanding. But most involved in this scheme to divert money to the Conservative national ad campaign in 2006 believe it seemed underhanded and verging on fraudulent. One of the most powerful propaganda weapons in Harper's 365 days a year campaign is his television ads. And in 2006, he found a way to be able to spend more money than the other parties on television ads during the campaign, which is expressly against the rules as laid out by Elections Canada. Whether it had a discernible impact upon the election or not, Harper cheated.
And stealing. Tony Clement, one of the most senior Minister's in Harper's inner circle was able to redirect $50,000,000 to his own riding that was supposed to be money allocated for either G8 infrastructure money or Border security enhancements. The vast majority of the money went into projects that had nothing to do with the G8 and Mr. Clement's riding is several hundred miles away from the nearest border. And there is no paper trail which seems to indicate a knowing "contravention" of the rules. This was taxpayers money that was deliberately and underhandedly redirected to Mr. Clement's home riding. In effect, it was stolen.
So in summary, given the examples of Harper-Cons lying, cheating and stealing, and let us not forget, Stephen Harper is the New Conservative Party, the actions of his party have frequently been unethical and bordering on, if not out right, illegal. And the above is a mere handful of the "too numerous to list in one place" transgressions. So the actions of the Harper-Cons demonstrates a value set that is far from the noble Canadian values that have evolved over the years. They are not setting the example of what it means to be ethical in all things and unlike the "it's how you play the game" attitude we attempt to teach our children in an effort to pass on our legacy of good Canadian values and ethical behaviour, the Government of Harper espouses a "the ends justifies the means" philosophy. And their behaviour is anything but ethical and thereby, completely out of sync with the traditional values that Canadians hold dear.
In Part Three (and hopefully last part) of this run-on blog post , I will examine The Harper-Cons bullying behaviour and why their many transgressions don't stick to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment