by arthur Weinreb, associate Editor,
December 10, 2004
In early 1995 after conservative Republicans led by Newt Gingrich took over Congress, President Clinton presented his budget. The budget went down to defeat in the Senate by a vote of 99-0. The budget failed to get any Democratic Party support in what was starting out to be a bad year for the president. Clinton later stood before the cameras and wailed, "I am relevant".
Even the most hard-hearted american Clinton-haters had to have had some sympathy for the guy. Here is the president of the United States, the head of the only remaining superpower and the man who holds the most powerful office in the world crying before that world that he is indeed, relevant.
Now Stephen Harper, the head the Conservative Party of Canada and the leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, in an act that was truly Clintonesque, wrote a letter to the National Post whining that he has not abandoned conservative principles. Much like Clinton in 1995, if the leader of the official opposition feels the need to write a major Canadian newspaper to explain that he really is a conservative, there is obviously a problem.
In a page taken right out of the left’s playbook, Harper turned his defense of his party into an attack on the newspaper, concluding his letter by saying, "What it [Canada] lacks is a national conservative newspaper. While Harper might indeed have a point, David asper wrote back the following day saying in effect that the newspaper is not a mouthpiece for the Conservative Party.
although Stephen Harper listed what he said were the Liberal Party policies that his party opposes; national defence, unethical conduct, Kyoto, child care and taxation, he failed to enunciate any overall conservative philosophy that his party might have. Unethical conduct isn’t a conservative position; it is an ethical one. The Bloc and the NDP also oppose the lack of ethics that are routinely practiced by the governing Liberals.
Harper says in his letter that he told President Bush on his recent visit to Canada that "Canada most certainly has a conservative party". although the full extent of private conversations between Canadian leaders and the U.S. president are not known, it is a safe bet that Paul Martin and Jack Layton felt no need to tell Bush that Canada has a liberal party or a socialist party, respectively. There is something wrong when a conservative leader feels the need to have to explain that his party is, indeed, conservative.
The most pressing issue facing Canada today, other than perhaps same sex marriage that is pretty well a done deal, is whether or not Canada should participate in ballistic missile defence with the United States. The Prime Minister is dithering and dawdling on the issue because no matter what the ultimate decision is, Martin is going to be in trouble with some of his caucus members. Not an ideal situation for a minority government. Martin’s lack of a decision has not stopped the New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois from taking firm positions--they’re against it. But Harper refuses to take a position, preferring to wait until Martin makes up his mind. This game of following the rudderless leader is not conservatism. Can there be any doubt why the National Post and others are questioning the party’s principles? and while the NDP and the Bloc keep hammering the government on missile defence, the Conservatives use their time during Question Period to ask about Romanian strippers.
Stephen Harper and his Tories also lack the moral fibre to even suggest that Canadians might be even a little better off if they were given the option of paying for at least some medical procedures.
During a committee meeting last week, Treasury Board President Reg alcock made a crack about the youth (he’s 25) of CPC member Pierre Poilievre that, according to alcock he later apologized for. Last Monday, Poilievre rose in the House during Question Period and demanded that alcock apologize "to young people everywhere for offending their charter rights to participate in the democratic process". Boo-hoo. With Poilievre’s whining about being a "victim" because of his age it’s getting harder and harder to tell the Conservatives from the NDP.
Harper’s problem is not that he lost the last election but that he almost won it. Hungry for power, he’s moving towards the centre in a bid to put power over principle.